By DY_nasty Go To PostDon't reform. The solution of d-league development is already paying off.
You hate tanking but love those picks
Yes, it's an interesting dichotomy I've been in the last several seasons. If those picks were ours and not protected one's we sold off, I would have been fine picking in the 5-7 range btw.
Regarding D League development paying off, I kinda feel like that won't ever matter until the NCAA shit is taken care of.
By Fenderputty Go To PostIf you got a better idea, rather than adjusting the lottery, I would love to hear it. I've never heard any other suggestions.The (modified) Draft Wheel, of course! :v
e: it does modify the lottery, though, by entirely getting rid of it.
It'll continue paying off and improving because the NCAAs flawed development practices aren't changing either. Just a few years ago, it made no sense to play in the d-league and teams were hamstrung when it came to retaining talent there.
By providing kids with an option better than heading to Italy or China, the NBA will continue to remove itself bit by bit from the NCAA independently.
By providing kids with an option better than heading to Italy or China, the NBA will continue to remove itself bit by bit from the NCAA independently.
By DY_nasty Go To PostIt'll continue paying off and improving because the NCAAs flawed development practices aren't changing either. Just a few years ago, it made no sense to play in the d-league and teams were hamstrung when it came to retaining talent there.
By providing kids with an option better than heading to Italy or China, the NBA will continue to remove itself bit by bit from the NCAA independently.
I hope you're right. I have noticed an increased popularity for the summer league. If the D League can provide some revenue for teams shit may get expedited.
By rodeoclown Go To PostThey should get rid of the lottery and give the worst team the top pick.
There, I fixed it.
I"ll race you to the bottom!
By Kibner Go To PostThe (modified) Draft Wheel, of course! :v
e: it does modify the lottery, though, by entirely getting rid of it.
Thanks. Interesting. Not sure I dig this:
nder the original Wheel, designed by Celtics general manager Mike Zarren, teams would rotate through each draft slot over a 30-year period in an order determined to create relative balance.
Ideally the lesser teams have a better shot at a good pick. I just want to deincentivize being garbage tier while doing that.
By rodeoclown Go To PostThey should get rid of the lottery and give the worst team the top pick.NFL does some things right.
There, I fixed it.
By giririsss Go To PostThe whole point to the lottery was to make sure that the worst team got the best opportunity to get the best player so that they weren't the worst team.actually that wasn't the point of the lottery... if the point was to give the team with the worst record the number 1 pick they wouldn't had gone to a lottery system and just would had kept the draft by record system that every sport has...
This doesn't solve that in the slightest.
And it looks like they've taken the protection off of the # 1-3 picks? So you could now end up with the worst record, but not even get a top 3 pick? Just top 5?
It's pretty terrible reforms.
It does give the bottom 4 - 6, a better time.
But it does shift the "when to tank" line. Which doesn't incentivise 15 win teams, but you still get the best odds by being the worst, so it doesn't really dis-incentivise it either.
And it doesn't help or hurt particular markets one way or the other.
The way to stop teams tanking, isn't really through changing lottery odds.
I actually, legitimately believe that you wouldn't have seen a situation like the Sixers where they tanked for multiple years in a row if they just seeded the draft by order of worst record.
The idea that the lottery means less tanking isn't true. It's never been true and it won't be true now. Especially now that teams 1-5 are basically all on the same level as far as odds of ending up at the top of the draft.
The idea that the lottery means less tanking isn't true. It's never been true and it won't be true now. Especially now that teams 1-5 are basically all on the same level as far as odds of ending up at the top of the draft.
By blackace Go To Postactually that wasn't the point of the lottery… if the point was to give the team with the worst record the number 1 pick they wouldn't had gone to a lottery system and just would had kept the draft by record system that every sport has…You're right. It's not the sole reason for it.
By Fenderputty Go To PostIf you got a better idea, rather than adjusting the lottery, I would love to hear it. I've never heard any other suggestions.
Hurt them financially. If a team doesn't make 20 wins, they can't be part of revenue sharing. After all, if a team is outright tanking, it hurts he rest of the league financially (no one watched the 15 win 76'ers).
By DY_nasty Go To PostDon't reform. The solution of d-league development is already paying off.
D-league helps. But even that needs further time spent on it. Sounds like teams are starting to take it seriously though.
By rodeoclown Go To PostI actually, legitimately believe that you wouldn't have seen a situation like the Sixers where they tanked for multiple years in a row if they just seeded the draft by order of worst record.There's certainly a legitimate argument that if your team got the worst record 2 years in a row, and 2 number one picks, you're not showing up for that 3rd year. Your whole clubhouse would never recover.
The idea that the lottery means less tanking isn't true. It's never been true and it won't be true now. Especially now that teams 1-5 are basically all on the same level as far as odds of ending up at the top of the draft.
By giririsss Go To PostHurt them financially. If a team doesn't make 20 wins, they can't be part of revenue sharing. After all, if a team is outright tanking, it hurts he rest of the league financially (no one watched the 15 win 76'ers).
.
Ok any realistic ideas lol. This would be like trying to pass single payer healthcare through a GOP controlled congress and POTUS.
By Fenderputty Go To PostOk any realistic ideas lol. This would be like trying to pass single payer healthcare through a GOP controlled congress and POTUS.It will never pass. But most didn't think these changes would pass either. So who knows.
If the other teams / owners genuinely feel this strongly on the issue, it's certainly an option on the table. Because tanking teams hurt revenue.
But it's certainly better than punishing young bad teams (lakers and suns this year) for the sins of others' past.
It would also stop teams from doing what the Suns did at the end of the year last year, where they benched anyone who was over 25.
By rodeoclown Go To PostI actually, legitimately believe that you wouldn't have seen a situation like the Sixers where they tanked for multiple years in a row if they just seeded the draft by order of worst record.A draft will always create tanking in the NBA because basketball is a sport where one legit superstar can make you a playoff team. But the idea that drafting order by record had less tanking isn't true because they did that for years...Like the years Houston tanked for Ralph and turned around and tanked for Dream back to back
The idea that the lottery means less tanking isn't true. It's never been true and it won't be true now. Especially now that teams 1-5 are basically all on the same level as far as odds of ending up at the top of the draft.
By blackace Go To PostA draft will always create tanking in the NBA because basketball is a sport where one legit superstar can make you a playoff team. But the idea that drafting order by record had less tanking isn't true because they did that for years…Like the years Houston tanked for Ralph and turned around and tanked for Dream back to backBut a draft order that is influenced by your record in anyway, will always have people manipulating their record to manipulate their draft order, if you want to think about it that way.
By giririsss Go To PostBut a draft order that is influenced by your record in anyway, will always have people manipulating their record to manipulate their draft order, if you want to think about it that way.sure but now they don't punish teams that try to win even tho they shouldn't... remember how hot people were when D-Lo hit that game winner late last season?
By blackace Go To Postsure but now they don't punish teams that try to win even tho they shouldn't… remember how hot people were when D-Lo hit that game winner late last season?I mean, they still do. Your odds change. Just not by as much. But they still do. (And i think that win was more about the fact that the lakers would lose their pick entirely because it would fall outside protection).
By giririsss Go To PostI mean, they still do. Your odds change. Just not by as much. But they still do. (And i think that win was more about the fact that the lakers would lose their pick entirely because it would fall outside protection).but their odds changed so much with win to win... I think it's a decent move by the NBA. The last few years watching fans root for tanks have been sad
By reilo Go To PostI still think tanking is only as rewarding as the GM making the pick.most the time there is a clear number 1 pick and even the worst GMs can't mess that up
By blackace Go To Postbut their odds changed so much with win to win… I think it's a decent move by the NBA. The last few years watching fans root for tanks have been sadYou said it your self earlier, it's not going to change things because of how influential one star can be. Teams are still going to tank.
By giririsss Go To PostYou said it your self earlier, it's not going to change things because of how influential one star can be. Teams are still going to tank.I think it curbs trying to have single digit wins and it also makes 1st round picks more of wildcard in trades. It doesn't stop tanking but it doesn't encourage it like it does now
By reilo Go To PostI still think tanking is only as rewarding as the GM making the pick.GMs and the player's knees.
By diehard Go To PostZach Lowe article on it http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/20849861/zach-lowe-nba-draft-lottery-reform-potential-ramifications
That fear remains in some corners, including (presumably) in Oklahoma City, the only franchise to vote no – and one that, as the Sonics, tanked for stars.The shit that makes your soul burn slow.
By diehard Go To PostLottery change is good for my team so.. "fuck you i got mine" and all that.
Same. Lottery change helped my team a lot.
By DY_nasty Go To PostBy providing kids with an option better than heading to Italy or China, the NBA will continue to remove itself bit by bit from the NCAA independently.
It's not better for them when they can earn a fraction of what they can get overseas tho
Some have argued the best teams should select first as a way to incentivize winning, or that all 30 teams should participate in a lottery with equal odds of landing in any spot.Is this what happens when Ayn Rand fans become sports analysts?
Lottery did nothing for my team, got fucked over mostly by picking X+1 in an X player draft. Plus having monkeys make draft picks means you take Joe Smith over Kevin Garnett.
Wasn't until they got some competent people in things changed. Also having more incompetent people draft ahead of them helped.
Wasn't until they got some competent people in things changed. Also having more incompetent people draft ahead of them helped.
By pilonv1 Go To PostLottery did nothing for my team, got fucked over mostly by picking X+1 in an X player draft. Plus having monkeys make draft picks means you take Joe Smith over Kevin Garnett.
Wasn't until they got some competent people in things changed. Also having more incompetent people draft ahead of them helped.
I don't think you can stop people from making bad picks.
A large part of having a long time successful org will always be having a good front office.
The only reason we were able to tank for as long as we have (dear lord let it end), is because we took TWO broken big men in a row plus a draft stash....not many teams would do that or even be in position to do so. I also doubt that even if we come out of this winning (which is still up in the air thanks to one of those broken big men still being broken), how many GMs are willing to follow in Hinkie's footsteps? I don't think the line for getting blackballed is that long. Plus I doubt many owners would be down for it either...Josh Harris didn't lose money but even he got cold feet and thus Colangelo happened. Plus as stated earlier, very few franchises could put their fans through the process and still have them come back.
I always will think that the whole fear of the process being the way to build a team was overstated as hell. Its not a good time, requires a lot of risk, and honestly Hinkie made some misteps along the way that perhaps could have even cut it down quite a bit.
But I eagerly await the day when an actually awful team gets hosed out of the first pick all because of the tanking boogieman. Y'know the biggest reason for the lack of parity...shortsighted and outright trash FOs. GS got to where they are now due to a longterm strategy (and some luck). The Spurs have been good for fucking ever now because they thought longterm (ex. George Hill for Kwahii) and adjusted with the times. Bad franchises make short sighted trades like we did for Bynum's corpse or how Billy King did for KG's Corpse. Moves that make total sense in the moment but even if they had of worked out, probably wouldn't have lasted for a long time. I fucking hate Danny Ainge and his posturing at times but dude has played the long game in his hoarding, which is why the Celtics have quietly rebuilt despite going down around the same time the Magic, Sixers, and Lakers did.
and again I don't think tanking is the ONLY way of doing things, I feel like we were in a unique situation to give it a try but I think the weird fear of it was just a bit much. Hopefuly not many teams will be in a situation of having fuck all due to a shit trade
I always will think that the whole fear of the process being the way to build a team was overstated as hell. Its not a good time, requires a lot of risk, and honestly Hinkie made some misteps along the way that perhaps could have even cut it down quite a bit.
But I eagerly await the day when an actually awful team gets hosed out of the first pick all because of the tanking boogieman. Y'know the biggest reason for the lack of parity...shortsighted and outright trash FOs. GS got to where they are now due to a longterm strategy (and some luck). The Spurs have been good for fucking ever now because they thought longterm (ex. George Hill for Kwahii) and adjusted with the times. Bad franchises make short sighted trades like we did for Bynum's corpse or how Billy King did for KG's Corpse. Moves that make total sense in the moment but even if they had of worked out, probably wouldn't have lasted for a long time. I fucking hate Danny Ainge and his posturing at times but dude has played the long game in his hoarding, which is why the Celtics have quietly rebuilt despite going down around the same time the Magic, Sixers, and Lakers did.
and again I don't think tanking is the ONLY way of doing things, I feel like we were in a unique situation to give it a try but I think the weird fear of it was just a bit much. Hopefuly not many teams will be in a situation of having fuck all due to a shit trade
Just randomize the whole lotto with even odds. Why do we actually care about the worst team? You're just ensuring that your stars all end up on:
A) Incompetent organizations, or
B) Semi-competent or competent organizations who threw games to get that bad record.
No amount of draft picks are saving Orlando/Minny/Sacto from bad management anyway.
A) Incompetent organizations, or
B) Semi-competent or competent organizations who threw games to get that bad record.
No amount of draft picks are saving Orlando/Minny/Sacto from bad management anyway.
By livefromkyoto Go To PostJust randomize the whole lotto with even odds. Why do we actually care about the worst team? You're just ensuring that your stars all end up on:I could write a response or just point out there's a good reason no other sport in the world does that.
A) Incompetent organizations, or
B) Semi-competent or competent organizations who threw games to get that bad record.
No amount of draft picks are saving Orlando/Minny/Sacto from bad management anyway.
By giririsss Go To PostI could write a response or just point out there's a good reason no other sport in the world does that.Well no one was doing a lotto also now other sports are doing it like the NHL...
If there's even a 1% chance of a team like GS getting the #1 pick, it's too high.
Nyets and Kings fucked the league
Nyets and Kings fucked the league
By giririsss Go To PostI could write a response or just point out there's a good reason no other sport in the world does that.
Is there? The NBA used to do it, and then everyone freaked out when the Magic got Penny & Shaq.
All these contortions to save the bad franchises from themselves, yet they spend most of a decade out of the playoffs anyway. Does this situation actually get any worse if teams have zero incentive to throw games?
By livefromkyoto Go To PostIs there? The NBA used to do it, and then everyone freaked out when the Magic got Penny & Shaq.Chill, Ayn Rand of Basketball.
All these contortions to save the bad franchises from themselves, yet they spend most of a decade out of the playoffs anyway. Does this situation actually get any worse if teams have zero incentive to throw games?
By reilo Go To PostChill, Ayn Rand of Basketball.
Lol. Seriously though, the only substantive argument I can see for the current system is the narrative it creates for fans of bad teams - "we suck, but if we keep this up we might get star X! " It at least keeps some form of fan engagement when it would otherwise be pointless.
So this is the last year where a good tank can get you to the promised land...... I'm glad my team is tanking
By Fenderputty Go To PostYo go check and see if I was wanting to tank last year. Or the year before. This site got receipts. Kado was in the back drinking margaritas laughing at my while I held out. Last year specifically I figured we would be #5 or so by the end was rooting for wins almost all season. Then we traded Lou Williams.why? tanking is fun.
I fuckin' hate tanking
By livefromkyoto Go To PostLol. Seriously though, the only substantive argument I can see for the current system is the narrative it creates for fans of bad teams - "we suck, but if we keep this up we might get star X! " It at least keeps some form of fan engagement when it would otherwise be pointless.Bingo.
Even if you look at it and take into account shocking shit management and drafting, i.e. Orlando. They've got a reason to have faith it can turn around by landing their next shaq/dwight.
Take that away? Take away any incentive to know anything about the team until they land that next guy?
You'll have completely empty stadiums, fan dis-engagement at all time highs, piss poor local tv ratings, and a drop in league overall value.
I mean, some of that is hyperbole, some not.
By giririsss Go To PostBingo.I remember this one time when fans were mad at how a team was managed and stopped supporting that team so much... they moved OKC.
Even if you look at it and take into account shocking shit management and drafting, i.e. Orlando. They've got a reason to have faith it can turn around by landing their next shaq/dwight.
Take that away? Take away any incentive to know anything about the team until they land that next guy?
You'll have completely empty stadiums, fan dis-engagement at all time highs, piss poor local tv ratings, and a drop in league overall value.
I mean, some of that is hyperbole, some not.
Fans are basically hostages....
I do think that the NBA needs some sort of franchise tag or franchise player contract to help teams keep stars.
They got something like one in the last CBA with the DPE. It's a bunch more money than the player can earn elsewhere. Of course, it doesn't force the player to stay there, but, yeah.
By Kibner Go To PostThey got something like one in the last CBA with the DPE. It's a bunch more money than the player can earn elsewhere. Of course, it doesn't force the player to stay there, but, yeah.Naw that's not enough... It's a nice start tho
By blackace Go To PostI remember this one time when fans were mad at how a team was managed and stopped supporting that team so much… they moved OKC.NBA is determined to make that harder to do. It's not great for the league.
Fans are basically hostages….
I do think that the NBA needs some sort of franchise tag or franchise player contract to help teams keep stars.
And you're not wrong. But it's not fun showing up and supporting a shit show.
By rodeoclown Go To PostI personally don't believe that my favorite team should tank, but honestly, this is a solution to a problem that didn't exist. How is tanking an issue? Aside from the Sixers, how many teams have blatantly thrown away seasons to try and win the lottery (which is the only way star players might play in Philadelphia, by the way) and actually been successful?I think that’s the problem. So many teams tank and it never pays off which just results in a shittier product. I feel like Orlando has been picking top 5 ever since Dwight left and their best player was only useful in the dunk contest
They're hurting smaller markets and teams that actually need help to address something that isn't even a real widespread issue.
Orlando hasn't even been tanking lol
Last year, the only real tank jobs were from start to finish were Phx and LA. There were plenty of teams that SHOULD have tanked though; Dallas, Miami, New York, Detroit, Sacramento, Orlando, and Atlanta imo
Asshole squads like Sacramento and New Jersey ruined it for everyone and got Philly and Boston picks that they don't even need.
Last year, the only real tank jobs were from start to finish were Phx and LA. There were plenty of teams that SHOULD have tanked though; Dallas, Miami, New York, Detroit, Sacramento, Orlando, and Atlanta imo
Asshole squads like Sacramento and New Jersey ruined it for everyone and got Philly and Boston picks that they don't even need.