The Utah Jazz and Tanking
- Thread starter chawx
- Start date
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
I really liked Chawx' copyrighted idea. It seemed to award effort - which was my simple idea (my idea was no lottery but have the first pick go to the best team that just missed the playoffs on down). Chawx's idea was more complicated - I think I kinda got it but not really, but that's good 'cause I don't expect the average NBA player to understand it either. All they know is that they're pretty much only rewarded for winnning.
Freak's rebuttal to this system:
I can see how you might think this but Stoked had an astute reply:
Teams should work their way out of the bottom - and by doing so they improve their draft order.
We've all witnessed some franchises remain bottom feeders in spite of their high draft picks. They keep being rewarded the best players only to do nothing with them in the W column. Management is what keep a bottom feeder a farm team. Teams that are poorly managed maybe should be contracted - they're farm teams anyway, just get it over with in one fell swoop.
Reward teams that are well managed, always producing a competitive product. This will also help create parity in the NBA as say a team like Houston - who just misses the playoffs - gets Anthony Davis and boom, they're in contention with the top teams in the league. This helps the middle class, helps the competitive product.
The bottom feeder teams have to figure out how to do more with less to improve, and by improving they get better picks in the draft. OR they can just throw in the towel like the losers they are.
Note: perhaps I need to say this - team that make the playoffs are NOT in the lottery. This system rewards the best teams that miss the playoffs only.
Freak's rebuttal to this system:
I can see how you might think this but Stoked had an astute reply:
Teams should work their way out of the bottom - and by doing so they improve their draft order.
We've all witnessed some franchises remain bottom feeders in spite of their high draft picks. They keep being rewarded the best players only to do nothing with them in the W column. Management is what keep a bottom feeder a farm team. Teams that are poorly managed maybe should be contracted - they're farm teams anyway, just get it over with in one fell swoop.
Reward teams that are well managed, always producing a competitive product. This will also help create parity in the NBA as say a team like Houston - who just misses the playoffs - gets Anthony Davis and boom, they're in contention with the top teams in the league. This helps the middle class, helps the competitive product.
The bottom feeder teams have to figure out how to do more with less to improve, and by improving they get better picks in the draft. OR they can just throw in the towel like the losers they are.
Note: perhaps I need to say this - team that make the playoffs are NOT in the lottery. This system rewards the best teams that miss the playoffs only.
To me that would indicate that you are not a championship caliber team. Having that 6th man and good role players on the bench is party of being a championship team.
Like I said, Utah is fantastic and getting into a contending status but they have problems getting over the hump.
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
Why, Mr. Verbose?
BluesRocker
Banned
This wind freaking sucks. Its killing my new trees.
Who is verbose
Who is verbose
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
.....the shot selection and pathetic play of so many teams brings into question just how many teams are NOT tanking, even teams that make the playoffs!
BENTLEY
Well-Known Member
Not Northeast.
this
BluesRocker
Banned
So are we all in agreement that the Jazz should have been Tanking this year so we could get a good pick and push the gs pick to us?
What sounds better?
No picks in this draft and a weak *** playoff run?
Or
The 1st overall and 8th
First we select Davis. We trade al and move up from eighth to fourth and select kidd ghilchrist.
And in few years we rack off 6 straight titles
That's how I would do it if I were GM
Bluesrocker 2014
What sounds better?
No picks in this draft and a weak *** playoff run?
Or
The 1st overall and 8th
First we select Davis. We trade al and move up from eighth to fourth and select kidd ghilchrist.
And in few years we rack off 6 straight titles
That's how I would do it if I were GM
Bluesrocker 2014
this
this
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
the problem with 90% of these options is that they do nothing to deincentivize tanking -- they just reward people for tanking at different times. a system that gives the highest chances to teams barely missing the playoffs means that right now you'd have the jazz, nuggets, rockets, suns, blazers and wolves trying really hard to lose enough games to stay out but win enough games to stay #9. all that does is bring on a new form of tanking.
of course, the only way to truly remove that is either: a) the best teams overall get the highest chances -- that way you're truly rewarding people who are trying to be good, but you're also creating a rich-get-richer scenario; or b) true lottery where chances are equal.
of course, the only way to truly remove that is either: a) the best teams overall get the highest chances -- that way you're truly rewarding people who are trying to be good, but you're also creating a rich-get-richer scenario; or b) true lottery where chances are equal.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
thing is, most teams that are bad are "stuck at the bottom for 5-10 years" anyway. cases like KD's thunder or lebron's cavs are an exception. think of teams like the kings or the warriors who have been picking in the mid-lottery for several years straight and have done little to pull themselves from mediocrity. having a high pick is nice, but you still have to know what to do with it. and even if you draft well, the prospect of one single player transforming your organization from perennial loserdom into being a championship-caliber franchise is flawed. look at how long it took OKC to reach the conference finals or finals, even after putting several top five picks together.
BluesRocker
Banned
so now you are criticising how long its taken OKC as wayto point out that they are flawed or something. They were just young. It takes time. Just like its going to take time for our young guys. That's why we should be adding top picks a long the way. Because al and Millsap aren't going to be here later and they aren't leading us to a championship either.
Did we say 5-10 years? I meant 5 - 10 centuries.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
no, i'm actually not criticizing it at all. i'm just saying that it takes a while to go from being really bad to being really good, and almost never comes down to adding just one player. an obvious example is TD to the spurs, but that's because the only reason they were bad enough to get him was because robinson was injured.
other than that, just about any decent team took a while to build as a contender. the lakers got rookie kobe bryant along with shaq in his prime, and they still had to live through early exits before they hit their dynasty.
cleveland got lebron and STILL missed the playoffs for two years with 35 wins in '04 and 42 in '05, then got ousted in the 2nd round in '06.
it takes a while to build around the right talent, and that's assuming you don't screw up in the first place when drafting.
chawx
Active Member
Quick read on how I'd do the draft.
1) Once a team is eliminated from the playoffs they enter the "Draft Playoffs" (DP).
2) The team with the best winning percentage (minimum of 10 games played) gets the #1 pick and so on until you get to the teams who played less than 10 games in the DP (example: picks #1-7 if 7 teams played 10 or more games after playoff elimination).
3) The next tier of draft picks (example: #8-14) are given to the other teams eliminated from playoff contention playing less than 10 games in the DP.
=== The only chance at tanking comes around the 13 to 10-games left in the season mark. After that, all teams are in WIN-ONLY mode! ===
4) The remaining picks to the playoff teams are handed out as they are now with an NFL tweak. The team that wins the title gets the last pick no matter what. The other picks (#15-29) are given in win pct order.
5) Tie breakers: head-to-head, Division record, then Conference record. Better records get the higher pick (again, encouraging winning- not losing)
^ This keeps competition high throughout the year. This also doesn't give the best teams the best pick. Obviously there is one part where competition could suck or teams may try to tank, but it would be for like 1 or 2 games tops.
Questions?
1) Once a team is eliminated from the playoffs they enter the "Draft Playoffs" (DP).
2) The team with the best winning percentage (minimum of 10 games played) gets the #1 pick and so on until you get to the teams who played less than 10 games in the DP (example: picks #1-7 if 7 teams played 10 or more games after playoff elimination).
3) The next tier of draft picks (example: #8-14) are given to the other teams eliminated from playoff contention playing less than 10 games in the DP.
=== The only chance at tanking comes around the 13 to 10-games left in the season mark. After that, all teams are in WIN-ONLY mode! ===
4) The remaining picks to the playoff teams are handed out as they are now with an NFL tweak. The team that wins the title gets the last pick no matter what. The other picks (#15-29) are given in win pct order.
5) Tie breakers: head-to-head, Division record, then Conference record. Better records get the higher pick (again, encouraging winning- not losing)
^ This keeps competition high throughout the year. This also doesn't give the best teams the best pick. Obviously there is one part where competition could suck or teams may try to tank, but it would be for like 1 or 2 games tops.
Questions?
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
chawx, problem there is, you'll have mediocre teams tanking early. if you're a team like the jazz or wolves and you know you don't have what it takes to compete for a title THIS year, then you have great incentive to suck early in the season.
that's why i said... any revised system pretty much just rewards teams for being bad at DIFFERENT times... but do nothing to eliminate altogether the idea of strategy and purposefully being bad at some point.
that's why i said... any revised system pretty much just rewards teams for being bad at DIFFERENT times... but do nothing to eliminate altogether the idea of strategy and purposefully being bad at some point.
The solution would be just having 2 or 3 different lottery types.
For example:
1. All 30 teams get equal chance
2. Current system
3. Non playoff teams get lottery balls according to their record. Better record - more balls.
Then when regular system is done you flip the coin and choose the lottery method and then draw the lottery.
Now before season start no GM knows if it's worth tanking or not this season but at the same time talent tends to land to truly weak teams.
For example:
1. All 30 teams get equal chance
2. Current system
3. Non playoff teams get lottery balls according to their record. Better record - more balls.
Then when regular system is done you flip the coin and choose the lottery method and then draw the lottery.
Now before season start no GM knows if it's worth tanking or not this season but at the same time talent tends to land to truly weak teams.