Reply With Quote
Who wrote this ty article?
This is shaping up to be the worst season of the NBA, parity-wise, ever. 14 out of 16 teams in the East are absolute garbage. The Spurs,Trailblazers, and Thunder are a combined 26-1 vs Eastern Conference teams this year, with the lone loss being from the Spurs to the Pacers.
The NBA is full of teams with pathetic rosters. Unless their owners are complete morons (Knicks) it's impossible to argue that their teams, as presently constructed, have been put together to compete and to win.
About 20 teams in the NBA are tanking right now. The elite teams are going to all win 60+ games automatically because they'll never lose to a team that's tanking. Take the Spurs for example. The Spurs are 13-0 vs teams with losing records (tanking teams) and conversely, 6-5 vs teams with winning records (non-tanking teams). 70% of teams fans have already lost hope in this season. If you think some of these arenas are empty now, just wait until February and March. They'll resemble graveyards, except that even the dead wouldn't be caught dead in them.
This is terrible for the NBA. The league has always teetered on the edge of maintaining the public's respect. This season of tanking will serve to destroy whatever is left of it. If the NBA wants to gain any of it back, they can NEVER let a season like this happen again. Having said that, here's what they need to do:
The NBA needs to GUARANTEE that the worst 3 teams (record-wise) will receive the LAST 3 draft picks in the 1st and 2nd round of the draft. Doing this prevents teams from assembling terrible rosters, for fear of the extreme consequences of doing so. This also keeps every team in the NBA trying to win as many games as possible. Half of the teams will be trying to win to make the playoffs while the other half will be desperately trying to win to avoid finishing in the bottom 3. The last half of the regular season will go from being unwatchable-- to flat-out compelling, as even the teams in the bottom half will be immersed in a bloodbath to not lose any more games. Other than this one stipulation, the draft would be left alone, with the corresponding W/L record of teams determining the order of where they draft outside of the lottery, which would now only feature 11 teams.
The continuing viability of the NBA is more important than individual teams futures. Besides, the worst NBA teams shouldn't be rewarded for trying to lose, or for being plain-out terrible. Right now tanking has built a losing culture in the NBA. And it''s not just the teams that are losing, but the NBA as a whole as empty arenas, low television ratings, and the loss of generated revenue comprise to destroy it.
This is the NBA's chance to change their losing culture. By eliminating tanking, they could increase interest in the regular season, and by doing so elevate the NBA to a whole new level. But apparently, they're too dumb to think of a solution of how to do so and they need our help. So please. For the love of the NBA, submit responses with solutions on how to stop tanking and we'll figure it out for them. Then, once we find a viable one, we'll mass send out our solution and solve this issue.
Last edited by TheyCallMePro; 12-18-2013 at 12:02 AM.
Who wrote this ty article?
tanking is a must in american sports because players don't go to soccer academies like they do in Europe. It's the only way to maintain some sort of compe iveness in the long-run..
Would you rather watch LA and Botson winning every championship?
Steve Nash once mentioned this idea, something they do in certain soccer leagues, where they have a tournament for the lottery teams, and whoever wins the tournament gets the no.1 pick, second place gets the 2nd pick etc.... I think that would make a lot more interesting. the NBA has still a lots of way to go to fix things.
so the best worst team would get the number one pick? doesn't that defeat the purpose of the lottery?
I think Nash was saying that the team that played the hardest would get rewarded, saying how in certain soccer leagues, it turns out to be a very fun tournament to watch. I like that idea better than the crooked lottery.
Man the draft system used to be so ty in the 70's-80's, especially in an era where most GM's got Ujiried by Red and Jerry (who got top draft picks in wtf trades).
Lakers have a good team and they get Magic, then a few years later Worthy.
Celtics destroy the NBA in 86, then get Len Bias, but he went all black on the white stuff.
I guess once the play-off starts the ty teams can start playing for drfats ( Let's call it the ty teams playoffs). And to determine the picks for playoff bound teams, whoever wins the championships get's the highest pick too..Gotta play hard to get rewarded. lol 6-8 seeded teams would benefit the least out of this system though
I've already posted the solution - you don't even have to do the tournament. All you have to do is switch the way you assign the odds. Don't even have to change the probabilities, simply change the teams you award it to. Instead of the worst record getting the best odds, the best team to miss the playoffs gets that and work your way all the way down to the worst team.
Not only does it eliminate tanking, but if you truly want better basketball and more parity, that system allows teams "on the cusp" to make that next jump by having the possibility of obtaining top flight, young, cheap talent or giving them a great asset to trade with in order to make the next jump.
The purpose of the lottery is supposed to give teams the ability to get better. However, you see tanking as a result of this and you reward not only tanking and poor play, but poor choices (since teams that are constantly in the lottery have other issues: bad management, drafting, trades, contracts...). If you want to give more teams a chance to compete, reward the teams that do more good and try to put a quality product on the floor. Give them the shot, since they typically make better decisions overall, to improve more quickly.
The system of rewarding sucking rarely works and leads to a lot of bad teams since the reason they are bad is bad management in general. Getting a good pick more often than not is a giant waste on them. The only time it's not is if a team lucks into a true superstar (Duncan, Shaq, Lebron, Wade, Durant) which is incredibly rare.
I think that's a horrible idea. Instead of having bad teams tank, you'll have the borderline playoff teams tanking. If your choice is between having a great shot at getting the chance to pick one of Parker, Randle, and Wiggins vs getting your teeth kicked in by Miami in the first round, you're not gonna throw a few games to miss the playoffs?
Why thank you BB - I was hoping someone would bring that up. I highly, highly doubt a "borderline" playoff team will tank.
1) The financial incentive, especially for everyone outside of the Lakers/Knicks, for making the playoffs is quite huge. I surely doubt owners would give the ok to forgo not only the revenues from the playoffs, but the chance to build experience from the playoffs for his team that is right there.
2) Not only is there significant financial incentive, but it would be very difficult from a practical sense to do what you say. In order to do that, you would have to be good enough to get a playoff spot in the first place. If you are that good and have pushed all year to win as many games as you can to get the best pick or make the playoffs, to be able to shut that off or somehow just tank the last 5 games or so would be in practice quite difficult.
3) Ownership aside, good luck getting a coach/players to tank when they have a shot at the playoffs. Not only does ownership get a financial boost, but so do the players coaches. Both directly (incentives/bonus/sharing) but indirectly (perform in the playoffs and possibly get a bigger contract down the road).
4) You have to throw out the anomalies as well. No system is perfect, but it's about what makes the most sense and accomplishes the overall goal more often than not. Sure, in a year where the East is full of losers, you might run into some situations (but, because of what I explained above, shouldn't be a concern). Let's say you do have those issues though - well, it's such an anomaly that this would happen you just can't worry about it. Same with this draft. It's pretty rare you have a draft that is this "stacked". Most years it's not. That doesn't mean the draft isn't valuable, jus that the argument of "Parker, Randle, Wiggins.." doesn't come up all that often. There's really not many years where there are players worth tanking for tbh..
Also, let's say the problem you brought up does exist and all of what I said doesn't matter. Isn't it still better? That would still mean it's teams pushing the vast majority of the year playing as hard as they can and only tanking a few games instead of an entire season. Not only that, but if a borderline team did tank at the end of the year it only helps my point. If you want parity and compe ion and a better brand of basketball, you have to make those teams on the cusp make the jump faster to legit playoff team/contender. Getting that borderline team a Wiggins does that.
Bump - this is actual basketball discussion and I would like to hear others thoughts. With DPG's pull and subtle goods, I might get this implemented tbh..
The current lottery system is actually a de-facto encouraging system to those tanking teams imho. I thought of a feasible solution like 2-3yrs ago, when I said teams with the tiest records (like the bottom 3 or something) should be deprived of their draft picks so even the tanking teams would have more or less incentives to win games.
there's no sin in tanking, but there should be a limit to it just like everything tbh.
Agreed, and tanking isn't even close to the top reason I think my system makes sense. I just don't think tanking is that big of an issue in reality and my system just happens to clean that up from an ancillary perspective. The real benefit is getting more teams compe ive which increases the quality brand of basketball.
HarlemHeat37 Chinook what are yalls thoughts on this?
Yeah, this goes along the lines of my idea. Don't reward teams for sucking. Punish them. That way, teams will do everything in their power to try to get better, instead of to get worse. The draft system has it all backwards right now. It may make the worst teams a little better, but it makes the league worse as a whole.
DPG's system is innovative and interesting, but it also has its own flaws. Just like BB pointed it out above, teams will begin tanking for the #9 seeds if DPG's system gets its way. Sure, playing in the playoffs generate more incomes for the team and increases the team's popularity among fans, but the difference isn't that significant when your team makes the playoffs only to receive the broom in the first round imho.
And it'd broaden the gap between good teams and bad ones in the long term, good teams getting better and the ty ones getting even tier, and finally the 30 teams will be sorted in two extreme groups. And the league would be split again someday into two leagues, NBA and ABA, like how things were in the mid 20th century. Our economy has been going that way for many decades and as you might have seen it, it doesn't work, because a strong middle class is always the foundation of a healthy economy imho.
Disagree - boiled down, you see continually the same teams seemingly in the lottery year over year. It's because of how they are managed (which includes not only wasted draft picks, but bad contracts, ect..). Even if you think the financial incentive is not good enough to prevent teams from tanking that still means a team will have to play their best for 90% of the year which is more entertaining than today. So that doesn't even bother me.
But to the middle class point. As those cusp teams get those great draft picks, they will make the jump and force other teams up naturally. The ty ones stay ty in today's system anyways (see the Bobcats, Toronto...) so this will force them to be better managed and compete. There will always be losers, but in this system I feel the losers will all be better versions of themselves because of the setup. If not, they deserve to fail tbh just like the fail today.
It's only two extra home games if the 1 or 2 seed in your conference is a juggernaut. Very worth forgoing in a loaded draft if you're a Milwaukee, a Minnesota, a Memphis, etc. who can only get franchise players in the draft since no great player leaves to anywhere but LA, Miami, NY in free agency.1) The financial incentive, especially for everyone outside of the Lakers/Knicks, for making the playoffs is quite huge. I surely doubt owners would give the ok to forgo not only the revenues from the playoffs, but the chance to build experience from the playoffs for his team that is right there.
But you're not that good and probably haven't been pushing that hard when you're a borderline playoff team.2) Not only is there significant financial incentive, but it would be very difficult from a practical sense to do what you say. In order to do that, you would have to be good enough to get a playoff spot in the first place. If you are that good and have pushed all year to win as many games as you can to get the best pick or make the playoffs, to be able to shut that off or somehow just tank the last 5 games or so would be in practice quite difficult.
You can dump guys at the trade deadline, cut players on expiring deals, fire the coach or force him to play along, things like that.3) Ownership aside, good luck getting a coach/players to tank when they have a shot at the playoffs. Not only does ownership get a financial boost, but so do the players coaches. Both directly (incentives/bonus/sharing) but indirectly (perform in the playoffs and possibly get a bigger contract down the road).
So your solution eliminates tanking in years where tanking wouldn't be a problem anyways.4) You have to throw out the anomalies as well. No system is perfect, but it's about what makes the most sense and accomplishes the overall goal more often than not. Sure, in a year where the East is full of losers, you might run into some situations (but, because of what I explained above, shouldn't be a concern). Let's say you do have those issues though - well, it's such an anomaly that this would happen you just can't worry about it. Same with this draft. It's pretty rare you have a draft that is this "stacked". Most years it's not. That doesn't mean the draft isn't valuable, jus that the argument of "Parker, Randle, Wiggins.." doesn't come up all that often. There's really not many years where there are players worth tanking for tbh..
Last edited by baseline bum; 12-18-2013 at 12:26 AM.
tanking teams won't stop tanking just because they see other teams being good imho. you're probably making a paradox here, to tell you the truth. The ty teams are being poorly managed and they don't give a about winning, so I don't see how you're gonna find any kick up their arses that would "force" them to compete tbh. Bottom teams need help (in the forms of high draft picks mainly) to turn things around, and if you don't give them such help they would simply quit, and they'd be even tier.
I'm not saying my solution would definitely work but at least it is more feasible and reasonable imho. Just deprive the bottom 3 of their draft picks so even the tanking teams would have some incentives to win games to avoid finishing bottom three, which's like the relegation rule in MOST sports leagues in Europe imho. The compe ion among bottom teams in those leagues (like the English premier league) will always be more fierce and intense than the top flight, near the end of the season, and those teams can often upset the top ones. it's like, the top teams are fighting for glory, while the bottom teams are fighting for life. Can't believe you've actually played soccer tbh, when you don't even watch soccer at all.
It's hard to stop tanking alltogether, but the best and most balanced way would be to have the same odds (one ping pong ball each) for each non-playoff team.
I don't like giving any team an incentive to tank. I would just do a straight-up equal odds lottery like Stern implemented after Houston's back-to-back tank jobs. No borderline playoff team will tank their playoff chance for a 1 in 14 shot at even a LeBron, but they'd be fools not to for a 1 in 4 shot if they're first round fodder under your system. And conversely no bad team will bench their best players (like New Orleans with Davis last season) when it can do nothing to improve its draft spot.
I think that would completely eliminate tanking.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
