Make coaches/front office salaries based on wins

Shock Defeat · Post #1 » by **Shock Defeat** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:23 pm

We all know players themselves don't really tank. It's the coaches and GMs that put out terrible rosters.

Why not incentivize wins for those people. GMs, coaches, and owners get paid per win. If you win zero games a season, you don't get paid, simple as that. The more you win, the more you get paid. Regular season wins give you X amount of money, Playoff wins give you double that, etc.

EZ solution to fix tanking.

Post #2 » by **loserX** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:26 pm

Except then when bad teams fire their coaches (which happens most of the time), they won't be able to attract a good coach because he knows he can get more money by coaching an already-winning team. Then bad teams get stuck with bad coaches, fire them, etc. etc.

(Obviously this is waaaay over simplistic, but the underlying point stands.)

DrCoach · Post #3 » by **DrCoach** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:29 pm

BBall Loyalty wrote:We all know players themselves don't really tank. It's the coaches and GMs that put out terrible rosters.

Why not incentivize wins for those people. GMs, coaches, and owners get paid per win. If you win zero games a season, you don't get paid, simple as that. The more you win, the more you get paid. Regular season wins give you X amount of money, Playoff wins give you double that, etc.

EZ solution to fix tanking.

I disagree, players get lazy, don't care and don't produce, take bad shots and don't listen to coaches too.

And what incentive would owners have to produce winning tams when they keep extra money by not paying the staff?

Bubstubbler · Post #4 » by **Bubstubbler** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 7:49 pm

BBall Loyalty wrote:GMs, coaches, and owners get paid per win. If you win zero games a season, you don't get paid, simple as that. The more you win, the more you get paid. Regular season wins give you X amount of money, Playoff wins give you double that, etc.

The particular weights that various wins get will be important to decide; people's opinions will vary based on how much more they value winning championships over simply winning games.

For me, I'd want the weights to be at least this drastic:

1st round playoff wins are worth 10 times what regular season wins are
2nd round wins are worth 20 times
Conference final wins - 50x
NBA final wins - 100x
Championship itself: bonus equal to 10 times your total earnings from all wins for the year (so winner makes ~10 times more than runner up)

I would also want player salaries to be tied to wins. I want them to play as if their pay directly depends on it. Regular season games are almost unwatchable due to the lack of caring. I want them to always play as if it's game 7 of the NBA finals. None of this 'intentionally waiting until the game clock expires before shooting a low percentage 3 so as to protect one's shooting %', far less laziness, far more concentration and general mental effort, etc. The NBA product gets immeasurably better when the playoffs start and the players start caring more, and tying player salaries to wins (maybe even paying them after every game to reinforce it) would make the players care more and thereby make the NBA product better, particularly in the regular season.

Cycklops · Post #5 » by **Cycklops** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 8:26 pm

The fundamental problem is that the NBA within itself is not a competitive free market situation. Their product is the competition between the teams, so they can't afford to have one team eventually win enough that the others all go out of business. Teams need to be able to sign good players and draft good players even if they are awful, so serious punishments towards players and executives for losing games, which thus put those teams out of business or prevent them from signing people to help them rebuild, work against the NBA's interest.

Chuck Everett · Post #6 » by **Chuck Everett** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:27 pm

Since 1990 the following teams have played in the NBA Finals:

East: New York, Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, Indiana, Philadelphia, Orlando, Boston, Brooklyn (fka NJ), Miami
West: San Antonio, Dallas, Oklahoma City (fka Seattle), Houston, Portland, Utah, LA Lakers, Phoenix

None of the non-Florida expansion franchises have played for the title (Charlotte, Minnesota, Toronto, Memphis (fka Vancouver), New Orleans).

The remaining seven teams are Atlanta and Golden State (best two records in the league this year), Milwaukee, Sacramento, LA Clippers, Washington, Denver. I don't remember what my point was, but basically in the last 25 years, almost 2/3 of the league has played for the title. If Golden State and Atlanta get their this year that would mean exactly 66% of the league has had a chance to win the Larry O'Brien. I'd say that's pretty good.

Prokorov · Post #7 » by **Prokorov** » Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:46 pm

BBall Loyalty wrote:We all know players themselves don't really tank. It's the coaches and GMs that put out terrible rosters.

Why not incentivize wins for those people. GMs, coaches, and owners get paid per win. If you win zero games a season, you don't get paid, simple as that. The more you win, the more you get paid. Regular season wins give you X amount of money, Playoff wins give you double that, etc.

EZ solution to fix tanking.

they already are. you go 4-5 years without winning and you are basically gone. i cant think of one coach or GM who lost of that long and stuck around longer then 4-5 years.

nets made the playoffs 3 straight years, are on their 5th coach.

mike brown lasted like a week in LA