Another Golden State Warriors title is disheartening, at least to teams that look at the Warriors' $170.3 million tax bill for the 2021-22 season and think, "I can't compete with that."

Now, the franchise is doubling down with extensions for Jordan Poole and Andrew Wiggins. Golden State's payroll could reach the $400-500 million range for the 2023-24 season. There's just no way for the majority of teams in the league to match that.

Most don't have anything close to the operating income needed to keep up with the Warriors' massive spending power. That gap is a widespread concern as the NBA and National Basketball Players Association (NBPA) have already begun negotiations on a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA).

A primary goal of the CBA is to give every team the opportunity to win, regardless of market size. Some franchises will push for new rules, harsher tax penalties and stricter spending limits. But is that necessary?

Recency bias may scream the Warriors are buying titles—that the system is broken. The actual history, dating back to the adoption of the 2017 CBA, tells a different story. Heavy spenders reach the NBA Finals about as often as the more conservative teams.

Not Every NBA Champion Spent Excessively

Four teams have won titles over the last five years. The Warriors have two of them, but the smaller-market Milwaukee Bucks paid out under $800,000 in penalties for their title. The Los Angeles Lakers are in a top media market and a willing spender, but even they were under the tax in their championship run (2019-20).

The past five champions were charged the following in luxury taxes:

• 2017-18: Golden State Warriors—$32,263,299
• 2018-19: Toronto Raptors—$25,190,963
• 2019-20: Los Angeles Lakers—$0
• 2020-21: Milwaukee Bucks—$794,721
• 2021-22: Golden State Warriors—$170,331,194

Yes, the Warriors are massive spenders. Yet their first spending spree came at the end of the Kevin Durant era, when broadcast revenue spiked in 2016. Adding Durant to a team with Stephen Curry, Klay Thompson and Draymond Green was going to be a problem for any teams that tried to outspend the Warriors, including the Cleveland Cavaliers.

(Finals) Appearances May Be Deceiving

What about the second-best teams that fell in the NBA Finals? Did they buy their way, or was it a level playing field?

The Cavaliers (with LeBron James) that lost to the Warriors in 2017-18 made a heavy investment in defeat. The trend, however, is going the other way entirely:

• 2017-18: Cleveland Cavaliers—$50,749,202
• 2018-19: Golden State Warriors—$51,487,864
• 2019-20: Miami Heat—$2,461,242
• 2020-21: Phoenix Suns—$0
• 2021-22: Boston Celtics—$0

The last two teams to advance but lose in the Finals were under the tax. A bill under $2.5 million should be a manageable figure for any NBA franchise. The Celtics were very competitive in June despite the $170.3 million extra the Warriors were spending on tax.

Some Spend, Only to Lose

The final four in 2021 paid out a combined $5.9 million in taxes, with the Los Angeles Clippers footing $5.2 million and the Atlanta Hawks under completely. Similarly, the Heat were the only team over the tax in either of the 2020 conference finals.

Both Los Angeles teams spent heavily last season (Clippers at $83.1 million in tax, Lakers at $45.1 million), but neither made the playoffs. The Brooklyn Nets ($97.7 million) and Utah Jazz ($18.8 million) could not advance out of the first round.

The top spenders over the 2020-21 season were the Warriors ($68.9 million) and Nets ($61.6 million)—and the Warriors didn't even make the playoffs with multiple injuries. The Oklahoma City Thunder spent $61.6 million in taxes for 2018-19, only to lose in the first round to the Portland Trail Blazers, who advanced to the Western Conference Finals with a $15 million tax bill.

Spend to Win or Win to Spend?

Some teams, like the Indiana Pacers, draw a hard line and won't pay luxury taxes. Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks haven't paid taxes for a decade, although that projects to change for 2022-23.

The general rule of thumb for an NBA team on spending into the tax is: "Will doing so give us a significant chance to win at the highest level?"

By and large, the teams that have steeper payrolls are the ones that believe they have a chance to win a title that season. They may be more likely to be a buyer at the trade deadline.

Meanwhile, the franchises that thought they would be elite but are falling short of expectations tend to shed salary via trade and even contract buyouts to reduce or eliminate their tax bill.

A team's success can be cyclical. It depends on various factors, but the most important one is talent. The Warriors have as many titles as they have because of Steph Curry. Just like the San Antonio Spurs had Tim Duncan, the Lakers had Kobe Bryant and the Finals were a given wherever James set up shop. The teams with historic greats take home the rings.

But landing those superstars may be the most challenging step for an NBA team, so spending into the tax when those rare opportunities present themselves should make sense.

To most teams, what the Warriors are doing with their payroll doesn't make any sense. But is it ruining the NBA? Is the league non-competitive? The results over the course of the 2017 CBA suggest otherwise.

Finally, the teams under the luxury tax get a share of the money paid out by taxpayers. The haul after last season was $10.5 million, primarily paid by Golden State, which functionally subsidized the smaller markets with its lavish spending.

Those crying foul and asking for systemic change—are you sure you want to kill the golden goose?

Email Eric Pincus at eric.pincus@gmail.com, and follow him on Twitter @EricPincus.