It seems to me that the players union couldn't care less about parity or competitive balance in the league. They were against a hard cap, which has been shown to work very effectively in NFL, and it looks like they will mostly get their way on that issue. The luxury tax may be stiffer in the new CBA, but it still won't discourage teams like Lakers or Mavericks from paying it if it produces championships.
I like the idea of LT teams not being able to use certain exceptions. After all, those teams not only already exceeded the cap, but also exceeded the much higher LT limit, so it would make sense to limit their ability to compete for the same free agents as lower-payroll teams. And any player wishing to play for such a team could still do so by signing for the minimum. But that's not enough for the players union. They want to maintain the status quo where every player has the choice to sign with any team, including the largest markets and championship contenders, and still get a $5M/year salary. Fisher is not just talking about midlevel players, as he would have you believe. He is also talking about higher-priced players willing to take a paycut for a chance at a ring or to play in a large market, but not willing to play for the minimum.
