RealGM

• All the rules from the other leagues.... you know the drill

Spoiler:

Calvin Klein
PG - Damian Lillard (PG)
SG - Buddy Hield (SG)
G - Goran Dragic (PG/SG)
SF - Harrison Barnes (SF/PF)
PF - Serge Ibaka (PF/C)
F - Willie Cauley Stein (PF/C)
C - Nikola Jokic (PF/C)
U - Steven Adams (C)
U - Patrick Beverley (PG/SG)
B - Dion Waiters (SG/SF)
B - Marcus Morris (SF/PF)
B -

batsmasher wrote:Rules

Ulquiorra
PG - Mike Conley
SG - Victor Oladipo
G - Jrue Holiday
SF - Evan Fournier
PF - Draymond Green
F -
C -
U -
U - Jared Sullinger
B - JaMychal Green
B -
B -

B -

MathiasPW wrote:Seth Curry as a keeper? Was it that bad?

bwgood77 wrote:Although I like the idea of the random determination of teams that could theoretically get the first pick, I just thought of one other alternative.

In this scenario we have 4 lotteries, one for 13-16, one for 9-12, one for 5-8, and one for 1-4.

That way there are no predetermined spots.

However, if you don't meet the activeness level of somewhere between playing between 25 and 41 games of the max, you get a 4 spot penalty, basically meaning you move down a whole draft tier. And someone could get lucky, because if they were sitting at the 5th worst spot (2nd tier), and say the third worst team didn't play within a certain number of games of the max, they would move down to 7, moving everyone up one spot, the 5th worst team would suddenly move to 4 and have the chance at the #1 pick.

Kerrsed wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:Although I like the idea of the random determination of teams that could theoretically get the first pick, I just thought of one other alternative.

In this scenario we have 4 lotteries, one for 13-16, one for 9-12, one for 5-8, and one for 1-4.

That way there are no predetermined spots.

However, if you don't meet the activeness level of somewhere between playing between 25 and 41 games of the max, you get a 4 spot penalty, basically meaning you move down a whole draft tier. And someone could get lucky, because if they were sitting at the 5th worst spot (2nd tier), and say the third worst team didn't play within a certain number of games of the max, they would move down to 7, moving everyone up one spot, the 5th worst team would suddenly move to 4 and have the chance at the #1 pick.

This gets my vote! I like this idea alot!

Whats better than having a lottery?

Spoiler:

HAVING 3 LOTTERIES!!!!

Spoiler:

bwgood77 wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:Although I like the idea of the random determination of teams that could theoretically get the first pick, I just thought of one other alternative.

In this scenario we have 4 lotteries, one for 13-16, one for 9-12, one for 5-8, and one for 1-4.

That way there are no predetermined spots.

However, if you don't meet the activeness level of somewhere between playing between 25 and 41 games of the max, you get a 4 spot penalty, basically meaning you move down a whole draft tier. And someone could get lucky, because if they were sitting at the 5th worst spot (2nd tier), and say the third worst team didn't play within a certain number of games of the max, they would move down to 7, moving everyone up one spot, the 5th worst team would suddenly move to 4 and have the chance at the #1 pick.

This gets my vote! I like this idea alot!

Whats better than having a lottery?

Spoiler:

HAVING 3 LOTTERIES!!!!

Spoiler:

bwgood77 wrote:

kennydorglas wrote:I'm not a fan of any type of lottery, but I can live with it

So even after we do reverse draft of standings this year, you want to do that every year regardless? I think ultimately that will make the league less competitive.

bwgood77 wrote:I'm ready to start the draft but am trying to add everyone's suggestions into my original idea. But since we need to iron out future draft rules before starting, and new ideas keep getting thrown out, it delays it.

So the current hold ups seem to be kenny/Phystic don't want any lottery/random determination in future years, and MrMiyagi wants 41 games instead of 25 as the cut off for being penalized two draft spots.

I guess we keep the discussion going.

Also, one thing about the two spots we'd need to decide is if say, 5 teams make the lottery next year, because the Suns win 32 games, does the 2 spot penalty happen pre lottery? Or post lottery?

If you squeeze in 5th worst because of not having played games, it seems like you probably shouldn't get to be in the lottery. Originally I was thinking the penalty would happen post lottery; because if you got penalized two games for inactivity pre-lottery and still made the lottery cut off, and didn't get penalized post lottery, then you could have inactivity and still win the lottery.

I guess the easiest answer is you get a penalty pre and post. It would only matter pre lottery if it pushed you outside of the cutoff. If you remained in the lottery even after the penalty, you still should receive it post lottery because you could win.

Phystic wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:I'm ready to start the draft but am trying to add everyone's suggestions into my original idea. But since we need to iron out future draft rules before starting, and new ideas keep getting thrown out, it delays it.

So the current hold ups seem to be kenny/Phystic don't want any lottery/random determination in future years, and MrMiyagi wants 41 games instead of 25 as the cut off for being penalized two draft spots.

I guess we keep the discussion going.

Also, one thing about the two spots we'd need to decide is if say, 5 teams make the lottery next year, because the Suns win 32 games, does the 2 spot penalty happen pre lottery? Or post lottery?

If you squeeze in 5th worst because of not having played games, it seems like you probably shouldn't get to be in the lottery. Originally I was thinking the penalty would happen post lottery; because if you got penalized two games for inactivity pre-lottery and still made the lottery cut off, and didn't get penalized post lottery, then you could have inactivity and still win the lottery.

I guess the easiest answer is you get a penalty pre and post. It would only matter pre lottery if it pushed you outside of the cutoff. If you remained in the lottery even after the penalty, you still should receive it post lottery because you could win.

To clarify, I absolutely think anything but a reverse snake draft THIS draft is completely unfair. I don't necessarily agree with having a lottery moving forward as I think a reverse draft can keep things more balanced if tanking can be controlled(which is a part of this discussion).

I personally think that if we are keeping tanking under control then there is no need for a lottery. The worst teams get top picks which in theory should help keep the league level. In theory. I just don't like the idea of a playoff team landing a top pick and the worst team in the league getting a mid round pick. And this isn't just because I'm the worst team in the league . Of course all the top teams are down for a lottery, it benefits them.

With all that said, if the league wants to do that starting next draft then I'm fine even if that does sort of mess with my... process/timeline .

As for when the penalty should be implemented. I say pre-lottery. If that keeps them in the lottery then oh well. I don't think it's fair to screw them over multiple times by doing pre AND post lottery.

bwgood77 wrote:Although I like the idea of the random determination of teams that could theoretically get the first pick, I just thought of one other alternative.

In this scenario we have 4 lotteries, one for 13-16, one for 9-12, one for 5-8, and one for 1-4.

That way there are no predetermined spots.

However, if you don't meet the activeness level of somewhere between playing between 25 and 41 games of the max, you get a 4 spot penalty, basically meaning you move down a whole draft tier. And someone could get lucky, because if they were sitting at the 5th worst spot (2nd tier), and say the third worst team didn't play within a certain number of games of the max, they would move down to 7, moving everyone up one spot, the 5th worst team would suddenly move to 4 and have the chance at the #1 pick.

Kerrsed wrote:

Phystic wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:I'm ready to start the draft but am trying to add everyone's suggestions into my original idea. But since we need to iron out future draft rules before starting, and new ideas keep getting thrown out, it delays it.

So the current hold ups seem to be kenny/Phystic don't want any lottery/random determination in future years, and MrMiyagi wants 41 games instead of 25 as the cut off for being penalized two draft spots.

I guess we keep the discussion going.

Also, one thing about the two spots we'd need to decide is if say, 5 teams make the lottery next year, because the Suns win 32 games, does the 2 spot penalty happen pre lottery? Or post lottery?

If you squeeze in 5th worst because of not having played games, it seems like you probably shouldn't get to be in the lottery. Originally I was thinking the penalty would happen post lottery; because if you got penalized two games for inactivity pre-lottery and still made the lottery cut off, and didn't get penalized post lottery, then you could have inactivity and still win the lottery.

I guess the easiest answer is you get a penalty pre and post. It would only matter pre lottery if it pushed you outside of the cutoff. If you remained in the lottery even after the penalty, you still should receive it post lottery because you could win.

To clarify, I absolutely think anything but a reverse snake draft THIS draft is completely unfair. I don't necessarily agree with having a lottery moving forward as I think a reverse draft can keep things more balanced if tanking can be controlled(which is a part of this discussion).

I personally think that if we are keeping tanking under control then there is no need for a lottery. The worst teams get top picks which in theory should help keep the league level. In theory. I just don't like the idea of a playoff team landing a top pick and the worst team in the league getting a mid round pick. And this isn't just because I'm the worst team in the league . Of course all the top teams are down for a lottery, it benefits them.

With all that said, if the league wants to do that starting next draft then I'm fine even if that does sort of mess with my... process/timeline .

As for when the penalty should be implemented. I say pre-lottery. If that keeps them in the lottery then oh well. I don't think it's fair to screw them over multiple times by doing pre AND post lottery.

Re-read his new 4 tier lotto idea, and tell me that doesnt interest you.

Phystic wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:I'm ready to start the draft but am trying to add everyone's suggestions into my original idea. But since we need to iron out future draft rules before starting, and new ideas keep getting thrown out, it delays it.

So the current hold ups seem to be kenny/Phystic don't want any lottery/random determination in future years, and MrMiyagi wants 41 games instead of 25 as the cut off for being penalized two draft spots.

I guess we keep the discussion going.

Also, one thing about the two spots we'd need to decide is if say, 5 teams make the lottery next year, because the Suns win 32 games, does the 2 spot penalty happen pre lottery? Or post lottery?

If you squeeze in 5th worst because of not having played games, it seems like you probably shouldn't get to be in the lottery. Originally I was thinking the penalty would happen post lottery; because if you got penalized two games for inactivity pre-lottery and still made the lottery cut off, and didn't get penalized post lottery, then you could have inactivity and still win the lottery.

I guess the easiest answer is you get a penalty pre and post. It would only matter pre lottery if it pushed you outside of the cutoff. If you remained in the lottery even after the penalty, you still should receive it post lottery because you could win.

To clarify, I absolutely think anything but a reverse snake draft THIS draft is completely unfair. I don't necessarily agree with having a lottery moving forward as I think a reverse draft can keep things more balanced if tanking can be controlled(which is a part of this discussion).

I personally think that if we are keeping tanking under control then there is no need for a lottery. The worst teams get top picks which in theory should help keep the league level. In theory. I just don't like the idea of a playoff team landing a top pick and the worst team in the league getting a mid round pick. And this isn't just because I'm the worst team in the league . Of course all the top teams are down for a lottery, it benefits them.

With all that said, if the league wants to do that starting next draft then I'm fine even if that does sort of mess with my... process/timeline .

As for when the penalty should be implemented. I say pre-lottery. If that keeps them in the lottery then oh well. I don't think it's fair to screw them over multiple times by doing pre AND post lottery.

bwgood77 wrote:

Phystic wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:I'm ready to start the draft but am trying to add everyone's suggestions into my original idea. But since we need to iron out future draft rules before starting, and new ideas keep getting thrown out, it delays it.

So the current hold ups seem to be kenny/Phystic don't want any lottery/random determination in future years, and MrMiyagi wants 41 games instead of 25 as the cut off for being penalized two draft spots.

I guess we keep the discussion going.

Also, one thing about the two spots we'd need to decide is if say, 5 teams make the lottery next year, because the Suns win 32 games, does the 2 spot penalty happen pre lottery? Or post lottery?

If you squeeze in 5th worst because of not having played games, it seems like you probably shouldn't get to be in the lottery. Originally I was thinking the penalty would happen post lottery; because if you got penalized two games for inactivity pre-lottery and still made the lottery cut off, and didn't get penalized post lottery, then you could have inactivity and still win the lottery.

I guess the easiest answer is you get a penalty pre and post. It would only matter pre lottery if it pushed you outside of the cutoff. If you remained in the lottery even after the penalty, you still should receive it post lottery because you could win.

To clarify, I absolutely think anything but a reverse snake draft THIS draft is completely unfair. I don't necessarily agree with having a lottery moving forward as I think a reverse draft can keep things more balanced if tanking can be controlled(which is a part of this discussion).

I personally think that if we are keeping tanking under control then there is no need for a lottery. The worst teams get top picks which in theory should help keep the league level. In theory. I just don't like the idea of a playoff team landing a top pick and the worst team in the league getting a mid round pick. And this isn't just because I'm the worst team in the league . Of course all the top teams are down for a lottery, it benefits them.

With all that said, if the league wants to do that starting next draft then I'm fine even if that does sort of mess with my... process/timeline .

As for when the penalty should be implemented. I say pre-lottery. If that keeps them in the lottery then oh well. I don't think it's fair to screw them over multiple times by doing pre AND post lottery.

Well there are no playoff teams and the lottery under my initial plan would have probably normally be only the bottom half or less, but perhaps a couple more teams at times.

I think with the penalty, even though it might happen twice, ultimately would only get penalized once. Pre lottery they only get penalized if they get knocked out of lottery due to moving down. In that scenario, that's their only penalty. If someone moves down pre lottery and still stays in lottery, they could still end up with #1 pick even though they fell way short on games. So their only real penalty would be post lottery where they move down from 1 to 3.