Paradise wrote:EddieJonesFan wrote:I'm failing to see the harm this has actually caused the league, it seems people are just increasingly whining about it because it offends their precious sensibilities.
Tanking is a reality of the draft being weighted to help the bad teams, so either change that and accept those consequences of that instead, or shut up about it and accept it's an inevitable consequence of the way the system is set up. There are no rewards for being middle of the pack.
Well, it impacts ticket sales, ratings, losses that big market teams usually cover, lack of profitiablity, etc.
There should be stiffer penalties on teams like the 2011 Bobcats or 2013 Sixers.
There is too much of a habit on that. Being in the middle is what 29 teams do yearly honestly. There isn't a championship for being runner up. 1 wins, everyone else tries.
I just don't buy into the " be a contender or tank it" logic. It should only apply to certain teams, not all situations like how it's become.
Why not stiffer penalties on the Lakers, Nets, Knicks and Mavericks of the league who drive up middling player prices making it less affordable for softer markets?
Or stiffer penalties on the Melos, Dwights, and Pauls of the league who give their teams what is essentially ultimatums to trade them to teams of their choosing, or risk losing them for nothing which would force teams to inevitably lose anyways?
Or how about the league actually steps back, looks at the economics of player movement, the adverse effects max salaries and poor profit sharing are having on the 'have not' markets while benifitting the 'have' markets, creating the disparity in talent (and greater disparity in wealth) and therefore the need to tank.
The draft isn't what is causing tanking. The unfair distribution of wealth and the inevitable movement of labour towards those who have the, and can offer greater, wealth is what is causing teams to tank. The league has, through their ever tightening CBAs, offered owners greater rewards at lower risks. However not all owners have benifited the same - the LAs, NYs, Miamis, Houston/Dallas' of the league have just been able to take a bigger peice of the talent pie at a risk and cost thats much smaller than it ever was. Convient that David Stern has at many times in the past talked about the importance and benifit to the league of having great players in the major markets? I think not.....
If the Charlottes and Phillies of the league ever truelly want to compete at the top they have what boils down to 2 choices. Tank and try to get top talent at the top of the draft. Not tank and try to get top talent in the middle of the draft. Seems pretty logical, given history, where those teams will have their best opportunity to find it.
The other option is to sit on their thumbs and hope lightning falls right into that empty bottle they are holding.
If the league goes about and actually changes the CBA so those 'have not' markets can both keep and afford to keep that better talent that they draft or acquire, there will be no or atleast little need to tank. Unfortunately the executives of the league, its more influential owners and really the media itself has little desire for this. They want that top talent in the major markets - thats whats best for them.
The draft is fine. The safety net it offers, so bad teams can become good again in the future, is ideal. Its the CBA thats the real problem.
Optimism Bias is the tendency of individuals to underestimate the likelihood they will experience adverse events. Optimistic bias cannot be reduced, and by trying to reduce the optimistic bias the end result was generally even more optimistically biased