Solutions to the tanking epidemic

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

This is somewhat of a fair point except for the fact that players seem to be recruiting their buddies to their teams and in some ways teams that are doing most everything right get the shaft (OKC springs to mind).

It didn't work as well as planned and I'm sure it would work even less today but Miami absolutely did not deserve what they got with LeBron's dream team.

1. I don't necessarily agree that players recruiting each other is a negative. And you also have to keep in mind that this occurred with the current system still in place. Under a system where players didn't have it decided for them where they were going to play on Day One, they might be less likely to leave.
2. I wouldn't say that they "deserved" it, either, but I also don't think that "deserve" has anything to do with it. With respect to the concern that the "Glamor Teams" would end up with all the good players, I think that concern is overblown: there's still a limit of roster spots; the "glamor teams" can't sign everybody.

Now, I'm not personally in favor of a hard cap, because I don't think that owners should be protected from going broke trying to "buy" a championship, but you still can't have but thirteen guys on a team. And there's still going to be a greater-than-zero number of players who don't want to just go to LA or Miami and play with their friends. Which, once again, puts the onus back on ownership to hire people who can build an team where those guys want to go.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I wouldn't say that they "deserved" it, either, but I also don't think that "deserve" has anything to do with it. With respect to the concern that the "Glamor Teams" would end up with all the good players, I think that concern is overblown: there's still a limit of roster spots; the "glamor teams" can't sign everybody.

This point was specific to you having said front offices building teams and setting up attractive destinations to FAs and the Miami thing was anything but that outside of just fireselling to create cap space.

I wouldn't be opposed to abandoning the draft though. If you keep a cap in place it would wind up something like MLS which has a lot of parity and shifting around year to year. If the NCAA would let teams sign players out of high school and still play we could see good things too.

 

[whozit]

Nobody is going to institute a playoff game for teams in the lottery. Isn't going to happen. The game would be after the regular season where players could still get injured and injured players would be encouraged to play to better a team's lottery position. And, if the team is truly bad enough not to win they are getting penalized for not beating a better team? Really?

Yes, really. It is four teams for four spots. All four have something to lose And something to gain. Sixth and seventh seed can clinch fourth and fifth without hope of going higher and without risk of going lower. Fourth and fifth seed don't want to drop (and they can't drop any more than under the current system) and want the chance to move up. I would think that the fourth thru seventh seed would usually be a pretty even match up.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

This point was specific to you having said front offices building teams and setting up attractive destinations to FAs and the Miami thing was anything but that outside of just fireselling to create cap space.

Perhaps. But, don't forget that Pat Riley's name still had cache in 2010. And that happened before this transition to the "modern" NBA.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Perhaps. But, don't forget that Pat Riley's name still had cache in 2010. And that happened before this transition to the "modern" NBA.

In some ways it helped transition it though.

 

[Warhawk]

Yes, really. It is four teams for four spots. All four have something to lose And something to gain. Sixth and seventh seed can clinch fourth and fifth without hope of going higher and without risk of going lower. Fourth and fifth seed don't want to drop (and they can't drop any more than under the current system) and want the chance to move up. I would think that the fourth thru seventh seed would usually be a pretty even match up.

So, if a team that was more successful in the regular season beats a team that lost more games, you would then reward the higher ranked team with a better draft pick? Really? I'm missing the logic.

 

[whozit]

So, if a team that was more successful in the regular season beats a team that lost more games, you would then reward the higher ranked team with a better draft pick? Really? I'm missing the logic.

My logic was simple. But flawed. How many times have the Kings been bumped back? I didn't want teams to tank to get to the bottom five, something about moving the goalposts. With my modifications teams would tank to get to the bottom three. I also thought that teams 4-6 would be close in ranking. Looking at the standings this morning and going back 5 years, 3 of the 5 had teams 4-7 with only 3 wins separating them which is acceptable. Trouble was the other two years had 9 games separating them, unacceptable.

The more I've looked at my idea the less I like it. Mr Slim's idea is growing on me.