If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NESN)   NBA considering dropping the draft, determined by annual win-loss record, in favor of a "wheel" system where every team is slotted to select from each of the 30 predetermined slots once every 30 years   (nesn.com) divider line 94
    More: Stupid, NBA, systems  
•       •       •

661 clicks; posted to Sports » on 23 Dec 2013 at 1:45 PM (34 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



94 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-23 12:30:32 PM
Here's a better, simpler system. Everybody that misses the playoffs goes into an equal lottery. Everybody that makes the playoffs drafts after them in order.

It's simple, it retains the main goal of the draft i.e. improving weak teams, it eliminates the incentive to tank, and it doesn't penalize a team that is on the cusp of making the playoffs but just misses out.
 
2013-12-23 12:57:47 PM

czetie: Here's a better, simpler system. Everybody that misses the playoffs goes into an equal lottery. Everybody that makes the playoffs drafts after them in order.

It's simple, it retains the main goal of the draft i.e. improving weak teams, it eliminates the incentive to tank, and it doesn't penalize a team that is on the cusp of making the playoffs but just misses out.


From what I've read of this, that was the original system (or at least very close to it). The problem is that it still leaves the possibility of teams on the playoff fringe tanking into the lottery.

I think the wheel idea is interesting. Probably the best I've seen (in my opinion) since it completely removes all incentive to lose. But it does have its flaws. Say some star player sees that one year a team like the Bucks has the #1 pick, but in the next year a team like the Heat has the #1 pick. He's staying that extra year, right? Though I'm not sure if this scenario even matters unless there's a LeBron-level prospect.
 
2013-12-23 01:06:35 PM
How about this system - no farking draft. Teams can just offer contracts to whatever players they want.

BUT!!

You can't offer a contract to any rookie other than the minimum if doing so would put you over the cap. No 'soft cap' for these players.

Done.
 
2013-12-23 01:36:53 PM

FreakinB: I think the wheel idea is interesting. Probably the best I've seen (in my opinion) since it completely removes all incentive to lose. But it does have its flaws. Say some star player sees that one year a team like the Bucks has the #1 pick, but in the next year a team like the Heat has the #1 pick. He's staying that extra year, right? Though I'm not sure if this scenario even matters unless there's a LeBron-level prospect.


That's the 2nd or 3rd time today that I've heard such an argument, but I really don't think there's much to it. A) Why would the NBA care if a kid decides to stay in school an extra year? and B) A kid coming out of school who's a sure-fire top 3 pick isn't going to go back to college and risk some sort of catastrophic injury (and lose out on millions) just to try to land himself on a team he wants.
 
2013-12-23 01:44:21 PM

exick: FreakinB: I think the wheel idea is interesting. Probably the best I've seen (in my opinion) since it completely removes all incentive to lose. But it does have its flaws. Say some star player sees that one year a team like the Bucks has the #1 pick, but in the next year a team like the Heat has the #1 pick. He's staying that extra year, right? Though I'm not sure if this scenario even matters unless there's a LeBron-level prospect.

That's the 2nd or 3rd time today that I've heard such an argument, but I really don't think there's much to it. A) Why would the NBA care if a kid decides to stay in school an extra year? and B) A kid coming out of school who's a sure-fire top 3 pick isn't going to go back to college and risk some sort of catastrophic injury (and lose out on millions) just to try to land himself on a team he wants.


You're right, probably not as much of a concern as I initially thought. Another idea I've seen today is having the lottery weighted by taking the last 3 years or 5 years into account, rather than just the most recent season. I think that's a step in the right direction.
 
2013-12-23 01:49:48 PM
Line the potential draftees up alphabetically by height. Then at the whistle, let 'em run to the team they want to play for. Problem solved.
 
2013-12-23 01:58:02 PM
I think it is okay the way it is.
 
2013-12-23 01:58:21 PM
Make every draft prospect pick a team's name out of a hat.
 
2013-12-23 01:58:36 PM
This is a terrible idea. You wouldn't be able to build through the draft anymore.

So teams that have a hard time hanging onto players - like my personal favourite, the Raptors - would be screwed forever because it's hard to recruit players after their rookie contracts are over.

/My theory is because black guys don't like the cold
 
2013-12-23 01:59:27 PM

FreakinB: exick: FreakinB: I think the wheel idea is interesting. Probably the best I've seen (in my opinion) since it completely removes all incentive to lose. But it does have its flaws. Say some star player sees that one year a team like the Bucks has the #1 pick, but in the next year a team like the Heat has the #1 pick. He's staying that extra year, right? Though I'm not sure if this scenario even matters unless there's a LeBron-level prospect.

That's the 2nd or 3rd time today that I've heard such an argument, but I really don't think there's much to it. A) Why would the NBA care if a kid decides to stay in school an extra year? and B) A kid coming out of school who's a sure-fire top 3 pick isn't going to go back to college and risk some sort of catastrophic injury (and lose out on millions) just to try to land himself on a team he wants.

You're right, probably not as much of a concern as I initially thought. Another idea I've seen today is having the lottery weighted by taking the last 3 years or 5 years into account, rather than just the most recent season. I think that's a step in the right direction.


This isn't football... "catastrophic injuries" are much less likely in the NBA.... someone might be out for a year, but, if they were really a "no doubt" #1 pick and wanted to be on the Heat or Lakers vs. the Bucks or Raptors, they'd still be ok sitting out a year for school.... heck, you still have to "declare" for the draft anyway right... couldn't they just "sit out" after college until the team they want gets the #1 pick?
 
2013-12-23 01:59:38 PM
I once read a column, and although it dealt with the NHL had an interesting way to do draft picks. Basically it suggested that the team with the best record once they were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs (can't remember if it was winning percentage or just number of wins) gets the number one pick. Which means after you are eliminated you can't tank games just to get a better pick.
 
2013-12-23 02:07:22 PM
Here's a better system: GET RID OF DAVID STERN!
 
2013-12-23 02:10:31 PM
And, I agree, this is just a stupid idea.... yes, the "tanking" is an issue in all leagues (aka, "Suck for Luck"), although, it does seem to get a larger amount of attention with the NBA.   Probably because it is the league where 1 extremely high-quality player can actually add .200-.300 to your winning pct. almost automatically vs most other sports.

Here is an idea for the NBA that I think would get rid of the "tanking" somewhat....

* Go back to the more "even" ping pong balls (ie, when there were 11 lottery teams, worst team got 11 balls, next worst got 10, etc, "least worst" got 1).
* Draw for the Top FIVE picks, not just the top 3.  So, unlikely, but, even tanking to the very bottom, you may only get the #6 pick... not quite as worth it.
* Will be the most controversial, but, I think takes out the edge tanking in the regular season.... including the 8 first-round playoff loser teams in the lottery.   So, you'd have 22 teams (all but the "final 8") in the lottery.  Yes, you may have some "we're down 3-0, so, lets just lose" in the first round, but, most likely, you weren't going to do much if you are down 3-0 anyway.  But, also dilutes the pool and makes it less attractive to really suck to get to the "bottom".   And as we are seeing with the Eastern conference this year... the 5-8 seed teams in a conference could often use some help as well.  So, ping pong balls from 22 for the worst team to 1 for the best record of the 1st round playoff losers.
 
2013-12-23 02:13:38 PM

mechgreg: I once read a column, and although it dealt with the NHL had an interesting way to do draft picks. Basically it suggested that the team with the best record once they were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs (can't remember if it was winning percentage or just number of wins) gets the number one pick. Which means after you are eliminated you can't tank games just to get a better pick.


That is really interesting... I REALLY like that, from the perspective that there is no incentive to "give" games away near the end and affect the playoff seedings/race as well.  If you were first to be eliminated, you can now try to get on a mad winning streak.
 
2013-12-23 02:21:52 PM
I dont love the idea but I like the intent.  Shows the league is thinking about the problem.
 
2013-12-23 02:31:11 PM
Good. I hate the idea of being rewarded for losing.
 
2013-12-23 02:31:42 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: Line the potential draftees up alphabetically by height. Then at the whistle, let 'em run to the team they want to play for. Problem solved.


Have the teams hold hands real tight and the one with the worst record says, "Rover Red Rover send 'draft choice' right over".  If the player is unable to break through the line of hands then the team gets to keep him.  If he breaks through then the second worse team gets to pick.
 
2013-12-23 02:33:48 PM

mechgreg: I once read a column, and although it dealt with the NHL had an interesting way to do draft picks. Basically it suggested that the team with the best record once they were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs (can't remember if it was winning percentage or just number of wins) gets the number one pick. Which means after you are eliminated you can't tank games just to get a better pick.


I also heard a suggestion for a playoff between the crappy teams for the number #1.
 
2013-12-23 02:36:54 PM
Idea's not bad. Better system is the MLB Latin draft; you're given signing cap based on your record. The worse the team, the higher amount of money you're allowed to spend on signing Latin draft players. You can either spend it all on one superstar, or spread it around a build out the fringes of your roster. Of course, they should make the regular American draft the same way, so Bud Selig is trying to make the Latin draft like the terrible, stupid American draft instead.

Also, Euro players who are playing pro ball should not be drafted, period. They are professionals, work a signing deal w/ their pro teams/buy out their contracts. And make the D-League a real minor league, where you can send guys up and down more frequently.
 
2013-12-23 02:42:52 PM
O.o Dafuq? I thought the NBA draft lottery was stupid.

Seriously drop the lottery and just monitor the teams and if one is caught tanking slap them with a huge fine and loss of all draft picks that year. Yesi know it would not be easy to prove tanking.

Seriously this wheel thing could screw over a bad team for a long time.

I pray it does not come to pass.

Therehas got to be a better way to prevent tanking than the lottery but this wheel mess is not it.
 
2013-12-23 02:48:10 PM

dletter: mechgreg: I once read a column, and although it dealt with the NHL had an interesting way to do draft picks. Basically it suggested that the team with the best record once they were mathematically eliminated from the playoffs (can't remember if it was winning percentage or just number of wins) gets the number one pick. Which means after you are eliminated you can't tank games just to get a better pick.

That is really interesting... I REALLY like that, from the perspective that there is no incentive to "give" games away near the end and affect the playoff seedings/race as well.  If you were first to be eliminated, you can now try to get on a mad winning streak.


I am not a huge sports fan by any means but when I read it I thought it was cool too. Especially for the actual fans since with that system, once your team is eliminated winning games still matter. Especially if there is a Lebron or a Shaq or whoever out there that winning means you could get.
 
2013-12-23 02:48:52 PM

grimlock1972: Seriously drop the lottery and just monitor the teams and if one is caught tanking slap them with a huge fine and loss of all draft picks that year. Yesi know it would not be easy to prove tanking.


That's impossible to do, as there are legitimate basketball moves that are in the long-term best interests of a franchise that hurt them in the short term. If a team trades a good player that's about to leave anyway for picks, it will cause them to be noticeably worse. Is that tanking? Alternatively, a losing team decides to shut their banged-up (but still able to play if he really had to) point guard for the last five games to get their significantly worse backup point guard more reps so he can suck less next season. Is that tanking?
 
2013-12-23 02:50:46 PM

grimlock1972: Therehas got to be a better way to prevent tanking than the lottery but this wheel mess is not it.


This is the first step.
 
2013-12-23 02:54:30 PM

grimlock1972: O.o Dafuq? I thought the NBA draft lottery was stupid.

Seriously drop the lottery and just monitor the teams and if one is caught tanking slap them with a huge fine and loss of all draft picks that year. Yesi know it would not be easy to prove tanking.

Seriously this wheel thing could screw over a bad team for a long time.

I pray it does not come to pass.

Therehas got to be a better way to prevent tanking than the lottery but this wheel mess is not it.


You watch the Nets or the Knicks, and you have to ask yourself, is that legitimate tanking? How can you tell?
 
2013-12-23 02:56:07 PM

Palmer Eldritch: grimlock1972: Seriously drop the lottery and just monitor the teams and if one is caught tanking slap them with a huge fine and loss of all draft picks that year. Yesi know it would not be easy to prove tanking.

That's impossible to do, as there are legitimate basketball moves that are in the long-term best interests of a franchise that hurt them in the short term. If a team trades a good player that's about to leave anyway for picks, it will cause them to be noticeably worse. Is that tanking? Alternatively, a losing team decides to shut their banged-up (but still able to play if he really had to) point guard for the last five games to get their significantly worse backup point guard more reps so he can suck less next season. Is that tanking?


Trading a player who has no interest in re-signing to keep from getting nothing when he leaves after the season is not tanking in my opinion and no resting a banged up player is not tanking.  Both are legit management practices  Tanking is having your players deliberately lose games even those they could and should have won.

It's not impossible to prove deliberate tanking but its damn close to it as you would likely have to have some one rat out his team and bring incontrovertible evidence of it.

At any rate i still feel a better system than the lottery is needed what it is i donot know, but it sure as hell is not this wheel shiat.
 
2013-12-23 02:59:14 PM

Gunny Highway: grimlock1972: Therehas got to be a better way to prevent tanking than the lottery but this wheel mess is not it.

This is the first step.


No its a backstep as it potentially harms teams to fix a problem just as the lottery does but with even less chance of gettig the top pick than they do now.

The Minnesota T-wovles have had the worst record in the NBA in a number of years and never once got the 1st over all pick thanks to the lottery.  and lost out on some excellent players including Shaq.
 
2013-12-23 03:08:12 PM
FreakinB:

From what I've read of this, that was the original system (or at least very close to it). The problem is that it still leaves the possibility of teams on the playoff fringe tanking into the lottery.

I fully understand the unfortunate situation where teams may tank in a race to finish last (i.e. Suck for Luck), but  I can't imagine a team on the border... say the 15th or 16th best team... tanking to intentionally not make the playoffs just for a shot at a top pick, which would randomly be one of the first 14 picks. It's one thing to try to be 30th in the league instead of 29th, but would a playoff team rather have a 1/14 chance of the #1 pick than be in the playoffs? I doubt it...
 
2013-12-23 03:09:27 PM

DamnYankees: no farking draft


That's really the only way to avoid tanking
 
2013-12-23 03:11:11 PM
I'm not a fan of the wheel in a league where the draft can have such huge, immediate impact ona team's fortunes, because it effectively dooms bad teams to 6-7 years of hopelessness before they are given another chance to improve their team. Mess that one chance up, you may as well fold the franchise entirely because there won't be any hope for fans at all.
 
2013-12-23 03:11:45 PM

Lost Thought 00: DamnYankees: no farking draft

That's really the only way to avoid tanking


Well, that's not true. There's lot of ways to avoid tanking - a reverse draft, for example. But that has its own problems.
 
2013-12-23 03:27:10 PM

Rann Xerox: Here's a better system: GET RID OF DAVID STERN!


Uh, they are? Adam Silver is taking over in February.
 
2013-12-23 03:28:39 PM
If you actually want teams to be more even, get rid of the soft cap.
 
2013-12-23 03:40:20 PM
So, why is tanking such a big deal in the NBA?  I honestly don't get why there's such a fuss.  Nobody's claiming that the Texans are tanking as they're mired in a 13 game losing streak.  My Minnesota Twins went 8-21 in September last year while keeping a possibly healthy Joe Mauer on the DL.  Nobody was claiming that they were tanking and most fans agreed that it was a good idea to start bench players and minor leaguers to see if they might have any use going forward?

Why is it that the NBA is the only league really concerned with tanking?
 
2013-12-23 03:45:26 PM

ElwoodCuse: Rann Xerox: Here's a better system: GET RID OF DAVID STERN!

Uh, they are? Adam Silver is taking over in February.


I can't wait for th Stern articles to flow. There will probably only be 2 or 3 rational explorations of his tenure.
 
2013-12-23 03:48:00 PM

rugman11: So, why is tanking such a big deal in the NBA?  I honestly don't get why there's such a fuss.  Nobody's claiming that the Texans are tanking as they're mired in a 13 game losing streak.  My Minnesota Twins went 8-21 in September last year while keeping a possibly healthy Joe Mauer on the DL.  Nobody was claiming that they were tanking and most fans agreed that it was a good idea to start bench players and minor leaguers to see if they might have any use going forward?

Why is it that the NBA is the only league really concerned with tanking?


Tanking is especially prevelant in the NBA for various reasons.

1) Tanking in the NFL is basically impossible since there are so few games, and the game is so violent. There's almost no way to get football players to not try that hard, since they can get injured much more easily. This is the argument at least. Also, the NFL, for a variety of reasons, has far fewer trades, so its harder to shed yourself of talent for the sole purpose of tanking.

2) Tanking in baseball just isn't worth it, because the draft isn't nearly as important. Almost no one is good enough at draft-time to be worth tanking for. Furthermore, even if one player is amazing, one great player just doesn't have that huge an effect on a baseball team. Someone like Mike Trout, perhaps the best player in baseball, is worth about 10 wins. That's roughly 10% of the wins of a great team. Someone like Lebron is literally worth more than 50% of your team wins. So baseball doesn't have the motivation to tank.

Basketball has it all come together - physically, the sport lends itself to 'relaxing' and not playing at full strength, and resting guys is easier to do given the length of the schedule. Trades are really easy in basketball, so its very easy to shed your good players. The draft is hugely impactful, since one player can make a huge, huge, huge different.
 
2013-12-23 04:04:24 PM

dukeblue219: FreakinB:

From what I've read of this, that was the original system (or at least very close to it). The problem is that it still leaves the possibility of teams on the playoff fringe tanking into the lottery.

I fully understand the unfortunate situation where teams may tank in a race to finish last (i.e. Suck for Luck), but  I can't imagine a team on the border... say the 15th or 16th best team... tanking to intentionally not make the playoffs just for a shot at a top pick, which would randomly be one of the first 14 picks. It's one thing to try to be 30th in the league instead of 29th, but would a playoff team rather have a 1/14 chance of the #1 pick than be in the playoffs? I doubt it...


I disagree. Only five times in history has an 8-seed even made it past the first round, and of those one was during a weird lockout-shortened year and one involved Derrick Rose blowing out his knee mid-series. Those are some long odds. If it's a good draft, I can definitely see a team talking itself into the idea that the chance at the pick is worth more than a quick exit.
 
2013-12-23 04:14:40 PM

dletter: And, I agree, this is just a stupid idea.... yes, the "tanking" is an issue in all leagues (aka, "Suck for Luck"), although, it does seem to get a larger amount of attention with the NBA.   Probably because it is the league where 1 extremely high-quality player can actually add .200-.300 to your winning pct. almost automatically vs most other sports.

Here is an idea for the NBA that I think would get rid of the "tanking" somewhat....

* Go back to the more "even" ping pong balls (ie, when there were 11 lottery teams, worst team got 11 balls, next worst got 10, etc, "least worst" got 1).
* Draw for the Top FIVE picks, not just the top 3.  So, unlikely, but, even tanking to the very bottom, you may only get the #6 pick... not quite as worth it.
* Will be the most controversial, but, I think takes out the edge tanking in the regular season.... including the 8 first-round playoff loser teams in the lottery.   So, you'd have 22 teams (all but the "final 8") in the lottery.  Yes, you may have some "we're down 3-0, so, lets just lose" in the first round, but, most likely, you weren't going to do much if you are down 3-0 anyway.  But, also dilutes the pool and makes it less attractive to really suck to get to the "bottom".   And as we are seeing with the Eastern conference this year... the 5-8 seed teams in a conference could often use some help as well.  So, ping pong balls from 22 for the worst team to 1 for the best record of the 1st round playoff losers.


I hate tanking, but if you think "Suck for Luck" is an example....

I'm not sure how to explain how wrong that is to you.
 
2013-12-23 04:18:50 PM

dletter: This isn't football... "catastrophic injuries" are much less likely in the NBA.... someone might be out for a year, but, if they were really a "no doubt" #1 pick and wanted to be on the Heat or Lakers vs. the Bucks or Raptors, they'd still be ok sitting out a year for school.... heck, you still have to "declare" for the draft anyway right... couldn't they just "sit out" after college until the team they want gets the #1 pick?


I think you really over-estimate the desire to play on a specific team as compared to the desire to play in the NBA and make money.

No US born player is sitting out a year.  Not worth the risks (injury, someone else gets better and goes #1) to push back becoming a FA another year.  Foreign guys... I could see some gaming the system there, but they already do that now.
 
2013-12-23 04:21:25 PM
Also, if they did this, I think they should just let the teams pick their order spot by worst record last year.  That would be pretty interesting.  Sounds like there would gaps at the 6/7, 12/13, etc. marks.
 
2013-12-23 04:26:00 PM

DamnYankees: rugman11: So, why is tanking such a big deal in the NBA?  I honestly don't get why there's such a fuss.  Nobody's claiming that the Texans are tanking as they're mired in a 13 game losing streak.  My Minnesota Twins went 8-21 in September last year while keeping a possibly healthy Joe Mauer on the DL.  Nobody was claiming that they were tanking and most fans agreed that it was a good idea to start bench players and minor leaguers to see if they might have any use going forward?

Why is it that the NBA is the only league really concerned with tanking?

Tanking is especially prevelant in the NBA for various reasons.

1) Tanking in the NFL is basically impossible since there are so few games, and the game is so violent. There's almost no way to get football players to not try that hard, since they can get injured much more easily. This is the argument at least. Also, the NFL, for a variety of reasons, has far fewer trades, so its harder to shed yourself of talent for the sole purpose of tanking.

2) Tanking in baseball just isn't worth it, because the draft isn't nearly as important. Almost no one is good enough at draft-time to be worth tanking for. Furthermore, even if one player is amazing, one great player just doesn't have that huge an effect on a baseball team. Someone like Mike Trout, perhaps the best player in baseball, is worth about 10 wins. That's roughly 10% of the wins of a great team. Someone like Lebron is literally worth more than 50% of your team wins. So baseball doesn't have the motivation to tank.

Basketball has it all come together - physically, the sport lends itself to 'relaxing' and not playing at full strength, and resting guys is easier to do given the length of the schedule. Trades are really easy in basketball, so its very easy to shed your good players. The draft is hugely impactful, since one player can make a huge, huge, huge different.


I get why tanking is more beneficial in the NBA, but I don't get why the NBA cares.  The fans don't seem to notice.  There's a little indication that attendance is based on W/L record but a) it's not entirely that way as evidenced by the 33-win Trailblazers pulling the 4th-highest attendance figures last year and the 3-seed Pacers coming at #25, and b) who cares if attendance suffers?  Attendance will always suffer when a team is bad.  Does it really matter if they're 25-52 instead of 20-57?  And shouldn't we be encouraging owners to put the long-term interests of their teams ahead of the short-terms.  Especially when, if NBA history has shown us anything, it's that there only two ways to win a championship.  You can draft it (Kobe, Duncan) or you can buy it (Miami, Boston).  And unless you're in a big-market area, you're probably not buying a championship.

In other words, if the teams are okay with it, why should the league care?
 
2013-12-23 04:27:50 PM

rugman11: In other words, if the teams are okay with it, why should the league care?


I don't think the teams are OK with it. I'm sure teams like SA and LAL hate it, since it punishes success.
 
2013-12-23 04:32:51 PM

DamnYankees: rugman11: In other words, if the teams are okay with it, why should the league care?

I don't think the teams are OK with it. I'm sure teams like SA and LAL hate it, since it punishes success.


Yes, I'm sure the Spurs and Lakers are just weeping over their combined 12 Finals appearances in the last 15 years, especially since the Spurs owe their nearly two decades of success to (injury) lucking into the #1 spot the year they got Duncan.
 
2013-12-23 04:35:36 PM
The NBA sure does punish success, what with 7 teams accounting for 32 of the past 34 titles
 
2013-12-23 04:44:49 PM
Just make it like the NFL draft, and stop trying to make shiatty games watchable. It's not gonna happen. I already don't care about the NBA until the playoffs start, and even then I really don't care that much.
 
2013-12-23 04:58:03 PM

homarjr: This is a terrible idea. You wouldn't be able to build through the draft anymore.

So teams that have a hard time hanging onto players - like my personal favourite, the Raptors - would be screwed forever because it's hard to recruit players after their rookie contracts are over.

/My theory is because black guys don't like the cold


Well that could also explain why there are so many blacks guys in the NHL(yes there are like almost none that was the joke)
 
2013-12-23 04:59:41 PM

NicktheSmoker: Just make it like the NFL draft, and stop trying to make shiatty games watchable. It's not gonna happen. I already don't care about the NBA until the playoffs start, and even then I really don't care that much.


Yeah I dont watch NFL football much till college regular season is over which is darn near the playoffs.
 
2013-12-23 05:19:24 PM

homarjr: This is a terrible idea. You wouldn't be able to build through the draft anymore.

So teams that have a hard time hanging onto players - like my personal favourite, the Raptors - would be screwed forever because it's hard to recruit players after their rookie contracts are over.

/My theory is because black guys don't like the cold


You can blame that bug on the max contract rule.  When the amount of money you can make is limited by league mandate, would you rather make that money in Miami, New York, or LA, or Toronto, Detroit, or Milwaukee?
 
2013-12-23 05:29:26 PM

rugman11: homarjr: This is a terrible idea. You wouldn't be able to build through the draft anymore.

So teams that have a hard time hanging onto players - like my personal favourite, the Raptors - would be screwed forever because it's hard to recruit players after their rookie contracts are over.

/My theory is because black guys don't like the cold

You can blame that bug on the max contract rule.  When the amount of money you can make is limited by league mandate, would you rather make that money in Miami, New York, or LA, or Toronto, Detroit, or Milwaukee?


Yes, obviously once you're a free agent, it's ideal to go to the big cities (though in reality Toronto should be one, but I digress).

But if the small market teams can't even get a top 5 pick in consecutive years (because their stud players keep leaving), then they'll never get out of the basement.

If Parker/Wiggins end up in Toronto, for example, and the Raptors end up in the lottery again (which they probably would), they might end up with a great core duo both in their rookie contracts. This would then possibly attract more free agents.

If they go with this wheel route, this scenario can almost never happen, and by the time that first rookie contract is up, there is nearly no incentive for that star player to stay.

The problem with the NBA isn't that teams are tanking, it's that it's too hop heavy. The only reason for this is because (as someone mentioned above), a single all-star can turn a team around in one year. It doesn't work like that in other team sports. Plus, it's also the only league where a 19 year old can be the best player, or top 10 at the very least. Doesn't happen in the NHL, NFL or MLB.
 
2013-12-23 05:34:34 PM

rugman11: You can draft it (Kobe


Wait, you're putting the LAKERS on the list of "teams that drafted, not bought/acquired" titles? Shaq and Pau Gasol disagree.

(While the Pau Gasol trade has worked out well for Memphis NOW, Marc would not have been in position to help while Kobe was still a superstar - the Lakers would be better off now with Marc, but they probably wouldn't have won the titles they won).

BTW, you'd think that people would've noticed that tanking doesn't work in the NBA - Stern's been rigging lotteries to screw teams that tank (and sometimes to help markets/owner friends) for a while now.
 
2013-12-23 05:35:21 PM

rugman11: homarjr: This is a terrible idea. You wouldn't be able to build through the draft anymore.

So teams that have a hard time hanging onto players - like my personal favourite, the Raptors - would be screwed forever because it's hard to recruit players after their rookie contracts are over.

/My theory is because black guys don't like the cold

You can blame that bug on the max contract rule.  When the amount of money you can make is limited by league mandate, would you rather make that money in Miami, New York, or LA, or Toronto, Detroit, or Milwaukee?


Well, in the case of the latter, the only way to get them to say is to prove you want to win and keep winning.  Problem being, for whatever reason, the northern owners just aren't anywhere near as flashy or ready to throw money around as the southern ones.
 
Displayed 50 of 94 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report