Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Tanking Problem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    4hunnit_degreez wrote: View Post
    My solution would be that all the teams that dont make the playoofs have an equal chance to win the lottery so you wont see teams try to intentionally have the worst record for a better chance at landing #1 pick
    I like this idea.

    Comment


    • #17
      Tanking gets all the press, but an issue that helps drive tanking is concentration of talent, especially premium free agent talent, in a few choice markets. The NBA is fine with that, because for the most part those are the big revenue generators. States with no income taxes have a built-in advantage, as do large markets with numerous endorsement possibilities.

      The wheel draft lottery system will help these teams even more than the current system.

      A hard cap would help balance the inequities somewhat, but that would also either mean players would as a group see a share of the money they currently make end up in owners pockets if the cap was at the lower end, or with a much higher hard cap, small market teams would still be at a competitive disadvantage.
      If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

      Comment


      • #18
        JawsGT wrote: View Post
        I like this idea.
        Then you possibly have winning record teams that just missed the playoffs and win the lottery that are now in a position to draft a generational talent
        A key that opens many locks is a master key, but a lock that gets open by many keys is just a shitty lock

        Comment


        • #19
          e_wheazhy_ wrote: View Post
          Then you possibly have winning record teams that just missed the playoffs and win the lottery that are now in a position to draft a generational talent
          Which suggests their management was actually trying to win ballgames. That's a problem?
          If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

          Comment


          • #20
            3inthekeon wrote: View Post
            Which suggests their management was actually trying to win ballgames. That's a problem?
            The whole point of the draft is that the worst teams get the chance to pick the better players, it evens out the talent pool and makes the league more competitive. If we start giving away good players to well managed teams (who are good and already have good players)... Well I'm sure I don't have to spell it out for you (your nickname tells me you're a pretty smart guy)

            If that was the case, lets just give the heat all the first overall picks for the next 10 years, their management pulled off an impressive feat
            A key that opens many locks is a master key, but a lock that gets open by many keys is just a shitty lock

            Comment


            • #21
              e_wheazhy_ wrote: View Post
              The whole point of the draft is that the worst teams get the chance to pick the better players, it evens out the talent pool and makes the league more competitive. If we start giving away good players to well managed teams (who are good and already have good players)... Well I'm sure I don't have to spell it out for you (your nickname tells me you're a pretty smart guy)

              If that was the case, lets just give the heat all the first overall picks for the next 10 years, their management pulled off an impressive feat
              Your Miami argument is ridiculous. Last I checked Miami was not going to miss the playoffs.
              You seem to have missed the entire point of this discussion, which is how to best eliminate tanking.
              If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

              Comment


              • #22
                The Tanking Problem

                3inthekeon wrote: View Post
                Your Miami argument is ridiculous. Last I checked Miami was not going to miss the playoffs.
                You seem to have missed the entire point of this discussion, which is how to best eliminate tanking.
                It wasn't an argument per se, I was just trying to illustrate that the point of the draft lottery is not to reward good management (which seemed to be your point back there) but to even out the competitive balance of the league. The worst teams need the best players, so they get them.

                Saying "well that team wanted to win so they deserve it" well no shit, every team wants to win! Even bottom-feeding Philadelphia wants to win. Why are they tanking in the first place? Because they hate winning? Nope.
                Because they hate their fans? Perhaps, but not quite.
                Because they think that accumulating assets and high draft picks will eventually lead to winning? Bingo!

                You will never fully eliminate tanking (which I'm taking a liberty here and taking to mean "exploiting loopholes in the system") because to some, that IS good management. Let's say you're a GM and your predecessor was some smooth talking guy, let's call him Ryan Colangelo, for argument's sake, you get a heap of bad contracts and players who don't play well/ are past their prime as your first GM assignment and your owner says, make us start winning in 3-5 years. Not everyone is a super whiz kid like Masai who is able to make trades that make both teams better now and in the future. So you settle for the strategy of asset accumulation. Selling your prime assets for future assets, and while this causes a considerable ammount of losing NOW, lo and behold in 3-5 years you're Oklahoma City!

                What's the best way to cure tanking? Who knows? But is it bad management? Are these tanking GMs against winning? No.
                Last edited by e_wheazhy_; Mon Mar 3, 2014, 05:38 PM.
                A key that opens many locks is a master key, but a lock that gets open by many keys is just a shitty lock

                Comment


                • #23
                  TSF wrote: View Post
                  Doing some reading of old Grantland material due to boredom, and came across this puppy, which could solve the tanking problem once and for all.

                  http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=5496

                  Grantland's Sean Mcindoe explaining it:

                  "Here’s how it works: The top draft positions will be awarded based on points earned after playoff elimination. Once a team is officially out of the playoff race, it starts the clock on amassing points toward its draft position. Bad teams still get an advantage (because they’re eliminated earlier), but now the emphasis is on winning, not just on riding out the string. It’s relatively simple, and it’s brilliant.

                  You’re telling me you wouldn’t be excited the day the “no. 1 overall pick points” column appeared in the standings? If we were lucky, we could even have late-season showdowns for the top picks. And fans watching those games would actually be cheering for their own teams to win. Imagine that."
                  Actually, it's not brilliant. One reason is that not every team plays the same schedule. Nor can they ever play the same schedule in the same order. The mere random chance of when you play teams (and who you play) matters too much.

                  Also, the system can be gamed. Sit out your players with "injuries" early and the play them later in the year. It might also have the perverse effect of encouraging a team to try to lose more, faster just to get the clock started earlier.

                  The best idea I have seen is the "wheel". Every 30 years you get the #1 pick. Every 5 years you'd get a top 6 pick and a top 12 pick every four years. There would be absolutely no way to game the system and absolutely no incentive to ever try and tank.

                  At first I thought "the wheel" was stupid but I actually love the idea now.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    e_wheazhy_ wrote: View Post
                    It wasn't an argument per se, I was just trying to illustrate that the point of the draft lottery is not to reward good management (which seemed to be your point back there) but to even out the competitive balance of the league. The worst teams need the best players, so they get them.

                    Saying "well that team wanted to win so they deserve it" well no shit, every team wants to win! Even bottom-feeding Philadelphia wants to win. Why are they tanking in the first place? Because they hate winning? Nope.
                    Because they hate their fans? Perhaps, but not quite.
                    Because they think that accumulating assets and high draft picks will eventually lead to winning? Bingo!

                    You will never fully eliminate tanking (which I'm taking a liberty here and taking to mean "exploiting loopholes in the system") because to some, that IS good management. Let's say you're a GM and your predecessor was some smooth talking guy, let's call him Ryan Colangelo, for argument's sake, you get a heap of bad contracts and players who don't play well/ are past their prime as your first GM assignment and your owner says, make us start winning in 3-5 years. Not everyone is a super whiz kid like Masai who is able to make trades that make both teams better now and in the future. So you settle for the strategy of asset accumulation. Selling your prime assets for future assets, and while this causes a considerable ammount of losing NOW, lo and behold in 3-5 years you're Oklahoma City!

                    What's the best way to cure tanking? Who knows? But is it bad management? Are these tanking GMs against winning? No.
                    Let me preface my rebuttal with the following:

                    I also have no problem with tanking. Good, necessary tanking is good management. That is what the league has now, and I am more than OK with leaving the draft as it is now. The point of this thread, once again, is how best to prevent tanking if the league decides to do so.

                    You are incorrect about the draft lottery. Its point is NOT to even out the competitive balance of the league. The lottery is there to do what the whole point of this thread was about. That is, to make tanking a bit less of a sure fire reward. The draft itself, with teams picking in reverse order of success is what attempts to even out competitive balance.

                    My original point was, if the league truly wanted to stop tanking, while still trying to maintain competitive balance to some extent, teams that failed to make the playoffs should have an equal opportunity for the 1st few picks at least. The winners in this system would be teams that actually tried, but failed, to make the playoffs. The wheel would just make the rich richer. Large market desirable location teams already have a huge advantage as it is. Rich winners having the same chances at cheap elite talent as the Bucks just seems wrong to me.
                    If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      On mike and mike I heard one of the mikes say the picks should start from the team closest to making the playoffs but didn't make it in and have the draft order work down from there. Thoughts?
                      Sunny ways my friends, sunny ways
                      Because its 2015

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Uncle_Si wrote: View Post
                        On mike and mike I heard one of the mikes say the picks should start from the team closest to making the playoffs but didn't make it in and have the draft order work down from there. Thoughts?
                        I suspect it would result in ridiculous situations of teams tanking out of the playoffs. Sure, some owners will want the playoffs and the money it brings. Other owners will see an Anthony Davis, Embiid or Wiggins and decide that getting no.8 seed and getting beat by the Thunder isn't all that attractive.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          BobLoblaw wrote: View Post
                          I suspect it would result in ridiculous situations of teams tanking out of the playoffs. Sure, some owners will want the playoffs and the money it brings. Other owners will see an Anthony Davis, Embiid or Wiggins and decide that getting no.8 seed and getting beat by the Thunder isn't all that attractive.
                          Should be even odds for every team not in the playoffs. No one would miss the playoffs for this.

                          And, if you wanted to throw some winning incentive back in: even odds for every team not in the playoffs BUT the winningest non-playoff team picks no lower than fifth.
                          Last edited by JimiCliff; Mon Mar 3, 2014, 11:00 PM.
                          "Stop eating your sushi."
                          "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                          "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                          - Jack Armstrong

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            e_wheazhy_ wrote: View Post
                            The whole point of the draft is that the worst teams get the chance to pick the better players, it evens out the talent pool and makes the league more competitive. If we start giving away good players to well managed teams (who are good and already have good players)... Well I'm sure I don't have to spell it out for you (your nickname tells me you're a pretty smart guy)

                            If that was the case, lets just give the heat all the first overall picks for the next 10 years, their management pulled off an impressive feat
                            If we start doing this, then maybe, just mayyyyyyybe, all teams will realize that bad management is simply not an option.
                            "Stop eating your sushi."
                            "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                            "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                            - Jack Armstrong

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Here's another Grantland article about tanking, not sure if was linked anywhere on the site so I added it here. Written by Simmons and I was entertained. It's more of a rant about how tanking is a problem in the NBA and I tend to agree with most of what he says:

                              http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nb...ng-perfection/

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I would be fine with getting rid of the draft altogether (the Senate, too). Hard cap with a cap minimum and minimum player salary.

                                Another solution would be to give all 32 teams one lottery ball. That would help the odds of the Raptors getting a better pick this year, for instance.

                                Still another approach would be to arrange the draft order in a 32 year cycle in which each team gets the top pick once. Not my idea but it could work if a team picked in a four year rotation, something from the top 8, followed by bottom 8, then from 9-16, and then a 17-24 pick. It just has to be organized so that teams don't have consecutive picks at the top or bottom.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X