Race to the Bottom thread

KingsFanSince85 said:
KINGS being investigated for a foul in a competitive game? While having won 7 of 16 games over the past month (since March 8th)??

You got a go back 2 months to total 7 wins for Brooklyn. You gotta go back nearly 3 months to total 7 wins for Utah, Indiana, and Washington.

But, yeah, let’s investigate the franchise that’s actually been winning games the past month and even playing vets heavy minutes from time to time in order to do so. The team that went from having the worst record in the league to leap frogging 3 teams over the span of a week or two.

The NBA is a JOKE.
Click to expand...

Probably the only competitive game in the nba this month besides spurs vs nuggets

But the nba has an idiot commissioner
 
https://twitter(.)com/PolymarketSport/status/2042346077605548110

🚨JUST IN: Adam Silver is exploring a new draft lottery that would give the bottom 3 teams worse odds than teams ranked 4-10.

Per @KevinOConnor
Click to expand...

His goal is to destroy the game of basketball on and off the floor
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joshyjosh31 said:
https://twitter(.)com/PolymarketSport/status/2042346077605548110

🚨JUST IN: Adam Silver is exploring a new draft lottery that would give the bottom 3 teams worse odds than teams ranked 4-10.

Per @KevinOConnor
Click to expand...

His goal is to destroy the game of basketball on and off the floor
Click to expand...

That's just mean. Like, if anything just flatten the odds more for bottom 10 or whatever, but punishing teams for being terrible is so petty.

Especially when you have clowns like Vivek putting out trash teams for decades with the intention of being good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joshyjosh31 said:
https://twitter(.)com/PolymarketSport/status/2042346077605548110

🚨JUST IN: Adam Silver is exploring a new draft lottery that would give the bottom 3 teams worse odds than teams ranked 4-10.

Per @KevinOConnor
Click to expand...

His goal is to destroy the game of basketball on and off the floor
Click to expand...
If this happens, three teams will be doomed to permanent futility. Who will it be? All we know is that it will be three small-market franchises. The Lakers are safe. The Celtics are safe. The Heat are safe. But the Kings better pull their asses out of bottom-three before the hammer comes down.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
https://twitter(.)com/KevinOConnor/status/2042357947448398164

During the NBA GM meeting this week, one person suggested make the bottom three teams ineligible for the top picks entirely. The league, per multiple sources, found this to be way too extreme. But then another person on the call offered a softer version of the same concept: What if the bottom three teams just had slightly lower odds than the teams ranked four through 10? Not zero. Just a little less.

Sources on the call say Adam Silver responded enthusiastically to this idea. Which speaks to the state of lottery reform. The 18 team/8% odds for the top 10 concept is simply still just the concept. The specifics of it will change by the time the league votes on it in late May. And adjustments — like this one — are still in heavy consideration.

I think it’s brilliant. Under that structure, with the bottom three teams having slightly worse odds, there is no longer a single point in the standings where losing helps you. Tanking all the way to the bottom hurts you a bit. It’s not quite relegation that you’d see in the Premier League, but it’s the NBA’s own form that would punish being the worst in the league. And much like Premier League teams have entertaining games to prevent relegation, NBA teams would too.

Picture two bad teams in late March, both within a game of the bottom three, both desperate to win. That's a win for the fans. Picture the front office of the Wizards doing the calculus on whether to shut down Trae Young and Anthony Davis and realizing that, actually, no, the vets need to go play, because falling in the standings is a real cost now, not a reward. That's a win for the sport. Picture Sacramento intentionally fouling Seth Curry late in a game, and the conversation around it shifting from "nefarious tanking" to "bad coaching." That's a win for the league.


More on @YahooSports
Click to expand...

It somehow gets worse how could someone even think to say the botttom three teams should be ineligible what is this nonsense jesus
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joshyjosh31 said:
https://twitter(.)com/KevinOConnor/status/2042357947448398164

During the NBA GM meeting this week, one person suggested make the bottom three teams ineligible for the top picks entirely. The league, per multiple sources, found this to be way too extreme. But then another person on the call offered a softer version of the same concept: What if the bottom three teams just had slightly lower odds than the teams ranked four through 10? Not zero. Just a little less.

Sources on the call say Adam Silver responded enthusiastically to this idea. Which speaks to the state of lottery reform. The 18 team/8% odds for the top 10 concept is simply still just the concept. The specifics of it will change by the time the league votes on it in late May. And adjustments — like this one — are still in heavy consideration.

I think it’s brilliant. Under that structure, with the bottom three teams having slightly worse odds, there is no longer a single point in the standings where losing helps you. Tanking all the way to the bottom hurts you a bit. It’s not quite relegation that you’d see in the Premier League, but it’s the NBA’s own form that would punish being the worst in the league. And much like Premier League teams have entertaining games to prevent relegation, NBA teams would too.

Picture two bad teams in late March, both within a game of the bottom three, both desperate to win. That's a win for the fans. Picture the front office of the Wizards doing the calculus on whether to shut down Trae Young and Anthony Davis and realizing that, actually, no, the vets need to go play, because falling in the standings is a real cost now, not a reward. That's a win for the sport. Picture Sacramento intentionally fouling Seth Curry late in a game, and the conversation around it shifting from "nefarious tanking" to "bad coaching." That's a win for the league.


More on @YahooSports
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't lose my mind over this idea if I were you. Silver, himself, apparently hated the idea. It won't happen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MizzouKing said:
Watching the Nets/Pacers game with interest this evening. 🏀
Click to expand...
Unfortunately for Sacramento, so are the Nets, currently shooting 26% from the field and 15% from three. Is it possible to be passive/aggressive on the basketball court?

Jalen Slawson started for the Pacers. Brooklyn does not stand a chance.
 
Caccia said:
Unfortunately for Sacramento, so are the Nets, currently shooting 26% from the field and 15% from three. Is it possible to be passive/aggressive on the basketball court?

Jalen Slawson started for the Pacers. Brooklyn does not stand a chance.
Click to expand...
It's times like this that I really wish I could believe the NBA Lottery was rigged. I mean, it's obviously not, but if it were, we'd be winning it. Nets shamelessly down 30 in the first half! Wow.
 
gunks said:
That's just mean. Like, if anything just flatten the odds more for bottom 10 or whatever, but punishing teams for being terrible is so petty.

Especially when you have clowns like Vivek putting out trash teams for decades with the intention of being good.
Click to expand...
I’d flatten the odds entirely for the bottom 10 teams rather than mess around with changing the percentages or ‘punishing’ the bottom three. Basically put every team’s name in the hat from the bottom 10 and draw them out one by one. That way every team from the bottom ten has the same odds of winning the first overall pick. Granted, there will probably still be teams that ‘tank’ or take injury fuelled gap years, but it would arguably make things more unpredictable.

I suppose the wildcard in this is what to do with the play in teams. Personally I’d leave them out and let the bottom ten make up the top ten picks. The play in teams want to be competitive and make the play offs, so simply slot the losing play in teams in at 11-14, then the losing play off teams pick from there.
 
Section 101 said:
Tie breaker should be best record in last 10!
Click to expand...

i suggested previously that silver should make a "minor adjustment tp the tiebreaking system:

if two or more teams finish with the same record (looking possible, this year), the tie breaker should "reward teams who 'compete'".

this could be done in a number of ways, like, the team with the most wins since the break gets the better pick.

what i like more is "the team with the most (full season)'close games' ( five points or less in the last two minutes) gets the better pick"

you could "keep track" by monitoring the ref's two minute reports
 
Capt. Factorial said:
It's times like this that I really wish I could believe the NBA Lottery was rigged. I mean, it's obviously not, but if it were, we'd be winning it. Nets shamelessly down 30 in the first half! Wow.
Click to expand...
If the lottery was rigged I’m not sure I’d back us to win it, they’d probably still want to help out one of the other teams (eg give the Mavs and Flagg a running mate to thank them for sending Doncic to the Lakers, help the Bulls kickstart their rebuild).
 
Joshyjosh31 said:
https://twitter(.)com/KevinOConnor/status/2042357947448398164



It somehow gets worse how could someone even think to say the botttom three teams should be ineligible what is this nonsense jesus
Click to expand...

I think ineligible is bad, but the bottom 3 teams having worse odds I think promotes exactly what everyone is looking for; go win some damn games and stay out of the cellar. Like the Ind/Nets game would have had both times ACTUALLY trying, instead of doing their best to lose.

Capt's idea probably remains the best, but I don't see it ever being put into practice. I don't know if this idea is all the way there, but i think it's trending in the right direction; incentivize teams to try to win throughout the season, not try to lose as they are now.
 
Outside of just giving every team even odds at the top picks, tanking will continue to plague the league.

The Spurs are the poster child for how Tanking can help a franchise. Basically turning a team around into title contenders overnight. When one player can change the course of a franchise for the next 10 years, tanking will continue to be a problem in the league.
 
ockingsfan said:
Outside of just giving every team even odds at the top picks, tanking will continue to plague the league.

The Spurs are the poster child for how Tanking can help a franchise. Basically turning a team around into title contenders overnight. When one player can change the course of a franchise for the next 10 years, tanking will continue to be a problem in the league.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is pretty much also where I am with this whole thing. I don't think anything will ever be able to "fix" tanking as we know it. Which is why I am also, low-key, laughing at all of the proposals for "fixing" tanking (as we know it). I'm almost at the point where I'd much rather stick with the current system, perhaps tweak the odds a bit, and just call it a day and agree to live with the consequences that come with teams electing to tank.
 
The_Jamal said:
I think ineligible is bad, but the bottom 3 teams having worse odds I think promotes exactly what everyone is looking for; go win some damn games and stay out of the cellar. Like the Ind/Nets game would have had both times ACTUALLY trying, instead of doing their best to lose.

Capt's idea probably remains the best, but I don't see it ever being put into practice. I don't know if this idea is all the way there, but i think it's trending in the right direction; incentivize teams to try to win throughout the season, not try to lose as they are now.
Click to expand...

You know someone has to be the bottom three what if non of them tanked and there just bad
 
ESP47 said:
I agree but I don't think I'd hate this if it happened either since the Kings like to land themselves around 7-12 in the draft on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

everyone is looking for a big solution (to tanking)... twice now, i have gone the other way, seeking a a small improvement... and no one has said "yea" or "nay",,,

i guess if it does not COMPLETELY SOLVE THE PROBLEM, then people would rather "have something to complain about."

but i'm not giving up... below is cut/paste from esrlier today:

===================================================================


i suggested previously that silver should make a "minor adjustment tp the tiebreaking system:

if two or more teams finish with the same record (looking possible, this year), the tie breaker should "reward teams who 'compete'".

this could be done in a number of ways, like, the team with the most wins since the break gets the better pick.

what i like more is "the team with the most (full season)'close games' ( five points or less in the last two minutes) gets the better pick"

you could "keep track" by monitoring the ref's two minute reports

=====================================================================

i'm just looking at "how to discourage teams who want to tank (to get a higher pick)".

if the above were a small rule, would it discourage tanking (in a small way)?

you tank hoping to pick first, second or third... but if this rule meant that you might only get the fifth or sixth pick for your trouble, would tanking be worth it?
 
eleventy said:
i suggested previously that silver should make a "minor adjustment tp the tiebreaking system:

if two or more teams finish with the same record (looking possible, this year), the tie breaker should "reward teams who 'compete'".

this could be done in a number of ways, like, the team with the most wins since the break gets the better pick.

what i like more is "the team with the most (full season)'close games' ( five points or less in the last two minutes) gets the better pick"

you could "keep track" by monitoring the ref's two minute reports
Click to expand...
eleventy said:
everyone is looking for a big solution (to tanking)... twice now, i have gone the other way, seeking a a small improvement... and no one has said "yea" or "nay",,,

i guess if it does not COMPLETELY SOLVE THE PROBLEM, then people would rather "have something to complain about."

but i'm not giving up... below is cut/paste from esrlier today:

===================================================================


i suggested previously that silver should make a "minor adjustment tp the tiebreaking system:

if two or more teams finish with the same record (looking possible, this year), the tie breaker should "reward teams who 'compete'".

this could be done in a number of ways, like, the team with the most wins since the break gets the better pick.

what i like more is "the team with the most (full season)'close games' ( five points or less in the last two minutes) gets the better pick"

you could "keep track" by monitoring the ref's two minute reports

=====================================================================

i'm just looking at "how to discourage teams who want to tank (to get a higher pick)".

if the above were a small rule, would it discourage tanking (in a small way)?

you tank hoping to pick first, second or third... but if this rule meant that you might only get the fifth or sixth pick for your trouble, would tanking be worth it?
Click to expand...
Too much work required to "keep track". I don't like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top