Now that Brunson's sacrifice has paid off in a Finals run, will other stars look to emulate that strategy?
Based on the current $165 million projection for the 2026-27 salary cap, a five-year, 25% max deal would be worth $239.25 million, a 30% max deal would be $287.1 million, and a 35% max deal would be $334.95 million.
Agents and income taxes (in most states) would wipe out a not-insignificant chunk, but it's generational wealth either way.
If someone eligible for a 35% max took closer to a 25% max, he'd be freeing up more than $16 million in financial flexibility for his team this coming season.
For context, the non-taxpayer mid-level exception is projected to be just over $15 million.
If multiple stars agreed to take similar discounts, that could give one lucky team the flexibility to build around a Big Three without running into major apron issues.
It'd be what Brunson's contract did to the Knicks but on steroids. The NBA's financial system is effectively designed to prevent superteams.
It's now harder to build around multiple players on max contracts, and under the recently passed draft-lottery reform, teams can no longer have three straight picks land in the top five of the draft.
They're automatically moved to No. 6 or lower in their third year.
Brunson and the Knicks are proving how beneficial one discount contract can be in overcoming second-apron restrictions.
>>> Wes Tucker Named North Florida PGA Professional of the Year
If two or more stars agreed to team up on well-below-max deals, they could quickly become the team to beat in the NBA thanks to the flexibility their front office would have to build around them.
