Ford: 7 teams prepared to tank for wiggins

dice · Post #41 » by **dice** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 3:50 pm

mct wrote:I'm starting to really hate the lottery.

It's ironic that a mechanism designed to help bad teams get better in reality contributes to the disparity.

what in holy hell are you talking about? do you really think we'd be better off just going off record? or do you think all rookies should just be free agents?

Smirk · Post #42 » by **Smirk** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 3:55 pm

nyc6 wrote:http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nba/2224/andrew-wiggins

It still boggles my mind how teams like Cleveland, Detriot, Washington, Sacramento and New Orleans have no plans to make this list. Like I said in my other thread it's likely because grant, dumars and Grunfeld are all on the hot seat.

Why the hell would New Orleans be trying to tank?

Post #43 » by **QRich3** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:02 pm

dice wrote:
mct wrote:I'm starting to really hate the lottery.

It's ironic that a mechanism designed to help bad teams get better in reality contributes to the disparity.

what in holy hell are you talking about? do you really think we'd be better off just going off record? or do you think all rookies should just be free agents?

I don't have a clue what would be the best system but he's completely right. The lottery doesn't work, it promotes teams purposely playing bad basketball, it promotes that teams sell us a bad product on purpose. It is always bad, specially at the end of every regular season, but when you have half the league making moves to be a bad team 5 months before the start of the season, I don't know what else do you need to see that the system is broken.

mysticbb · Post #44 » by **mysticbb** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:04 pm

mct wrote:I'm starting to really hate the lottery.

Why? The lottery in fact makes it less likely that the worst team gets the #1 pick!

mct wrote:We'd get to watch a lot better basketball if being a .500 team wasn't such a hopeless situation.

Hopeless to whom? Are the people who are paying for the tickets really thinking that the only thing a team should try is winning a championship? I guess people are willing to pay, if the team just plays overall good basketball. The whole "winning or bust" idea is from my point of view just seen in such a fashion on message boards and among "journalists".

dice · Post #45 » by **dice** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:05 pm

QRich3 wrote:
dice wrote:
mct wrote:I'm starting to really hate the lottery.

It's ironic that a mechanism designed to help bad teams get better in reality contributes to the disparity.

what in holy hell are you talking about? do you really think we'd be better off just going off record? or do you think all rookies should just be free agents?

I don't have a clue what would be the best system but he's completely right. The lottery doesn't work, it promotes teams purposely playing bad basketball, it promotes that teams sell us a bad product on purpose. It is always bad, specially at the end of every regular season, but when you have half the league making moves to be a bad team 5 months before the start of the season, I don't know what else do you need to see that the system is broken.

good god man. you didn't answer my question. what do you think would happen if there WAS no lottery and we just went based on record? i'll answer for you: tanking would be much, much worse

nyc6 · Post #46 » by **nyc6** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:15 pm

Smirk wrote:
nyc6 wrote:http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nba/2224/andrew-wiggins

It still boggles my mind how teams like Cleveland, Detriot, Washington, Sacramento and New Orleans have no plans to make this list. Like I said in my other thread it's likely because grant, dumars and Grunfeld are all on the hot seat.

Why the hell would New Orleans be trying to tank?

Obviously I'm referring to pre-Jrue trade (ie: keeping Noel and 2014 #1)

Post #47 » by **jazzfan1971** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:16 pm

The reason this draft is so tankerific isn't just Wiggins. It's the safety. If you tank to the worst record in the league the lotto system guarantees you a top 4 pick. And this year, top 4 is good enough. Sure you hope for #1, but, #4 in this draft is STILL worth the tank.

So, there is not much downside risk to tanking. If it was just Wiggins and a bunch of role players you'd be tanking for a 25% chance at Wiggins. But, you are not you are tanking for a 100% chance at a franchise type player. (assuming you dont' get Darko'd)

mysticbb · Post #48 » by **mysticbb** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:22 pm

jazzfan1971 wrote:But, you are not you are tanking for a 100% chance at a franchise type player. (assuming you dont' get Darko'd)

There is no 100% chance at all. You mentioned one, and there are a couple of others, who where seen as great talented players, but didn't pan out for different reasons. The next draft offers you a better chance than other drafts to get that "franchise type player", but if you are not the worst team in the league (which becomes more likely, if more than one team is actually engaging in such strategy), the team may end up with the 6th, 7th, 8th or whatever pick.

And right now we don't even know whether that many teams will actually rather try to lose as much as possible, maybe one of those is getting off to a hot start and will then rather try to attempt to make the playoffs? Really, we have the 3rd of July and people are acting like the rosters are all set and we already know exactly how that season will pan out for a lot of teams.

nyc6 · Post #49 » by **nyc6** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:24 pm

jazzfan1971 wrote:The reason this draft is so tankerific isn't just Wiggins. It's the safety. If you tank to the worst record in the league the lotto system guarantees you a top 4 pick. And this year, top 4 is good enough. Sure you hope for #1, but, #4 in this draft is STILL worth the tank.

So, there is not much downside risk to tanking. If it was just Wiggins and a bunch of role players you'd be tanking for a 25% chance at Wiggins. But, you are not you are tanking for a 100% chance at a franchise type player. (assuming you dont' get Darko'd)

Thanks for clearing this out as many people are being annoying and saying "why tank for a chance to get only 1 available player."

I didn't know I actually I had to type this all out but you couldnt have said it any better

Top 4 picks next year are all arguably better than #1 this year

mct · Post #50 » by **mct** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:27 pm

dice wrote:
mct wrote:I'm starting to really hate the lottery.

It's ironic that a mechanism designed to help bad teams get better in reality contributes to the disparity.

what in holy hell are you talking about? do you really think we'd be better off just going off record? or do you think all rookies should just be free agents?

Take away any incentive to be bad. This could mean giving all teams an even chance of winning, or maybe let divisions rotate through the draft order so that every six years, your team has a top 5 pick. I don't know. The free agent thing could work too, but I really would miss the draft.

ratul · Post #51 » by **ratul** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:31 pm

I love how it is July and we have pre-tank talk already for the season. What a joke.

Drogba · Post #52 » by **Drogba** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:46 pm

This is why the NBA is such a joke.

Wish there was a relegation system like the Premier League(European Soccer Leagues) to prevent this crap.

Ditchweed · Post #53 » by **Ditchweed** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:53 pm

This league has a serious, serious flaw if the only way 30% of its teams can win is if they throw away the season for their fans, or rather soon to be ex fans if they aren't the one to win that lottery.

Post #54 » by **jazzfan1971** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 4:54 pm

These are the rules we have. Don't blame the players.

Post #55 » by **QRich3** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:01 pm

dice wrote:
QRich3 wrote:
dice wrote:what in holy hell are you talking about? do you really think we'd be better off just going off record? or do you think all rookies should just be free agents?

I don't have a clue what would be the best system but he's completely right. The lottery doesn't work, it promotes teams purposely playing bad basketball, it promotes that teams sell us a bad product on purpose. It is always bad, specially at the end of every regular season, but when you have half the league making moves to be a bad team 5 months before the start of the season, I don't know what else do you need to see that the system is broken.

good god man. you didn't answer my question. what do you think would happen if there WAS no lottery and we just went based on record? i'll answer for you: tanking would be much, much worse

I did answer with a pretty clear "I don't have a clue", but it baffles me that you can't grasp what people is complaining about is not the lottery in itself or the fact that it makes it less likely for the worst team to get #1. On the contrary, what people complains about is that selling a bad product on purpose gets rewarded with a better chance to improve. It's not even the draft in itself, but the way it's constructed that makes the NBA as a whole less apealing.

I didn't want to say any specific idea so this doesn't turn into a "say your not really well thought idea on how to improve the draft" thread, but what Drogba suggests might be a good direction, if the very worst team in the league gets relegated to the D-League no owner would risk losing hundreds of millions in value for a chance at the number one pick. Then the lottery wouldn't even be necessary, you could be sure that the second to last team had given his all not to go to the D League lol

Obviously owners will never go for that in a million years but it would improve the product for us fans a lot.

Chosen01 · Post #56 » by **Chosen01** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:08 pm

As said earlier, THIS is the year to tank. Even if your team has the worst record and DOESN'T get the number 1, it isn't the end of the world by any stretch. The next 3 picks are ALL-STAR caliber.

A Melo-like prospect
Harden-like prospect
and a Chris Webber-like prospect.

There hasn't been a draft since 2003 where there were FOUR projected All-stars and obviously the first pick being a superstar.

mysticbb · Post #57 » by **mysticbb** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:16 pm

Ditchweed wrote:This league has a serious, serious flaw if the only way 30% of its teams can win is if they throw away the season for their fans, or rather soon to be ex fans if they aren't the one to win that lottery.

I think the flaw is rather in the thinking of people on the internet, that the only way to be "useful" in that league is by contending for the title. It really seems that folks on the internet aren't caring as much about the overall quality of play, but much more about whether the team would be able to win it all. Once that does not seem to be possible (no cakewalk for that team seems to be enough, that winning a championship isn't something which comes easy seems to be not in their mind), people are screaming for a rebuild, wanting to get rid of actually pretty good basketball players, want their supposed favorite team to tank and so on.

We are also see something like a false-consensus effect, where people on internet message boards believe that a majority which doesn't show their opinion on message boards would just completely agree with them. And then we have the issue that only the loudest, those who think that their opinion matters a lot, will post on those forums, given a big chance for a bandwaggon effect among those internet users, just to feel better about themselves, because a lot of people on the message board are agreeing with them. Most times a proper analysis isn't done and people are engaging in their quest to prove their opinions with a lot of biases and logical fallacies.

The league would be incredible flawed, if the owners would lose money hands over fist while not being able to sell the teams for a price higher than what they invested. And the reality shows that there are rich people willing to pay the premium for those NBA franchises and even a city like Sacramento is ready to go against all reasons to keep a losing franchise in town, making it possible that the "hated" prior owners getting more money than they should have based on the success rate.

Point is: "winning it all or bust" seems to be rather a motto on the internet than a motto among those season ticket holders.

Ditchweed · Post #58 » by **Ditchweed** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:25 pm

dice wrote:good god man. you didn't answer my question. what do you think would happen if there WAS no lottery and we just went based on record? i'll answer for you: tanking would be much, much worse

Actually, there probably wouldn't be any fewer or more teams tanking than there are now, it's just that the real low enders would just end up tanking even harder than they are now. The intentional game losses would just be far more obvious to the fans and embarrassing for the league.

If there are seven teams tanking now as versus seven teams tanking with no lottery, it would still be the same amount of tanking teams, and the same crappy play for the fans of the losing tanking teams, and it would still result in those seven tanking teams being worst seven teams in the league. In effect, no difference at all except to make tanking more obvious than now, but, when it is that obvious, there would be a lot of season ticket holders cancelling and only returning when the team got better.

Post #59 » by **QRich3** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:28 pm

mysticbb wrote:
Ditchweed wrote:This league has a serious, serious flaw if the only way 30% of its teams can win is if they throw away the season for their fans, or rather soon to be ex fans if they aren't the one to win that lottery.

I think the flaw is rather in the thinking of people on the internet, that the only way to be "useful" in that league is by contending for the title. It really seems that folks on the internet aren't caring as much about the overall quality of play, but much more about whether the team would be able to win it all. Once that does not seem to be possible (no cakewalk for that team seems to be enough, that winning a championship isn't something which comes easy seems to be not in their mind), people are screaming for a rebuild, wanting to get rid of actually pretty good basketball players, want their supposed favorite team to tank and so on.

We are also see something like a false-consensus effect, where people on internet message boards believe that a majority which doesn't show their opinion on message boards would just completely agree with them. And then we have the issue that only the loudest, those who think that their opinion matters a lot, will post on those forums, given a big chance for a bandwaggon effect among those internet users, just to feel better about themselves, because a lot of people on the message board are agreeing with them. Most times a proper analysis isn't done and people are engaging in their quest to prove their opinions with a lot of biases and logical fallacies.

The league would be incredible flawed, if the owners would lose money hands over fist while not being able to sell the teams for a price higher than what they invested. And the reality shows that there are rich people willing to pay the premium for those NBA franchises and even a city like Sacramento is ready to go against all reasons to keep a losing franchise in town, making it possible that the "hated" prior owners getting more money than they should have based on the success rate.

Point is: "winning it all or bust" seems to be rather a motto on the internet than a motto among those season ticket holders.

I think the problem is different that what you think it is. People don't complain about not having every team contending for a title, but we want every team to COMPETE. If not for a title for the chance to make the first round, or to be 12th instead of your division rival who is 13th. I don't care what you compete for, I want you to try to WIN, not feeling that if you win 40 games is worse than if you win 5.

One of the most appealing things in European soccer (EDIT: and basketball of course lol) is the less talented teams fighting for his life to avoid relegation. Or non contending teams fighting for the chance to make it to lesser European tournaments.

In the NBA, if you're not contending the best you can do is lose on purpose, that's very different that what you suggest.

ratul · Post #60 » by **ratul** » Wed Jul 3, 2013 5:31 pm

2013 for me was the first year I watched less basketball than the previous year. Just watched the finals -pretty much ignored the rest except for Golden state. A whole bunch of nonsense.