Ranking the 8 Worst NBA Contracts on the Books Next Season

The article evaluates the worst NBA contracts for the 2025-26 season based on their value to the team bankrolling them. The ranking focuses on three key aspects of value: the player's on-court impact, the value provided through their availability, and the potential value recouped if traded. The process acknowledges subjectivity alongside objective metrics, especially since it projects future value. Rookie-scale deals, expiring contracts, and already waived/stretched contracts are excluded. Players recovering from injuries are considered, but notable stars like Haliburton and Tatum are omitted because their teams could likely still get value in a trade. The goal is to highlight long-term deals that would require attached assets to move or wouldn't return value commensurate with their salary.

The contract of Karl-Anthony Towns (3 years, $171.2 million, averaging 33.51% of the salary cap, with a 2027-28 player option) is highlighted. Despite strong individual production (24.4 points, 12.8 rebounds, 42.0% from deep), the article argues his contract is problematic due to significant limitations on team-building. His unique stretch-5 skillset has drawbacks: he doesn't take enough threes, was neutralized by smaller perimeter defenders last season, and requires playing alongside another big to cover his defensive deficiencies. While his offensive peak is superstar-level, it's inconsistent. The core issue is that paying this level of salary shouldn't necessitate such specific roster conditions to maximize the player.

Another contract identified is a 4-year, $207.8 million deal (averaging 30.0% of the salary cap, running through the player's age-31 season with no player option).