Around the NBA - Offseason 2022 Continued

[god shammgod]

Wall is one of my favorite players and I missed out on seeing him play for an entire year because a team wanted to lose games on purpose. What kind of product is that?

Not one you should pay for. And that's why it's a problem.

just make it even odds for every team in the lottery. it's not a perfect solution but it's the best you can get. nobody will try to lose on purpose until the last couple of weeks of the season if that's the case and nobody cares about the last couple weeks of the season in the nba anyway.

[stuporman]

I think relegation is a great idea....but if your team is so bad it gets relegated, you have to move the whole franchise to New Jersey....that'll show 'em.

[Chanel Bomber]

Wall is one of my favorite players and I missed out on seeing him play for an entire year because a team wanted to lose games on purpose. What kind of product is that?

Not one you should pay for. And that's why it's a problem.

just make it even odds for every team in the lottery. it's not a perfect solution but it's the best you can get. nobody will try to lose on purpose until the last couple of weeks of the season if that's the case and nobody cares about the last couple weeks of the season in the nba anyway.

Or just flatten the odds to the point where there is still some sense of graduality yet without forming an incentive to throw an entire season away.

I still think tanking isn't this big issue people talk about. But if the NBA were to address it, there is a pretty simple solution that doesn't require the "genius" out-of-the-box idea that Adam Silver is clearly craving for.

A relegation system would be a disaster for the NBA.

[Capn'O]

Not one you should pay for. And that's why it's a problem.

just make it even odds for every team in the lottery. it's not a perfect solution but it's the best you can get. nobody will try to lose on purpose until the last couple of weeks of the season if that's the case and nobody cares about the last couple weeks of the season in the nba anyway.

Or just flatten the odds to the point where there is still some sense of graduality yet without forming an incentive to throw an entire season away.

I still think tanking isn't this big issue people talk about. But if the NBA were to address it, there is a pretty simple solution that doesn't require the "genius" out-of-the-box idea that Adam Silver is clearly craving for.

A relegation system would be a disaster for the NBA.

I like the wheel too but flattening the odds would be fine.

[Capn'O]

He was always a bad fit with Luka defensively. Awful move for them

Too bad for them, eh? At least they have their... oh wait, we do.

It's lotto protected Or top 10 I think

Top 10. I can't imagine them going below that with Luka. It might be the perfect storm.

[Chanel Bomber]

just make it even odds for every team in the lottery. it's not a perfect solution but it's the best you can get. nobody will try to lose on purpose until the last couple of weeks of the season if that's the case and nobody cares about the last couple weeks of the season in the nba anyway.

Or just flatten the odds to the point where there is still some sense of graduality yet without forming an incentive to throw an entire season away.

I still think tanking isn't this big issue people talk about. But if the NBA were to address it, there is a pretty simple solution that doesn't require the "genius" out-of-the-box idea that Adam Silver is clearly craving for.

A relegation system would be a disaster for the NBA.

I like the wheel too but flattening the odds would be fine.

I suspect there will be the opposite problem where teams that would otherwise compete for a playoff spot late in the season might rest players to get a higher chance at getting say a top 5 pick. Tanking from the top if you will.

Even flattening the odds completely would be conducive to creating this incentive. Although I'm speculating of course.

A lot of these anti-tanking arguments refuse to accept the reality that this is a zero-sum game.

A way to remedy that would be to open a relegation system like the European leagues, but it is simply not compatible with a salary cap.

[robillionaire]

Wall is one of my favorite players and I missed out on seeing him play for an entire year because a team wanted to lose games on purpose. What kind of product is that?

Not one you should pay for. And that's why it's a problem.

just make it even odds for every team in the lottery. it's not a perfect solution but it's the best you can get. nobody will try to lose on purpose until the last couple of weeks of the season if that's the case and nobody cares about the last couple weeks of the season in the nba anyway.

The only thing with that is you might have teams with less incentive to push for the playoffs as an 8 seed as opposed to getting their equal lottery odds but other than that it’s a good solution like you said maybe not perfect but yes it would solve a lot of the problem. Plus the odds would be fairly low for each team so they might prefer to sell playoff tickets

[Capn'O]

^Yeah, I think resting good players for a team in contention for a playoff berth wouldn't go over as well with fans and players but who knows. Like, imagine benching Beal (or Doncic ) in a contract year right as the team enters a playoff race. That's tough to spin.

[robillionaire]

Or just flatten the odds to the point where there is still some sense of graduality yet without forming an incentive to throw an entire season away.

I still think tanking isn't this big issue people talk about. But if the NBA were to address it, there is a pretty simple solution that doesn't require the "genius" out-of-the-box idea that Adam Silver is clearly craving for.

A relegation system would be a disaster for the NBA.

I like the wheel too but flattening the odds would be fine.

I suspect there will be the opposite problem where teams that would otherwise compete for a playoff spot late in the season might rest players to get a higher chance at getting say a top 5 pick. Tanking from the top if you will.

Even flattening the odds completely would be conducive to creating this incentive. Although I'm speculating of course.

A lot of these anti-tanking arguments refuse to accept the reality that this is a zero-sum game.

A way to remedy that would be to open a relegation system like the European leagues, but it is simply not compatible with a salary cap.

I said the same thing in my post, but even this would be better than what we have. Plus what would the odds of a top pick be for 14 teams (16 if they expand the league) with completely flat odds? Probably not even high enough to care about losing on purpose. And even if some team did this an intentionally missed the playoffs, so what? The amount of teams punting entire seasons and losing on purpose would be drastically reduced enough across the board to make some team missing the playoffs on purpose for a 4-5% swing or whatever it is not very relevant. Teams at the bottom would actually be trying to win at the end of the season. That’s a huge improvement. Fans wouldn’t be begging for their team to blow it up and lose every game because the incentive isn’t there anymore.

We are talking about 1 or 2 oddball borderline playoff teams that might do something crazy and punt the last 5-10 games to sneak out of the playoffs vs an epidemic where multiple teams lose games on purpose for the entire season because it’s perceived that losing is the way to make your team good. There should be as little as possible incentive to lose on purpose. That should be the goal here

[Chanel Bomber]

I like the wheel too but flattening the odds would be fine.

I suspect there will be the opposite problem where teams that would otherwise compete for a playoff spot late in the season might rest players to get a higher chance at getting say a top 5 pick. Tanking from the top if you will.

Even flattening the odds completely would be conducive to creating this incentive. Although I'm speculating of course.

A lot of these anti-tanking arguments refuse to accept the reality that this is a zero-sum game.

A way to remedy that would be to open a relegation system like the European leagues, but it is simply not compatible with a salary cap.

I said the same thing in my post, but even this would be better than what we have. Plus what would the odds of a top pick be for 14 teams (16 if they expand the league) with completely flat odds? Probably not even high enough to care about losing on purpose. And even if some team did this an intentionally missed the playoffs, so what? The amount of teams punting entire seasons and losing on purpose would be drastically reduced enough across the board to make some team missing the playoffs on purpose for a 4-5% swing or whatever it is not very relevant. Teams at the bottom would actually be trying to win at the end of the season. That’s a huge improvement. Fans wouldn’t be begging for their team to blow it up and lose every game because the incentive isn’t there anymore.

We are talking about 1 or 2 oddball borderline playoff teams that might do something crazy and punt the last 5-10 games to sneak out of the playoffs vs an epidemic where multiple teams lose games on purpose for the entire season because it’s perceived that losing is the way to make your team good. There should be as little as possible incentive to lose on purpose. That should be the goal here

I actually wanted to raise that question because I think that's the part that's debatable.

What's more problematic in theory, a potential playoff team throwing the towel (and games) before the end of the season to have an equal shot at a high pick as the worst team in the league? Or a talent-depleted team to start with becoming even worse and being unwatchable? I can see both sides. Last season's Knicks team was very fun to watch up until the end of the season because they tried to compete despite missing the playoffs, and being the worst team in the league did produce the golden years of the Frank era.

I get your point and I'm not necessarily against flattening the odds completely. In fact, I'm all for experimenting with it, though I would personally try to maintain some level of graduality, but maybe with only a few percentage points from first to last.

[god shammgod]

I like the wheel too but flattening the odds would be fine.

I suspect there will be the opposite problem where teams that would otherwise compete for a playoff spot late in the season might rest players to get a higher chance at getting say a top 5 pick. Tanking from the top if you will.

Even flattening the odds completely would be conducive to creating this incentive. Although I'm speculating of course.

A lot of these anti-tanking arguments refuse to accept the reality that this is a zero-sum game.

A way to remedy that would be to open a relegation system like the European leagues, but it is simply not compatible with a salary cap.

I said the same thing in my post, but even this would be better than what we have. Plus what would the odds of a top pick be for 14 teams (16 if they expand the league) with completely flat odds? Probably not even high enough to care about losing on purpose. And even if some team did this an intentionally missed the playoffs, so what? The amount of teams punting entire seasons and losing on purpose would be drastically reduced enough across the board to make some team missing the playoffs on purpose for a 4-5% swing or whatever it is not very relevant. Teams at the bottom would actually be trying to win at the end of the season. That’s a huge improvement. Fans wouldn’t be begging for their team to blow it up and lose every game because the incentive isn’t there anymore.

We are talking about 1 or 2 oddball borderline playoff teams that might do something crazy and punt the last 5-10 games to sneak out of the playoffs vs an epidemic where multiple teams lose games on purpose for the entire season because it’s perceived that losing is the way to make your team good. There should be as little as possible incentive to lose on purpose. That should be the goal here

that's what i said. a couple teams might want to tank late but 2 to 3 weeks of tanking is way better than whole seasons of it. half the teams with good playoff position start resting guys anyway during this time. just flatten the odds.

[god shammgod]

most owners would rather have the extra playoff money anyway.

[Capn'O]

most owners would rather have the extra playoff money anyway.

I agree. With flattened odds, tanking out of a PO spot gets you fired on the spot.

[Chanel Bomber]

most owners would rather have the extra playoff money anyway.

I agree. With flattened odds, tanking out of a PO spot gets you fired on the spot.

The play-in tournament does blur the line a bit. Not saying this as a counter.

[robillionaire]

I suspect there will be the opposite problem where teams that would otherwise compete for a playoff spot late in the season might rest players to get a higher chance at getting say a top 5 pick. Tanking from the top if you will.

Even flattening the odds completely would be conducive to creating this incentive. Although I'm speculating of course.

A lot of these anti-tanking arguments refuse to accept the reality that this is a zero-sum game.

A way to remedy that would be to open a relegation system like the European leagues, but it is simply not compatible with a salary cap.

I said the same thing in my post, but even this would be better than what we have. Plus what would the odds of a top pick be for 14 teams (16 if they expand the league) with completely flat odds? Probably not even high enough to care about losing on purpose. And even if some team did this an intentionally missed the playoffs, so what? The amount of teams punting entire seasons and losing on purpose would be drastically reduced enough across the board to make some team missing the playoffs on purpose for a 4-5% swing or whatever it is not very relevant. Teams at the bottom would actually be trying to win at the end of the season. That’s a huge improvement. Fans wouldn’t be begging for their team to blow it up and lose every game because the incentive isn’t there anymore.

We are talking about 1 or 2 oddball borderline playoff teams that might do something crazy and punt the last 5-10 games to sneak out of the playoffs vs an epidemic where multiple teams lose games on purpose for the entire season because it’s perceived that losing is the way to make your team good. There should be as little as possible incentive to lose on purpose. That should be the goal here

I actually wanted to raise that question because I think that's the part that's debatable.

What's more problematic in theory, a potential playoff team throwing the towel (and games) before the end of the season to have an equal shot at a high pick as the worst team in the league? Or a talent-depleted team to start with becoming even worse and being unwatchable? I can see both sides. Last season's Knicks team was very fun to watch up until the end of the season because they tried to compete despite missing the playoffs, and being the worst team in the league did produce the golden years of the Frank era.

I get your point and I'm not necessarily against flattening the odds completely. In fact, I'm all for experimenting with it, though I would personally try to maintain some level of graduality, but maybe with only a few percentage points from first to last.

This is the point where we need to run the numbers to figure out exactly what the odds would be and then ask ourselves if it’s even feasible a team would try a plan that has a 95% chance of failing give or take vs. just trying to make the playoffs. And if a coach or players on a team that’s around .500 would even go along with this. Or ownership that wants extra playoff revenue. At that point you’d have to say if a team was crazy enough to try it and it worked, more power to them. Again it’s not a perfect solution like relegation is but we can’t do that as you’ve explained, this wouldn’t change all that much about the league structure. It might not eliminate 100% of games that are lost on purpose because in theory someone could try it but I feel like it would reduce it by 99.9% and I’m good with that.

[robillionaire]

most owners would rather have the extra playoff money anyway.

I agree. With flattened odds, tanking out of a PO spot gets you fired on the spot.

The play-in tournament does blur the line a bit. Not saying this as a counter.

With the flattened odds solution, I would probably consider ditching the play in tournament.

[Chanel Bomber]

I agree. With flattened odds, tanking out of a PO spot gets you fired on the spot.

The play-in tournament does blur the line a bit. Not saying this as a counter.

With the flattened odds solution, I would probably consider ditching the play in tournament.

I am against the play-in tournament so I would ditch it anyway. But yes flattened odds would make it pointless besides as a cash cow, which would probably justify keeping it in the NBA's view.

[Chanel Bomber]

I said the same thing in my post, but even this would be better than what we have. Plus what would the odds of a top pick be for 14 teams (16 if they expand the league) with completely flat odds? Probably not even high enough to care about losing on purpose. And even if some team did this an intentionally missed the playoffs, so what? The amount of teams punting entire seasons and losing on purpose would be drastically reduced enough across the board to make some team missing the playoffs on purpose for a 4-5% swing or whatever it is not very relevant. Teams at the bottom would actually be trying to win at the end of the season. That’s a huge improvement. Fans wouldn’t be begging for their team to blow it up and lose every game because the incentive isn’t there anymore.

We are talking about 1 or 2 oddball borderline playoff teams that might do something crazy and punt the last 5-10 games to sneak out of the playoffs vs an epidemic where multiple teams lose games on purpose for the entire season because it’s perceived that losing is the way to make your team good. There should be as little as possible incentive to lose on purpose. That should be the goal here

I actually wanted to raise that question because I think that's the part that's debatable.

What's more problematic in theory, a potential playoff team throwing the towel (and games) before the end of the season to have an equal shot at a high pick as the worst team in the league? Or a talent-depleted team to start with becoming even worse and being unwatchable? I can see both sides. Last season's Knicks team was very fun to watch up until the end of the season because they tried to compete despite missing the playoffs, and being the worst team in the league did produce the golden years of the Frank era.

I get your point and I'm not necessarily against flattening the odds completely. In fact, I'm all for experimenting with it, though I would personally try to maintain some level of graduality, but maybe with only a few percentage points from first to last.

This is the point where we need to run the numbers to figure out exactly what the odds would be and then ask ourselves if it’s even feasible a team would try a plan that has a 95% chance of failing give or take vs. just trying to make the playoffs. And if a coach or players on a team that’s around .500 would even go along with this. Or ownership that wants extra playoff revenue. At that point you’d have to say if a team was crazy enough to try it and it worked, more power to them. Again it’s not a perfect solution like relegation is but we can’t do that as you’ve explained, this wouldn’t change all that much about the league structure. It might not eliminate 100% of games that are lost on purpose because in theory someone could try it but I feel like it would reduce it by 99.9% and I’m good with that.

Yes, absolutely.

I think further flattening the odds (or completely) is the least problematic solution. That was essentially my point at the beginning of the conversation. It's not perfect, but it's fine.

I would still give the worst teams better odds even if the differences were insignificant, if only for what it means symbolically, before flattening them completely. But perfectly flat odds would be an interesting experiment for sure. It would also put more of an emphasis on talent evaluation in the draft.

[Clyde_Style]

I think relegation is a great idea....but if your team is so bad it gets relegated, you have to move the whole franchise to New Jersey....that'll show 'em.

Sorry, already taken.

NJ is a one-team state.

[Clyde_Style]

^Yeah, I think resting good players for a team in contention for a playoff berth wouldn't go over as well with fans and players but who knows. Like, imagine benching Beal (or Doncic ) in a contract year right as the team enters a playoff race. That's tough to spin.

That would be like temp banning Green Arrow during the Knicks deep playoff run into the ECF this season