Re: Leo Papile's math?

[JB <jimmetz@xxxxxxx>]

	Great post, Kim.
	It's wonderful what a clear mind can produce.
	For me, the big problem with the luxury tax, is that is is 
undetermined at the time when the teams are spending their money.
	Why did we go through last season thinking about a  tax and then 
when the numbers were released, there was none?	Again, this season, 
we won't know until it's over. Couldn't they use last years numbers for 
the year following?
	If it were my tax, those teams: Dallas, N.Y., and Portland, who are 
so far over, would have been fined and the money paid back to the other 
teams, on a sliding scale, from lowest on up, who would be required to 
spend at least a high % of it, on players, to counter the inflated 
payrolls, of the big spenders. That tax refund spent, would not count 
against future tax threshholds.
	If the goal is  parity, then it's one thing to pay the tax, it 
would be another to force the beneficiaries to spend it and not penalize 
them for doing so.
	I would expect the players would love this. How long would it take 
to sign a Travis Best, a Jeff McGinnis, a Rodney Rogers, or a Keon 
Clark, if you were using "free" money?
	As for the ego driven "big spenders," would they be so quick to add 
star players, if they knew that every dollar they spent to strengthen 
their own team, would go to help the competition?
		JB

	
					Unchain My Heart!


On Friday, July 26, 2002, at 07:25 PM, Kim Malo wrote:

> Well you've also got to realize that the rules to re-sign him will 
> almost certainly be very different then too, because a new CBA will 
> probably be in effect. Like maybe no luxury tax magnifying every dollar 
> over the cap.