This may sound like a stupid question and I apologize. But I was wondering why a lot of players sign to max contracts while knowing it’s going to handicap their team with these new rules and CBA, especially in instances where they could accept maybe 5-10M a year less to create room for more depth?

I totally understand that players should be getting paid their full worth since they’ve earned it and I am not saying this to help billionaires out or saving the team money. But this new CBA is essentially a hard cap, so it’s more about team building. I feel like I have seen instances in the past (most recently Brunson) but even Harden when he publicized that he took a paycut so his team could sign PJ Tucker and others. I personally feel like that’s a smart idea, especially for the players commanding massive max contracts. Yes, when you’re making 50M a year, giving up 10M a year of that contract so your team can sign more depth in an attempt to help tax bills sounds like you’re helping the owner, but what if you were able to sign one extra rotation player who adds legitimate depth? I’m just a simpleton peasant, so I feel like I would still be thrilled making 40Ms a year instead of 50Ms, but also I have never experienced that level of wealth or ability to even make decisions that big, so I am just speaking from the perspective of a fan. I’m sure when you’re an NBA player, you realize that you only have a short period of time to maximize your earnings which will see you and your family through the rest of your lives - so in that case, I totally understand why people wouldn’t want to sacrifice the money. Shit maybe I answered my own question lmao.