Reply With Quote
Not impressive against Brooklyn’s gleague lineup.
we are going to rely on the Sixers, who have lost 27 of their last 31, to beat ATL tomorrow
philly just broke their 10+ game losing streak yesterday against the wizards. they're on a roll!
Not impressive against Brooklyn’s gleague lineup.
NBA thought the play-in tournament would fix the regular season, but there are still like 10 teams in full tank mode right now and it shows.
They did a good job flattening odds but unless it’s completely flat there’s going to be incentive to do this, sadly.
Fix the draft so that if you hit the top 4, you’re barred from another top 4 pick for two years. Any combination of yours that is drawn for a top 4 slot is discarded and re-drawn. You can also still get bumped back if a team behind you jumps up. This is the way to disincentivize serial tankers.
This would only apply to your own picks that you still hold for that draft. No other team would be punished for owning your picks.
But what about if your team really does suck. Why should you not be able to get another top 4 pick if you've tried your hardest and still ended up with a bottom 3 record?
If SA got Wemby #1 in 2023 wouldn't that rule prohibit Spurs from getting Castle #4 in 2024? Maybe make it something like after the 3rd straight top 10 or so you get bumped back to #15 for 2 years if you land there again. What's fair? Because for example CHA being back in there again with a nice pick is going to be kinda questionable if it happens but I guess they are finishing out a rather nice roster and one more should do it. Just starting to feel like a repeat offender there with #2, #6 (granted Tidjane), and they sit at #3 draft odds currently so one of 3 slots with the top best odds at 14%. Guess I'm cool with CHA but PHI for sure needs draft process drug rehab.
Allan Rowe vs Wade
What, so if the Spurs sucked for 3 or 4 years in a row and got the number 1-4 pick each of those years, you'd be happy if they were told they can't have those picks?
Nah, I don't like any of these. What if you get three number 9 picks in a row. All those players could end up not working out and then you have to drop back 15, your team is going to suck for longer that way. I don't know the solution. It's all a mess as you can't prove who is and who isn't tanking. I agree something needs to be done, but there are teams that legitimately suck, and unless you get the number 1 pick every year, those picks outside of the top 1-4 picks are a crapshoot and may not end up being great or even good players that can turn your team around.
Last edited by Ice009; 04-11-2025 at 12:09 AM.
Yeah I agree with ex that teams are gaming the system but it's hard to come up with a fair or realistic governor that doesn't have a cir stance where it would seem unfair or feel misapplied.
Just get rid of the draft altogether!
If you draft 3 #9s in a row, and your team improves to the point where you draft at #15, your #9s weren’t failures.
That's not what I meant. He said if you draft inside the top 10 3 times in a row, you get bumped back to the 15th pick for two years. I said, what if those three number 9s suck and then you get bumped back to 15th, it could prolong the rebuild and make things worse.
These solutions might be great on the surface, but I was just showing that they could also be even more detrimental to a team.
Yeah, that’s a bit drastic. I liked mine better: two years outside the top 4 after one trip in.
Teams don’t tank to get a top 10 pick. They tank hoping jump into the top 4.
How is tanking no different than point shaving? Every game should be investigated if teams are intentionally losing and be penalized, and the city possibly losing its team if found to purposely tanking, management be permanently suspended from the NBA, etc.
I'd actually like something drastic, but how do you prove it, though? I don't think it's possible to prove if a team is tanking or not. You might end up with teams cutting good players and signing lesser players to lose games on purpose.
Every year a few people complain about tanking and it's never actually a problem. Teams don't want to tank, they want to get good. The problem is drafting is hard to convert into success. Until you solve that problem, you're not doing anything. I don't get wanting to punish teams for wanting to get better picks. It's not a huge deal.
Some time ago I read an interesting idea that actually makes some sense, but will never get implemented.
What if noone owned their pick, but selected which team's pick they want to own next year?
Jazz has the worst record, so they'd pick first. Let's say they take Wizards' pick.
Then Wizards make their selection etc.
Would create some rivalries between teams and noone would have an incentive to lose games.
My own idea that's somewhat realistic would be adding a wins threshold below which record doesn't matter.
Let's say set it at 30, with worse records being irrelevant.
This seasons 7 teams have 30 or less wins, with my idea they'd all have the same lottery odds.
Tanking is bad because even the worst rosters are capable of winning 25+ games with some historic outliers.
Teams outside the playoffs should have better odds to get the best positions in the draft, but right now it's just absurd that healthy high end starters are sitting a lot of games just so their team can lose for better odds.
No. Everyone's going to forget about the 'problem' until about this time next year, then completely forget about it again.
What people whine about is that some teams don't try at the end of the season. That's the real problem. So it affects standings. But the Celtics just rested their players in a game. Are you going to punish them for doing the same thing that tanking teams do?
Then the problem isn't tanking for draft position. It's something else.
And it happens every year. In almost every sport. , Tottenham threw a game at the end of last season against Man City to ensure Arsenal couldn't win the league. Did they get punished?
Again, this is a problem that cannot be solved by getting cute with lottery rules. It's already been flattened and that's solved the problem enough.
Has a team ever had a quieter successful year than the Clippers this season? Their record is 48-32, they're 13-2 in their last 15, a career role player like Kris Dunn leads the NBA in Defensive BPM, and Zubac is #2 in defensive WS... but I've heard very few sportswriters even mention them in months.
its impressive.
he just turned 20 a few days ago. absolute prototype SF
Yeah definitely impressive. But a bit too late on the ROY front imo. Unless he closes the season with b2b 50 point games, Castle has ROY locked up
Because their two best players are either notorious for ting the bed in the playoffs (Harden) or getting injured at the worst possible time (Kawhi)
They're a sneaky contender but at this point you just know Kawhi is gonna tear his vag or something in the first round
That would favor the big market teams. The top prospects will choose the big market teams.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
