ATL - New Lottery Rules Move to Owner Vote - pg59

[blazza18]

The gold standard. Not a juggernaut

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[Fotis St]

I would suggest to Rule out teams to pick top 4 in row. When a team picks top4 one year, the following year even if they finish "bottom 4", they draft from 5-9, 4th in row "bottom 4" teams pick 10-14 area, then reset. So a team who sucks "bottom 4" for 5 years ... would end up with : top4, top5-9, top5-9, top10-14, top4

[Prez]

I mean...

Definition of juggernaut
1 : a massive inexorable force, campaign, movement, or object that crushes whatever is in its path

I guess that applies to a team that lost in the first round?

[blazza18]

If you really think about it the Spurs are just the Bucks.

[Jez2983]

Hey Jez, I'm basically describing the soccer model. La Liga, Premier League etc
So yeah less games, no play offs, and far less money in Div 2 but not as bad as the Gleague. Also if a big name is happy to play Div 2 for whatever reason there's no rule that says you can't pay him a tonne. As for why soccer is so popular, I don't really know, personally I prefer basketball.

The US will always want a playoffs. Someone will need to be crowned champion in a knock-out series/title game.

So we do away with the draft? And then I suppose there's a 'Champions League' and 'Cup League' as well? Obviously rosters would need to increase and it would really be the death knell of small market teams in the short term as the big teams will take over.

Basically I reckon completely reforming the NBA in this way will set it back decades as the 'casual fan' who the owners are chasing with success will not understand it. Plus some diehards will be lost for the same reason.

I think they need to continue working on their current model, but I understand what you're saying about making games have more meaning. Obviously the easy solution to that is to make the games have more value, i.e. play less.

[FlagsFlyForever]

Why is it interesting to watch Bayern Munich and PSG win their weak leagues every year? Imagine if Bayern and PSG were competing in the same league as Real Madrid and Barcelona. Imagine if all of the best players in the world competed against each other regularly in the same league in place of the weaker players they currently regularly compete against. In the NBA, we get to see Shaq vs. Kobe. Durant vs. Westbrook. Why would you not want to see Neymar vs Messi?

I don't see a problem with a system of promotion and relegation for college athletics, but such a system would severely weaken the NBA.

[Pachinko_]

I hope you're not asking me, I'm not a soccer fan.
Just pointed out that the lack of parity never stopped soccer leagues from having the biggest and most dedicated fanbases in the world. As to why, no clue, we'll have to find a soccer fan and ask... I guess people probably are used to it and not think about it much?

People are also used to supporting multiple soccer teams as well.
I remember growing up in Greece at school kids would ask who do you root for (no need to specify the sport, major clubs have teams in all sports and you'd support them all by default)
The other kid would usually name the biggest team in his city
- "Oh, no, I mean from the big ones"
Then the other kid would name on of the biggest teams in the country
- "Oh, no, I mean from the big-big ones"
- "Oh, right. Barcelona"

Totally different fan mentality.

[HurricaneKid]

Outside of win totals and Aldridge being good not great I'm not seeing much difference between the two really.

And yea, the Spurs are a juggernaut.

Those are pretty significant & meaningful differences, in addition to the fact that it was over a year apart and not immediately after he lost to them.

And I think calling a team that loses in the first round a juggernaut is a pretty low standard for the term juggernaut.

What if the circumstances weren't significant or meaningful to KD though?

The Spurs were a 55 win team, won a title the year prior, haven't won less than 50 games for two decades and have the best coach in the world. How are they not a juggernaut?

And the three HoFers that carried them to such amazing and pervasive success were all retiring/ending their careers. Are Curry/Dray/Klay all retiring? How is this remotely comparable? Nevermind that a 55 win team loses 3X the # of games a 73 win team does.

And no one cares about a career .534TS% scorer with slow feet.

[DingleJerry]

Really the criteria is that if you're not a top top player, true superstar then you fly under the radar and it's not a big deal. If you're true superstar on the first team all NBA type level or all time great level then you're subjected to espn driven dumb hot takes and getting over scrutinized because it makes people feel good to try and bring others down.

So, essentially all the 2nd tier team guys can team up to try and beat the top guys and it's ok and they just want to win and do what's best for them. But if the top guys team up or move teams they're disloyal cheaters and pussies. They need to make things tougher for themselves or else they're really not that good. I mean, MJ Bird and Magic didn't switch teams. You know, ignoring they already had multiple HOFers as teammates and that the entire rules and landscape of the league was different back then

[emunney]

If you want to stop tanking you need to motivate teams to attempt to win. I've proposed this idea many times in the past but there's a simple solution to me. Each team's clock starts on the date they are officially eliminated from the playoffs. After that date, you start counting their wins until the end of the season. By the end of the season, the team with the most wins after their clock started will draft the earliest (or get the most ping pong balls). This will motivate teams to try to win while also providing an advantage to the worst teams to draft higher (because they will be officially eliminated from the playoffs earlier and thus have more games to earn wins).

This just shifts the tanking to earlier in the season.

[HurricaneKid]

Really the criteria is that if you're not a top top player, true superstar then you fly under the radar and it's not a big deal. If you're true superstar on the first team all NBA type level or all time great level then you're subjected to espn driven dumb hot takes and getting over scrutinized because it makes people feel good to try and bring others down.

So, essentially all the 2nd tier team guys can team up to try and beat the top guys and it's ok and they just want to win and do what's best for them. But if the top guys team up or move teams they're disloyal cheaters and pussies. They need to make things tougher for themselves or else they're really not that good. I mean, MJ Bird and Magic didn't switch teams. You know, ignoring they already had multiple HOFers as teammates and that the entire rules and landscape of the league was different back then

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

[FlagsFlyForever]

If you want to stop tanking you need to motivate teams to attempt to win. I've proposed this idea many times in the past but there's a simple solution to me. Each team's clock starts on the date they are officially eliminated from the playoffs. After that date, you start counting their wins until the end of the season. By the end of the season, the team with the most wins after their clock started will draft the earliest (or get the most ping pong balls). This will motivate teams to try to win while also providing an advantage to the worst teams to draft higher (because they will be officially eliminated from the playoffs earlier and thus have more games to earn wins).

This just shifts the tanking to earlier in the season.

Today, teams are still incentivized to tank at the start of the season and it doesn't happen. The issue everybody complains about is at the end of the season when half the league is sitting their best players for minor or non-existent injuries, sign a bunch of G League scrubs, trade away quality veterans, etc. I can't see those things happenig to start a season.

[emunney]

If you want to stop tanking you need to motivate teams to attempt to win. I've proposed this idea many times in the past but there's a simple solution to me. Each team's clock starts on the date they are officially eliminated from the playoffs. After that date, you start counting their wins until the end of the season. By the end of the season, the team with the most wins after their clock started will draft the earliest (or get the most ping pong balls). This will motivate teams to try to win while also providing an advantage to the worst teams to draft higher (because they will be officially eliminated from the playoffs earlier and thus have more games to earn wins).

This just shifts the tanking to earlier in the season.

Today, teams are still incentivized to tank at the start of the season and it doesn't happen. The issue everybody complains about is at the end of the season when half the league is sitting their best players for minor or non-existent injuries, sign a bunch of G League scrubs, trade away quality veterans, etc. I can't see those things happenig to start a season.

It would be more like holding all your "injured" guys out until you're out of the playoffs, and then putting them all in to race for the top pick. The only way to stop tanking is to take away the incentive to tank. This proposal doesn't do that. It just rearranges it.

[DingleJerry]

Really the criteria is that if you're not a top top player, true superstar then you fly under the radar and it's not a big deal. If you're true superstar on the first team all NBA type level or all time great level then you're subjected to espn driven dumb hot takes and getting over scrutinized because it makes people feel good to try and bring others down.

So, essentially all the 2nd tier team guys can team up to try and beat the top guys and it's ok and they just want to win and do what's best for them. But if the top guys team up or move teams they're disloyal cheaters and pussies. They need to make things tougher for themselves or else they're really not that good. I mean, MJ Bird and Magic didn't switch teams. You know, ignoring they already had multiple HOFers as teammates and that the entire rules and landscape of the league was different back then

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

I wasn't in on that argument and don't care to be. I was just saying the reality of the situation as it is. I mean, you just said it. Since KD is better he can't do it and but LMA can. It is what it is, that's the current standard on it. The truly best players are held to different rules, it's that simple. In a way it's not fair for them, buuuutttt, they make way more money so they're compensated for the extra pressure/scrutinty, etc.

[FlagsFlyForever]

This just shifts the tanking to earlier in the season.

Today, teams are still incentivized to tank at the start of the season and it doesn't happen. The issue everybody complains about is at the end of the season when half the league is sitting their best players for minor or non-existent injuries, sign a bunch of G League scrubs, trade away quality veterans, etc. I can't see those things happenig to start a season.

It would be more like holding all your "injured" guys out until you're out of the playoffs, and then putting them all in to race for the top pick. The only way to stop tanking is to take away the incentive to tank. This proposal doesn't do that. It just rearranges it.

Teams don't do that now and they easily could if they wanted an advantage in draft position. At the start of the season, teams are optimistic and think they can reach the playoffs. Franchises can't sell a fanbase on tanking out of the gate and admitting they were never trying this season. There are too many obstacles to tanking to start a season that I don't think it would ever happen.

[emunney]

Really the criteria is that if you're not a top top player, true superstar then you fly under the radar and it's not a big deal. If you're true superstar on the first team all NBA type level or all time great level then you're subjected to espn driven dumb hot takes and getting over scrutinized because it makes people feel good to try and bring others down.

So, essentially all the 2nd tier team guys can team up to try and beat the top guys and it's ok and they just want to win and do what's best for them. But if the top guys team up or move teams they're disloyal cheaters and pussies. They need to make things tougher for themselves or else they're really not that good. I mean, MJ Bird and Magic didn't switch teams. You know, ignoring they already had multiple HOFers as teammates and that the entire rules and landscape of the league was different back then

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

I wasn't in on that argument and don't care to be. I was just saying the reality of the situation as it is. I mean, you just said it. Since KD is better he can't do it and but LMA can. It is what it is, that's the current standard on it. The truly best players are held to different rules, it's that simple. In a way it's not fair for them, buuuutttt, they make way more money so they're compensated for the extra pressure/scrutinty, etc.

Not that there's an amount of money that would justify it, but Durant and LMA aren't that far apart salary wise. The idea here is that Durant by virtue of being great has an expanded responsibility to the league to ensure competitive balance. With great power comes great responsibility. But Durant is not Spider-Man. He's a dude who's been drilled by everyone on the fact that there is nothing more important than winning. He made a decision that aligns with the principle that 99.9% of basketball fans agree with unquestioningly.

It sucks because on a broader level most fans like the heightened competition and uncertainty that comes with competitive balance, but the league created a situation that was almost guaranteed to provoke turmoil, did not make a good faith effort to resolve it *over the course of the two years they knew it was coming*, and then somehow has completely ducked blame for it because Durant is a more visible target. This is a league problem and it was caused by a series of league actions.

[FlagsFlyForever]

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

LMA made the all-star game five straight seasons and joined the Spurs dynasty who are one of the top 3 favorites to win the NBA championship every year. Durant joined the team that just lost in the NBA Finals. They made the same move (as have many players previously) but there is clearly a double standard when it comes to Durant.

[DingleJerry]

Spoiler:

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

I wasn't in on that argument and don't care to be. I was just saying the reality of the situation as it is. I mean, you just said it. Since KD is better he can't do it and but LMA can. It is what it is, that's the current standard on it. The truly best players are held to different rules, it's that simple. In a way it's not fair for them, buuuutttt, they make way more money so they're compensated for the extra pressure/scrutinty, etc.

Not that there's an amount of money that would justify it, but Durant and LMA aren't that far apart salary wise. The idea here is that Durant by virtue of being great has an expanded responsibility to the league to ensure competitive balance. With great power comes great responsibility. But Durant is not Spider-Man. He's a dude who's been drilled by everyone on the fact that there is nothing more important than winning. He made a decision that aligns with the principle that 99.9% of basketball fans agree with unquestioningly.

It sucks because on a broader level most fans like the heightened competition and uncertainty that comes with competitive balance, but the league created a situation that was almost guaranteed to provoke turmoil, did not make a good faith effort to resolve it *over the course of the two years they knew it was coming*, and then somehow has completely ducked blame for it because Durant is a more visible target. This is a league problem and it was caused by a series of league actions.

Pretty much. And yea I know max salary rules keep these guys close in NBA salary. But the 1st team and all time great types make an obscene amount in advertising. They get extra scrutiny due to being public figures like that, but it's also why they make so much money from advertising. Quick googling of net worths puts KD at 150 mil and LMA at 40 mil. It seems he gets somewhere around 30 mil per year from Nike alone.

[tydett]

Would be interesting to see something like the way baseball does it.

Your performance during the season gives you an escalating amount of money to spend on rookies specifically.
Lowest performing team gets the highest salary amount.
All amateur players, once they sign an agent, enter into a rookie free agent pool that can only be signed using the rookie salary allotment. If a team wants to sign 4 rookies and the rookies agree to contracts that fit within the allotment, then go for it. If a team wants to blow the whole allotment on one player, they can do that too. Or a team could carry 50% of its rookie allotment to the next season only, for an attempt to sign one of those big-league prospects.

Sure, there's always a risk that a Michael Porter Jr joins Golden State for $500k, but many great potential rookies might be willing to go to a Brooklyn for a $10 million deal. This gives rookies more control over where they sign, it gives teams more competition to sign the truly great players, and really rewards those GMs who can spot a diamond in the rough and sign them for a cheaper contract.

[DrWood]

Really the criteria is that if you're not a top top player, true superstar then you fly under the radar and it's not a big deal. If you're true superstar on the first team all NBA type level or all time great level then you're subjected to espn driven dumb hot takes and getting over scrutinized because it makes people feel good to try and bring others down.

So, essentially all the 2nd tier team guys can team up to try and beat the top guys and it's ok and they just want to win and do what's best for them. But if the top guys team up or move teams they're disloyal cheaters and pussies. They need to make things tougher for themselves or else they're really not that good. I mean, MJ Bird and Magic didn't switch teams. You know, ignoring they already had multiple HOFers as teammates and that the entire rules and landscape of the league was different back then

LMA wasn't a top 50 pick in the current draft on this forum. I don't think anyone cares if a top 60 player attempts to replace a 40 year old ATG in a great system. I don't understand how anyone can compare that situation to the KD situation. Its like suggesting that since police don't arrest jaywalkers, murder might as well be overlooked as well.

no, it's like saying if you overlook some teenage kid who runs track if he jaywalks, you should also overlook Usain Bolt jaywalking.