Reply With Quote
Never realized Jackson and Diaw has the same power to have their coaches fired like Magic did.
I'm a trend setter.
I set trends.
Never realized Jackson and Diaw has the same power to have their coaches fired like Magic did.
Eh...this is getting stale.
Quittin' is quittin'. Jackson & Diaw quit, stabbed their coach, then Pop came along tootsweet.
Stings, don't it, Amb?
stale/schmale
Part & parcel to my NBA Forum rolling stock.
Get used to it, asshole.
Is this what every thread turns into nowadays? I don't lurk this side of ST much anymore.
Yeah, but, it was okay when we had the entire sandwich to eat. Now that you must share the do-do, you take exception.
Shut up and get back upstair afore I whistle the loops on your ass.
LOL rolling stock. pleazzze
Did Silas and Skiles write a book detailing how difficult it is to coach Diaw and Jackson, respectively?
But, it was all right before Neal raped and was signed by Pop, and before Artest hit that 3 and Kobe went over 5-4, and before Jackson & Diaw quit.
See, you mother ers can dish it, but, when the tables get turned...(then) then you pussies want to play by the rules.
Ya weaks s.
You got no room. You played the rape card for years until Neal raped and got signed.
Chickens have come to roost.
i doubt stern gives a about lottery teams, his more focused on the bigger teams that bring in the money, as long those team continue to pile on talent legitimate or not, thats what matters to him....those lower teams could stack up all the talent they want, but they aint winning or turning the team into a contender, those sort of teams are more focus on putting out some kind of product that brings the viewers in....not every team can win a championship....
I agree with the premise, disagree with the solution. I proposed a year ago that in order to do away with tanking you reverse the lottery structure you have now. Instead of giving the worst team to miss the playoffs the best chance at the number 1 pick, you give the best team to miss the playoffs the best chance.
Not only does this take away incentive to tank (you'd be hurting your chances), it rewards teams that are on the cusp to help more teams take that next step or add that talented but cheap piece to provide more parity.
Through FA bigger markets will continue to do well, but for the teams that are good at scouting but struggle to lure FA's, they can continue to add good, cheap talent and it rewards them for trying to compete and build.
Some may argue that it will kill parity, but there isn't much parity now to be honest and rotten teams are usually rotten for multiple reason and stay that way unless really lucky. This system would create a more compe ive league than there is now and accomplish the goal of fixing tanking. At least from the bottom half (you can see a scenario a team on the cusp of the playoffs tanks at the very end to have the best record and miss the playoffs although they would be losing out on some serious money by not making it).
You didn't give a flying limp about Jackson prior to The Return.
Either way it gives teams incentive to miss the playoffs. So they know they are a bubble team, they play just good enough to be the best of the non playoff teams. If winning your last game puts you in the playoffs, and losing it keeps you out, and there's a Duncan or Shaq in the lottery, a team is going to have a hard decision to make. You basically lose just by winning if you know you aren't good enough to make it out of the 1st round.
There's no way around tanking. The worst team should get the best pick, having a draft lottery of any sort is dumb.
While that may, and I say may be true once a decade (getting a Duncan/Shaq/Lebron sure thing), the penalty for missing the playoffs in your scenario is pretty steep naturally due to the large sums of money they are forgoing by not making it. Teams that make the playoffs receive a pretty nice financial lift so if you are going to tank, it's going to hurt you financially so I don't seeing it being an issue in my scenario.
Either way, you have them playing all the way up until the last 1 or 2 games basically which is still much better than the current tank job that takes place half a season and rewards it. At least in this scenario there is incentive to play better longer and if you want to tank there is a much bigger financial sting not to mention morale sting.
Also, you could keep the draft order the same for teams that make it where the best team gets the worst pick and the teams at the bottom of the playoff get the better picks.
Disagree with this quite a bit. You shouldn't reward teams with good picks especially when history shows getting a top pick doesn't turn a franchise into a good one.
This isn't football. It works differently. In my scenario, you get teams that are good to possibly great vs giving teams the ability to maybe get to decent unless they get really lucky.
It's better for the league my way IMO.
Though I like your system better than the one in the OP, free agency kills the entire "parity" aspect of the draft, since these guys can get their 4 years of training from some low level NBA team then join another 1st overall on their team.
Look at the past 1st overall picks. Which ones actually did anything to help the team they landed on? Then again, that might prove your point even more, that had they landed on teams on the cusp, they could push them over the top.
Then you would basically end up with 18 - 20 teams that competed every year, because those that dropped out would still probably play on the cusp unless we are talking about a Lebron/Cleveland situation where one team totally goes s up after a free agent decides to leave.
I also think the amount of tanking that goes on in the NBA is really blown out of proportion. Maybe GMs and owners want the #1 pick, but the players and coaches ultimately control the tanking that goes on, and most players don't give a about tanking to get the team they're playing for a #1 pick especially when they know that odds are they're gonna be playing somewhere else 3-4 years later.
That is exactly my point. Teams trying to win should be rewarded more and those players getting added to better teams would make the league better.
The teams that are ty would stay ty forever. How is a bottom feeder supposed to ever become relevant again? There'd be no point in keeping a team around after it was bad for a certain period of time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
