NBA looking to change Draft Lottery; 76ers say no

[shawn unkempt]

People just have a 12 month memory when it comes to the NBA, " The Sixers have been awful for ages" We've only been truly awful for a year, the NBA is tired of the Sixers tanking.... Were they tired of consistently being the 7th or 8th seed in the playoffs and losing year after a year? We've spent money to try and be good. Remember Elton Brand? We've traded our young assets to try and get a star piece, See Andrew Bymun, We even tried to build a team behind a bunch of young somewhat good players, See Holiday,Turner and Hawes. None of those solutions worked, since Decemeber 19, 2006 we've been putting off a rebuild/tank.We're finally doing it the right way and hopefully it turns out well.

Not really, I think you're reading it wrong. Everybody expects the Sixers to be awful for years to come. From an outsider's point of view it seems the most realistic outcome considering you'll likely be waiting on 19 year olds to become stars.

[BullyKing]

It was an example simply because you asked. You can't act like our legal system always makes sense to you and you always agree with what does and doesn't make it to trial. Thieves break into homes and injure themselves and sue the home owners, there is no way to definitively say what could or would come to trial.

There was nothing wrong with the analogy, you like many make the mistake of thinking that if the analogy isn't exactly congruous with the original scenario it's a bad analogy, while completely misunderstanding what an analogy is.

Ok, sure whatever. A fan could sue claiming that the arena lights were too bright and it upset. And since we never know what a jury will do, we should just play all games in the darkness.

Bam. Checkmate. Have a lovely day. http://bangordailynews.com/2014/05/14/n ... s-property

Please, you're embarrassing yourself. In the law, you have certain rights with respect to your own property. One who infringes on those rights by, for example, blasting loud music or, yes, obnoxious lights, may be liable for trespass, nuisance and/or your right to quiet enjoyment. Now, outside your home, when you voluntarily go somewhere, you have no such rights. Moreover, when you go somewhere and you know that things like bright lights or loud music will be there, you have "come to the nuisance" and have no cause of action.

[Mik317]

People just have a 12 month memory when it comes to the NBA, " The Sixers have been awful for ages" We've only been truly awful for a year, the NBA is tired of the Sixers tanking.... Were they tired of consistently being the 7th or 8th seed in the playoffs and losing year after a year? We've spent money to try and be good. Remember Elton Brand? We've traded our young assets to try and get a star piece, See Andrew Bymun, We even tried to build a team behind a bunch of young somewhat good players, See Holiday,Turner and Hawes. None of those solutions worked, since Decemeber 19, 2006 we've been putting off a rebuild/tank.We're finally doing it the right way and hopefully it turns out well.

Not really, I think you're reading it wrong. Everybody expects the Sixers to be awful for years to come. From an outsider's point of view it seems the most realistic outcome considering you'll likely be waiting on 19 year olds to become stars.

and if the alternative is to sign mid level guys to bad contracts all in order to uphold some misguided honor system...I'll take whatever the **** Hinkie is trying to do everyday.

Again, yes he is going hard for his tank but take that out of it and what is he really doing? Giving his young assets freedom and full time developmental focus. Is that what every franchise with young talent wants? I mean I constantly have heard in the last few years about how <insert vet here> is taking away minutes from a prospect because the coach is trying to save his job or is a tool who only plays vets because old school NBA nonsense. And yet here in this topic, we have dudes who would legit rather sign John Salmons and **** vets to bring "veteran leadership" Naw.

The Suns have the system to replicate. Play your youth no matter what and ideally they step up to the plate and surprise some people and if not you now know what you have and can move forward. The Suns found out that Plumlee can play a bit, that the Twins were actual NBA players, that Gerald Green still has some potential, that their twin PG system works... but they could have easily, brought in more Vets (they had the money IIRC), traded Dragic because of fit reasons and be awful w/ bad contracts. Teams like Orlando and Utah could have done the same...but that wouldn't make any goddam sense would it?

I ask you anti-tankers to put your team of choice in the Sixers position and ask yourself would you really go after subpar talent w/ our current roster or ride it out and see what you have?

[SlowPaced]

I really don't think tanking is that big of an issue. Keep the system.

[WVU]

The Sixers will win their next championship before the Boston Celtics win their next championship. I'd be willing to bet anything on that

[Sixersftw]

Please, you're embarrassing yourself. In the law, you have certain rights with respect to your own property. One who infringes on those rights by, for example, blasting loud music or, yes, obnoxious lights, may be liable for trespass, nuisance and/or your right to quiet enjoyment. Now, outside your home, when you voluntarily go somewhere, you have no such rights. Moreover, when you go somewhere and you know that things like bright lights or loud music will be there, you have "come to the nuisance" and have no cause of action.

1L property class broke out in the middle of a draft lottery discussion?

I have no idea how this happened buts it bringing up some bad memories.

[MagicMadness]

Well said. For the basketball purists out there who complain that tanking goes against the competitive spirit, is simply accepting perpetual mediocrity and never trying anything bold to get better more in line with the competitive spirit?

Good point. Fanbases for both Philly and Orlando have bought into their respective rebuilds, so what's the problem? We always rip the teams that never seem to be going anywhere (Raps/Bucks/Wiz/etc. in years past), but then when we see teams actively trying for long-term success, they're 'cheating the game' by not fighting for 9th place; for 'not being competitive' right then and now. It's called a rebuild, folks. You can be competitive while rebuilding, but being competitive with young talent usually does not equate to too many wins (a catch 22 situation).

I like what the Sixers have been doing, because it's something. It goes against the grain, but it sure has a heck of a lot of potential to be something great. And if I'm a fan of the Sixers, I'm a lot more excited about that than I would be of seeing a bunch of nobodies out there 'being competitive' to the tune of 38 wins and no future.

[sixerdave]

Well, advising on these kinds of things is part of what I do for a living but I understand if that's not good enough for you. And sure, anyone can sue anyone for anything but what is the claim? I voluntarily purchased tickets for a sporting event and the team that I went to go see sucked?

I don't know how successful a claim would be, but that's the risk with any trial. If you purchased season tickets to a team and then afterwards they dump all their good players and have a terrible record (Think Florida Marlins after they won both their World Series), you could argue that the product they put on the field or court is not the product you paid to see.

And that's exactly why the Sixers are rebuilding/tanking. No one comes to Sixers games anymore, even before the tank, Philadelphia fans are frontrunners, they only like teams with legitimate championship hopes. A team that's a 5th or 6th seed wouldn't get that many more fans. Unless you're the Eagles in Philly no one cares that you made it to the second round of the playoffs, you didn't win a champship so we're not going to really support the team.

Hey philly262, long time no see. I'm enjoying the banter in this thread.

I just wanted to chime in and say to call the Sixers fans "frontrunners" is somewhat off base. Philly fans love their teams and are very loyal. But they are not going to support a team that is putting a bad product out there, and they are not going to support inept management. I see nothing wrong with that. Frontrunners almost makes them sound like bandwagoners that hop onto other teams when the playoffs come around.

Regarding the "tanking" there have been some interesting reads here. The crux of the problem is that in the current CBA not every team has an opportunity to compete with a team that can put a Super Team out there like Lebron-Wade-Bosh, KG-Pierce-Allen, or Kobe-Gasol-Bynum. The league and Silver are being hypocrites, because they want teams to "try" to be good and put some farcical attempt at winning out there on the court. I'm sure they're very happy with the Bobcats/Hornets because they got Kemba/AlJeff/Lance, but that's a 45 win team. The Sixers want to win a championship, not 45 games. So the NBA wants teams to try to be good, but not try to be great? It's ridiculous.

If the draft supplied 30 stars every year, this wouldn't be an issue, but realistically there are maybe 1-3 stars that come into the league each year. It's tough to find talent that can take you to the top, so teams are looking for ways to win. Some work, some backfire.

[TheKingofSting]

I hope Silver does change it, it is time for something new.

[kingofthecourt67]

This is blatant targeting by the NBA. They set the rules that have been in place for years, and we simply played within those rules. I'm not commenting on whether these proposed changes are good or not, but it's not fair to change them 3 months before the season starts after free agency and the draft have already been done. They need to give at least a 2-3 year notice. This is equivalent to saying the current playoff format is going to change 2 weeks before the playoffs start.

And for those of you talking about the "competitive spirt of the game," the irony of it all is by refusing to sign mid-level role players to make our team "competitive" we're actually showing a greater desire to win. People take such a short-sighted view into all of this--oh, we don't care about winning because we'll only win 20-30 games for 2 years. But the fact that we're willing to stomach a few years of losing and less revenue for LONG-TERM success actually demonstrates a greater commitment to winning then a 7-8 seed who simply treadmills in order to put fans in seats.

[76ciology]

I don't know how successful a claim would be, but that's the risk with any trial. If you purchased season tickets to a team and then afterwards they dump all their good players and have a terrible record (Think Florida Marlins after they won both their World Series), you could argue that the product they put on the field or court is not the product you paid to see.

And that's exactly why the Sixers are rebuilding/tanking. No one comes to Sixers games anymore, even before the tank, Philadelphia fans are frontrunners, they only like teams with legitimate championship hopes. A team that's a 5th or 6th seed wouldn't get that many more fans. Unless you're the Eagles in Philly no one cares that you made it to the second round of the playoffs, you didn't win a champship so we're not going to really support the team.

Hey philly262, long time no see. I'm enjoying the banter in this thread.

I just wanted to chime in and say to call the Sixers fans "frontrunners" is somewhat off base. Philly fans love their teams and are very loyal. But they are not going to support a team that is putting a bad product out there, and they are not going to support inept management. I see nothing wrong with that. Frontrunners almost makes them sound like bandwagoners that hop onto other teams when the playoffs come around.

Regarding the "tanking" there have been some interesting reads here. The crux of the problem is that in the current CBA not every team has an opportunity to compete with a team that can put a Super Team out there like Lebron-Wade-Bosh, KG-Pierce-Allen, or Kobe-Gasol-Bynum. The league and Silver are being hypocrites, because they want teams to "try" to be good and put some farcical attempt at winning out there on the court. I'm sure they're very happy with the Bobcats/Hornets because they got Kemba/AlJeff/Lance, but that's a 45 win team. The Sixers want to win a championship, not 45 games. So the NBA wants teams to try to be good, but not try to be great? It's ridiculous.

If the draft supplied 30 stars every year, this wouldn't be an issue, but realistically there are maybe 1-3 stars that come into the league each year. It's tough to find talent that can take you to the top, so teams are looking for ways to win. Some work, some backfire.

From what I'm getting, this reform is to revive the big market teams like the Lakers, nets, knicks and the Celtics. These teams don't have the luxury to rebuild or "tank" because of their financials. Whether it's losing money on revenues or they have to pay ridiculous amount of money to pay players who draws crowd like Kobe and Melo.

Think about it.. These are the teams who will benefit the most with the moves. Imagine if the reform was made in the 2014. The lakers would have the chance to draft Embiid or Exum. But because they'd unlikely to go bottom, they would then just settle for the left overs for the creme of the crop in the draft.

These teams would just let their superstars play and be comfortable being the in-between teams while having the chance to land a no.1 pick in the draft. While for the Sixers, with reform or not, Hinkie would still draft the best guys available in the draft and maintain flexibility with the cap by not settling with these mediocre guys asking to be overpaid.

[76ciology]

I hope Silver does change it, it is time for something new.

Personally, I want it to happen for the sixers.

I believe the reform would work well for the Sixers with a stacked talent team but is an in between team in the short term, while the team develops chemistry and some player development. The team will have the chance to get a no.1 pick for multiple years despite having a talented core.

But as a basketball purist who enjoys parity, I wouldn't want it to happen for it will just prolong the rebuilding years of teams. And would make teams with bad management a harder time to improve their team.

[QRich3]

But as a basketball purist who enjoys parity, I wouldn't want it to happen for it will just prolong the rebuilding years of teams. And would make teams with bad management a harder time to improve their team.

Teams with bad management MUST have a harder time to improve than teams with good management though. What's next, banning defenders from contesting players with a bad jump shot?
You can't put your hand up if it's Rubio making a shot, it's for parity!

[76ciology]

But as a basketball purist who enjoys parity, I wouldn't want it to happen for it will just prolong the rebuilding years of teams. And would make teams with bad management a harder time to improve their team.

Teams with bad management MUST have a harder time to improve than teams with good management though. What's next, banning defenders from contesting players with a bad jump shot?
You can't put your hand up if it's Rubio making a shot, it's for parity!

Not just for bad management teams but small market teams who has a hard time going after stars or superstars in FA.

The ultimate goal of the lottery is to give the worst team the upper hand for improvement. By this, it's the fastest way to promote parity. Whether the team nails the draft pick, it's up to them.

[Baller2014]

This is blatant targeting by the NBA. They set the rules that have been in place for years, and we simply played within those rules. I'm not commenting on whether these proposed changes are good or not, but it's not fair to change them 3 months before the season starts after free agency and the draft have already been done. They need to give at least a 2-3 year notice. This is equivalent to saying the current playoff format is going to change 2 weeks before the playoffs start.

And for those of you talking about the "competitive spirt of the game," the irony of it all is by refusing to sign mid-level role players to make our team "competitive" we're actually showing a greater desire to win. People take such a short-sighted view into all of this--oh, we don't care about winning because we'll only win 20-30 games for 2 years. But the fact that we're willing to stomach a few years of losing and less revenue for LONG-TERM success actually demonstrates a greater commitment to winning then a 7-8 seed who simply treadmills in order to put fans in seats.

It's not targeting. Teams have tanked much more than you in the past, you're not doing anything new. It's about there being a new commish, and the new Commish is receptive to new ideas because he wants to put his own stamp on things. He's listening to feedback, and he wants to change things.

You can argue teams should get notice, but there was no notice when the previous 2 changes to the system were made in 94 and 85. I think there's been a growing perception for a while that tanking is a problem, and because of the PR of that the NBA wants to tweak the system to fix that perception, since getting a new commish gives them a chance to fix lots of perception issues all at once.

While I don't agree with you, I'm glad to be talking to a 76er fan who actually recognises this is bad for you guys. Some of the Hinkyites in this thread were trying to tell me that Hinkie is secretly on board with these changes, because it all fits in with his masterplan.

Anyway, I'm totally fine with tanking, though I don't think much of Hinkie's execution of that strategy. That said, these changes are quite minor, and don't alter the fundamental principle of the lotto- the bad teams have a big advantage to get the best talent.

[Turgon]

I'm all for changing it. Mind you, it's not that big of a change, it's more like a tweak. It's just altering the odds in a way that discourages radical tanking. The worst teams will still have the better chance at a top 3 pick and the rest of the picks will still be awarded in reverse order. But one can only hope this tweaking will not encourage tanking by design (like the sixers are doing) anymore.
I understand what the sixers are doing and I even think it's the smart thing to do. And therein lies the problem. When being a bad team is actually a viable strategy there must be something wrong with the rules. How can a sport encourage sucking? It's mind blowing.

The problem with the NBA is that getting just one star (never mind two) will change the outlook of the team for years. One player in the NBA can affect a team much more than he would in football or baseball. And drafting on top will give you better odds at getting that special player. Thus, NBA teams have a much bigger reason to tank.

And this has nothing to do with skewing the NBA in favor of big market teams. Those can get their big time players through free agency or forced trades and that's the way most of them do. In fact, one can argue that if a modest team (say, one with 35 victories) gets better chances at a top pick, small market teams will have a much better chance of building a championship team without having to resort to blatant tanking.

[Tony Franciosa]

It's not quite the same thing, but here in Philadelphia people are up in arms with the passing of the MLB trade deadline and the fact that the Phillies did nothing about their aging, mediocre core (sound familiar?).

The vast majority of fans and sports pundits thought they should have been selling off players left and right for any and all young prospects. There is a large group who think they need to start building through the draft and that means multiple years of bad baseball in this town.

And you know what? The ownership won't have it. Once their large ticket, over the hill players start coming off the books, they are committed to bringing in patchwork, mid-level chumps, with the hope that something will click and they'll get in the playoffs again. Unfortunately, they have the worst front office in all of professional sports with no plan or eye for player evaluation at all, so it's going to be miserable for them.

As a fan of the Sixers, I'm excited that our owner and GM have some idea of what they want to do and actually have the guts to do it. If the lottery system gets changed, I'm confident they'll make it work.

[Dupp]

Not giving the worst teams the best chance would be a monumental mistake. Some teams just suck. If the bad teams aren't getting top lotto picks they are gonna stay bad with no future.

The lotto system is as good a system there is in sports. "Tanking" will always be an issue but most of the times teams just suck. 25% chance for the worst team is no guarantee anyway.

[Snotbubbles]

I'm all for changing it. Mind you, it's not that big of a change, it's more like a tweak. It's just altering the odds in a way that discourages radical tanking. The worst teams will still have the better chance at a top 3 pick and the rest of the picks will still be awarded in reverse order. But one can only hope this tweaking will not encourage tanking by design (like the sixers are doing) anymore.
I understand what the sixers are doing and I even think it's the smart thing to do. And therein lies the problem. When being a bad team is actually a viable strategy there must be something wrong with the rules. How can a sport encourage sucking? It's mind blowing.

The problem with the NBA is that getting just one star (never mind two) will change the outlook of the team for years. One player in the NBA can affect a team much more than he would in football or baseball. And drafting on top will give you better odds at getting that special player. Thus, NBA teams have a much bigger reason to tank.

And this has nothing to do with skewing the NBA in favor of big market teams. Those can get their big time players through free agency or forced trades and that's the way most of them do. In fact, one can argue that if a modest team (say, one with 35 victories) gets better chances at a top pick, small market teams will have a much better chance of building a championship team without having to resort to blatant tanking.

This proposed change does nothing to stop tanking. It just masks the problem to where it doesn't have to be blatant. If you want to fix tanking it's going to have to be done in the next bargaining session. I don't think Silver has the balls to lockout the players to fix it so we are stuck with these feeble attempts to mask it.

[nodeal]

This proposed change does nothing to stop tanking. It just masks the problem to where it doesn't have to be blatant. If you want to fix tanking it's going to have to be done in the next bargaining session. I don't think Silver has the balls to lockout the players to fix it so we are stuck with these feeble attempts to mask it.

It does quite a bit actually. With the current flawed system. The difference between the 8th lottery seed and the 3rd lottery seed is huge. A team expecting to finish around 22nd would be smart to trade all their players over 24yrs old for pennies on the dollar to move from 22nd to 26th-28th

With the new proposal the difference between 8th and 3rd lottery seed isnt large enough to justify trading all your players for pennies on the dollar.