Reply With Quote
http://www.businessinsider.com/rever...tanking-2015-4
I really like this idea.
Terrible franchises like the Sixers and the Jim Buss-era Lakers have made a mockery of professional basketball with their blatant multiyear tanking plans. And with regional sports networks paying billions for the television rights of teams, it's pretty much a slap in the face to the network and the network's paying customers.
I can hear Laker fans already, "You're just mad we're gonna be building a future!"
Nope (you ever see Jerry West do this ?). Multiyear tanking plans have never worked. The Sixers have been doing this for nearly a decade, and not a thing has come from it. The Cavaliers post-Lebron tried it, and it didn't work. The Wolves have been doing it post-KG, and it hasn't worked. Granted, they're "decent," right now, but I don't see that as a success when you have like 20 number 1 picks on your roster.
It's a cheap and lazy way to roster build and acquire assets. Teams who have FOs with great scouting, advanced metrics departments, player development systems are the teams that typically excel in the NBA. Teams with their lips stuck on the tanking teat just ensures those teams won't get off the proverbial welfare and be forever stuck in mediocrity.
That said, I don't know how you fix this outside of a povertyball style relegation.
Last edited by midnightpulp; 12-19-2015 at 07:46 PM.
http://www.businessinsider.com/rever...tanking-2015-4
I really like this idea.
tanking is already fixed. you only have three years to build a team from the moment you draft a good player since all good players get maxed out in this age, making it impossible to be in the lottery and keep good players.
I like it.
My quick fix idea would be that a franchise is only allowed 3 top 5/5 top 10 picks in a decade. If a franchise isn't good after that, then too bad.
I hate it. The perfect solution is going back to making draft position for lottery teams uniformly random so that tanking only gets you a 1 in 14 chance at the #1 pick. That's enough welfare to the bad teams.
Anyone remember my packet drafting idea.....Basically teams 1-7 get three picks in the top 30. 7-15 get two picks. Playoff teams don't need picks.
Exclude teams from the lottery after they get a top pick..So you tank once, get new players and have no incentive to tank.
That's ridiculous to completely exclude decent teams from getting a first round pick and reward failure so handsomely.
Idk. While I hate tanking they do serve some purpose for contenders. Don't want scrub ass teams going hard against you when you're trying to position yourself for a playoff run. Those easy wins come in handy at the end of the season imo.
Naah ...I got that Sacre / Hibbert mix coming up
Agree some Time in 2017
Lakers cant draft so all is good,,,,they'll pass on Simmons like they passed on Okafor,,,,
that would make tanking obligatory for every team except the two favorites,
mid want the Purple and Gold "food stamps, NOW eh?" We ain't paying one luxury taxed penny until next year son. Neal with it.
Cubby had the NERVE to say we tank in 96 for Duncan. That's bull and he knows it.
OTOH blatant tanking worked out pretty well for SEA/OKC, Golden State, and even the Spurs. That's why teams try it.
It's the truth and you know it. No, no, tell me more about how "David needed screws in his foot"
Spurs had low odds of getting the 1st overall, so you cannot say they tanked.
Without Jim Buss we're light 2 NBA les.
With him you're light 2,,,it all works out to a wash,,,,
That's just a stupid ass talkin'.
Only pussies & assholes edit another member's post.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
