RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

How will coring change in the new CBA effective in 2020?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA
View previous topic :: View next topic  

How will coring change in the new CBA?
Coring limit will increase to more than 4 years
6%
 6%  [ 2 ]
Coring limit will remain unchanged at 4 years
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Coring limit will drop to 3 years
6%
 6%  [ 2 ]
Coring limit will drop to 2 years
51%
 51%  [ 15 ]
Coring limit will drop to 1 year
13%
 13%  [ 4 ]
Coring will be eliminated
20%
 20%  [ 6 ]
Total Votes : 29

Author Message
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 53004



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/19 3:40 pm    ::: How will coring change in the new CBA effective in 2020? Reply Reply with quote

How will coring change in the new CBA effective in 2020?

Let’s make this a prediction of what you think will happen instead of what you think should happen.





1-year poll



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 10119



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/19 4:41 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

That's a great question, but as I don't think anyone knows how the players rank their priorities going into negotiations, it's really hard to say.

For example, coring only affects a few players, players who make a lot of money overseas, whereas an issue like minimum salary or salary cap or revenue sharing or roster size impacts all players.

It's conceivable the league could throw "no coring" on the table as a minor bargaining chip, or the players could throw "keep coring" on the table for the same stakes.

It's sort of like charter flights. How important is that to the players really? How much would they give up to get them? Would they prefer charter flights to no coring? Or maybe a change in the injured reserve rule?



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25842



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/19 4:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I think coring is important to the health of the league. But I think those cored should get a substantial increase in salary and perhaps that substantial increase shouldn't be included in the salary cap. There will still be those demanding trades but if they're giving up $100,000 to do so, they may think twice.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
Randy



Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 9516



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/19 5:00 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Good topic!

I voted no coring, which is likely more of a change than it ends up being, however, I think it will (or at least should)l change so much that it really won't be the same mechanism. The reason is that the coring mechanism has been a miserable failure for forcing players to stay with the current teams or to even play at all. It seems to work best on players that need a paycheck more than they want freedom of movement (e.g. Langhorne, C. Little - players who are by no means "franchise" players in the first place).

So I think if the owners should make coring worth $omething - maybe paying up to 150-300% of the vet. max salary or they just dump it but maybe insist the RFA tag goes to an extra year.

The one reason in which coring sticks around close to its current form is that because it only seems to impact about a half dozen players a year reforming it in this way won't get many votes from players. The rank and file players may not like the idea that the top players get money which they will think comes at their own expense......In the end, the WNBAPA is more like a traditional labor union which tends to view seniority as an important determinant of pay.


WNBA 09



Joined: 26 Jun 2009
Posts: 8887
Location: Dallas , Texas


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/28/19 9:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I Voted down to 2 years. No way i see some of these owners allowing players total control of their destinys. Pay raise sure most likely but freedom to play wherever with whoever would most likely hurt alot more smaller markets than major ones.



_________________
3-Time WNBA Champion-3-Time National Champion-4-Time Olympic Champion....And Yes DT "We Got Confeti" lol
J-Spoon



Joined: 31 Jan 2009
Posts: 5230



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/29/19 12:34 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I know the smaller market angle is often used as a reason for coring but is there evidence to back that up?

What are even the smaller market teams in the W? and would players be leaving those teams for larger markets with a reason.

In the W the pay for most average to top veteran players is the same so players aren't leaving the smaller market teams for more money.

IMO player movement in the W seems often to be based on wanting to play for a potential championship, wanting to go closer to home, wanting to leave a poorly run franchise or moving for personal reasons.

NY is technically the largest market but as a NY fan I don't see us gaining many players for that reason. In fact the last couple of years we have done poorly in free agency, Even the players that have demanded trades have done so with moving home, getting away from a team they no longer want to be on, or a desire to be top dog as the reason more than a desire for a larger market.

Conn is probably the smallest market but they don't seem to have any higher turnover than other teams. Charles left because she was unhappy about the coaching move and wanted to go home, Douglas and Whalen left to play in their home areas Minn and Indy neither are a large market. and Conn in recent years has resigned most of their free agents and been able to sign a few as well.

Even with Cambage she wants to go to LA for lifestyle reason (I assume) more than market reason.

Many players have wanted out of Chicago or Atlanta but Chicago and Atlanta are probably the 3rd and 4th largest markets. At least with Chicago the desire to leave seems to be because players in the past have been unhappy with how the team is run, that isn't the same as wanting to leave for a better market it is wanting to leave for a better organization.

Is Indy's low level of talent atm a product of market size and players leaving or a product of years of being too good to be in the lottery?

Minn isn't a large market but they seem to be able to sign free agents every season, because they are always in the championship race and have a great organization. Seattle benefits for the same reasons not market size.

I think 7 years is plenty of time for a player to be committed to their original draft team, so I hope coring is eliminated all together. I think more player movement would actually help the league more than hurt it. Once a team has a few top picks in a row Minn, Seattle, LA, PX they become juggernauts and season after season for years the same teams dominate. The only reason Washington was in the mix this year was because of EDD's trade demand (OK slight over simplification but if DD isn't in Washington are they in the finals?) and she actually went to a smaller market.

But I agree it will be hard to vote down coring because pay and conditions for all players will be the top issue and coring simply doesn't affect enough players to be on the high level demand list.

Also most cored players can simply demand demand a trade or afford to sit out because they make top money else where. So instead forcing them to stay why not improve your franchise or recognize their desire to leave and get better trade value when it isn't a trade that is forced upon you to a single destination.


Happycappie25



Joined: 07 Feb 2006
Posts: 4154
Location: QUEENS!!!!


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/29/19 6:47 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
I think coring is important to the health of the league. But I think those cored should get a substantial increase in salary and perhaps that substantial increase shouldn't be included in the salary cap. There will still be those demanding trades but if they're giving up $100,000 to do so, they may think twice.


This i can see coring replaced by semi or unlimited contracts aka the Beckham rule or put at some sort of max above anything else attainable



_________________
"Leave it to the NCAA women's basketball committee to turn a glass slipper into glass ceiling" Graham Hays
DFWub2018



Joined: 24 Aug 2018
Posts: 262
Location: Dallas/Ft. Worth


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/29/19 5:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

J-Spoon,

Here are your largest markets in order:

1. New York
2. Los Angeles
3. Chicago
4. Dallas
5. Washington, DC
6. Atlanta
7. Phoenix
8. Minneapolis
9. Seattle
10. Las Vegas
11. Indianapolis
12. Connecticut


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 53004



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/19 8:03 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There’s still time to vote.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 14958
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/20/19 4:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

For me you can't separate coring form the bigger need the WNBA has to disperse talent better across the league. As is, talent has been pooled on a few teams (mostly through the draft and forced trades). Right now, coring can help that, though players like Fowles don't seem to care all about the collective bargaining and don't think it should pertain to them. So, coring "harms" players who follow their collective bargaining and not others. It helps some teams and not others.

The league needs a broader strategy to help talent dispersion. Making the lottery based on two-year records, helped this a bit, but it didn't help Seattle and Vegas from getting five No. 1 picks in a row between them. Coring can help, but it didn't help Chicago keep the assets it was entitled under collective bargaining.

All of this is to say, I don't know the answer, but these franchises aren't solid enough to be mired in shitty rosters for too long.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » WNBA All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin