Auction draft instead of lottery draft.

stilldropin20 · Post #21 » by **stilldropin20** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 2:12 am

best #9 gets the #1 pick. #10 seeds get the 3rd and 4th picks. etc. makes the regular season count more. this will significantly reduce tanking.

then to prevent the 7 and 8 seeds from tanking (out of the playoffs) pay teams AND players AND coaches 20% bonues for making the playoffs. Bonus money to playoff teams will be takne money taken from the teams AND owners AND PLAYERS AND COACHES. tanking will almost entirely cease to exist. regular season will mean more. every game will count significantly more.

the game would improve.

and to the teams that cant figure out how to fight for a 9th or 10th seed!? gtfo!! no seriously gtfo! from the front offices and then to the ownership groups. seel your damn team if you cant get off the bottom. and you dont deserve to be gifted the next micheal jordan or larry bird or lebron james.

timdunkit · Post #22 » by **timdunkit** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 2:18 am

zimpy27 wrote:
timdunkit wrote:The amount of attention tanking and the draft gets is blown out of proportion compared to the actual impact it has. At the end of the day, you want the worst teams getting the best young players. It's their best chance to improve and move up.

What would be an interesting experiment to me is if restricted free agency is removed from rookie contracts. Small market franchises would never go for it because it would reduce their control. But it would prevent teams from tanking several years in a row.

I agree with this. I prefer this drafting system for interest sake. Making sure teams get value for the player they want and not using a super early pick for choosing a need.

I think removing restricted free agency just hurts small teams. Teams in better climates, lively cities and tax benefits have a much bigger advantage over other teams in attracting free agents. It's already a bigger problem than tanking IMO and this would only add to it.

That's also a possibility. There would have to be an increase in financial incentives.

Another change could be to prevent teams from winning the lottery pick in back to back years. The lottery is only for the first 3 picks. If a team receives the #1-3 in one draft, the next draft they can only draft as high as 4. A second change I would add is to increase the draft lottery to the top 4 or 5 picks. Tanking the second year wouldn't seem like a great scenario and the young talent would be spread to the mediocre teams that can't tank as hard as everyone else.

Ace_Rockola · Post #23 » by **Ace_Rockola** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 2:52 am

"We want to have the opportunity to offer you a job paying you millions of dollars a year" But yeah, lets always bring up slavery.

Dominator83 · Post #24 » by **Dominator83** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 3:00 am

Purch wrote:Lmao, trust me when I say you don't want to open up that can of worms.

The NCAA is always accused of using black athletes as slaves, and then you want them to be part of an auction at the pro level?

I can see something controversial from a mile away. The articles write themselves.

These are the kind of things I call avoidable landminds

The easy solution is there are no auctions. Make it simple. Draftees are all free agents, and are free to go wherever. But as OP said, the worst record gets the most rookie cap space, and so on down. So a top rookie is free to sign with Golden state for $1 million, or Boston (via brooklyn) for $8 million

Purch · Post #25 » by **Purch** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:32 am

Dominater wrote:
Purch wrote:Lmao, trust me when I say you don't want to open up that can of worms.

The NCAA is always accused of using black athletes as slaves, and then you want them to be part of an auction at the pro level?

I can see something controversial from a mile away. The articles write themselves.

These are the kind of things I call avoidable landminds

The easy solution is there are no auctions. Make it simple. Draftees are all free agents, and are free to go wherever. But as OP said, the worst record gets the most rookie cap space, and so on down. So a top rookie is free to sign with Golden state for $1 million, or Boston (via brooklyn) for $8 million

I don't know, I personally have liked the fact that drafts are held throughout the major sports. I don't think I'd like it as much as a general free agency

JB2 · Post #26 » by **JB2** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:52 am

The idea is really interesting. It would create such an exciting draft period. I like it a lot. Just don't call it an auction.

However, I don't believe this current system is as broken as people make it out to seem. There could and should be some tweaks, but it's not terrible. In fact, if the bottom feeders have effective GM's who can make the right calls and/or be aggressive not just rely on lucky draft picks to hit, it's very fluid system. Problem is that many owners really don't care as long as they're making money and GM's are too scared to rock the boat or they are under strict owner instituted monetary constraints.

Sark · Post #27 » by **Sark** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:22 am

Why not just let all players coming into the league pick and choose where they want to play, like they do in the NCAA, so that players have to be recruited. It works for the NCAA. It's the most capitalist way to do it. The entire idea of a draft is about as anti capitalist as can be.

Dame Lizard · Post #28 » by **Dame Lizard** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:50 am

Super cool idea OP.

Would be hilarious though when the next Lebron came along, and teams were acquiring tokens in whatever way possible, so that they could drop 25% of all available tokens to land #1.

PerkinsFor3 · Post #29 » by **PerkinsFor3** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:33 am

kbitboc · Post #30 » by **kbitboc** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:34 am

Fun idea. How will the cost of each player be determined?

DanishLakerFan · Post #31 » by **DanishLakerFan** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:59 am

Love the idea of a change to the current crappy draft system.

Using tokens - or pokerchips - would be great. Teams should get X amount of tokens based on the wins and losses and should be able to bid whatever amount on whoever they choose.

I dont think the highest bidder should win though, but rather have the best odds of getting the player between the 5 (?) highest bids.

The teams that miss out get back their tokens, which can be used on the next guys in the draft. In order for a playoff team to get in on the highest ranked players they would have to have saved up trade chips over a couple of seasons - or trade for extra chips - in order to outbid some of the bad teams that were given more tokens due to their bad record.

Da ThRONe · Post #32 » by **Da ThRONe** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:20 am

All the merit this idea presents are worthless because the draft is big on tv and something like this likely wouldn't be.

Andri · Post #33 » by **Andri** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 11:37 am

Da ThRONe wrote:All the merit this idea presents are worthless because the draft is big on tv and something like this likely wouldn't be.

Complete opposite.

The "Auction" (or whatever it would be called due to political correctness) would be huge on TV.

Apart from that, it is the first time I read a viable proposal that is simple and improves the current system.

HeatedEnd · Post #34 » by **HeatedEnd** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:28 pm

So are we talking about something similar to how the MLB international pool is done? Where teams get to spend more the worst their record is.

To all the slavery jokes, the current system isn't that much different to slavery either.

Da ThRONe · Post #35 » by **Da ThRONe** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:38 pm

Andri wrote:
Da ThRONe wrote:All the merit this idea presents are worthless because the draft is big on tv and something like this likely wouldn't be.

Complete opposite.

The "Auction" (or whatever it would be called due to political correctness) would be huge on TV.

Apart from that, it is the first time I read a viable proposal that is simple and improves the current system.

How would it play on tv that's so great that it surpasses the current draft format? There's essentially no rounds therefore there's no set time limit. Will the auction be held by alphabetical order? So Ben Simmons is going to be one of the last guy auctioned?

whitehops · Post #36 » by **whitehops** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:44 pm

am i missing something? the whole premise behind tanking is that it gives worse teams more advantages in the lottery/draft, so it incents them to lose. the auction token thing would still do that.

mudsak · Post #37 » by **mudsak** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:47 pm

ElectricMayhem wrote:Interesting idea. Would teams be required to use tokens for the upcoming draft or could they save them for future years? For example, could even a successful team just save its tokens for 10-15 years and get a top draft pick when they need one? Does the draft end at a set number of picks or when nobody is willing to lay down a single token for a player anymore?

Hmmm... I think that teams would absolutely have to either use their tokens for that season, or trade them (though they could trade them for a team's future tokens. Think about it in terms of the way draft picks work now. If a team decides they don't have anyone they want to draft...they either have to trade the pick, or pick someone...they don't get to just save their draft pick for the following year.

Golabki · Post #38 » by **Golabki** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:50 pm

zimpy27 wrote:Remove the lottery system and create a bidding token system.

Worst team gets most tokens, best gets least. Can trade players for other teams token rights like teams trade picks now.

Teams bid for players with tokens they accrue, similar to fantasy auction drafting. Adds another dimension as teams consider how to get multiple guys in draft instead of opting all tokens for the number one. Also allows teams trading players to get more tokens than the worst team, multiple ways to get the top pick. Reduces tanking. You will still have tanking but teams can pull them selves out of tanking faster.

Much more interesting drafting system IMO. Especially if salaries then need to match bid value.

If the worst team gets the most tokens... why wouldn't you expect just a much tanking?

This idea could get some interesting trades, but I don't see it helping to solve the tanking "problem".

Golabki · Post #39 » by **Golabki** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:51 pm

whitehops wrote:am i missing something? the whole premise behind tanking is that it gives worse teams more advantages in the lottery/draft, so it incents them to lose. the auction token thing would still do that.

Yep - most plans to solve tanking are just more complicated ways of rewarding bad teams for being bad. As long as you reward bad teams for being bad you'll have tanking.

Da ThRONe · Post #40 » by **Da ThRONe** » Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:59 pm

Golabki wrote:
zimpy27 wrote:Remove the lottery system and create a bidding token system.

Worst team gets most tokens, best gets least. Can trade players for other teams token rights like teams trade picks now.

Teams bid for players with tokens they accrue, similar to fantasy auction drafting. Adds another dimension as teams consider how to get multiple guys in draft instead of opting all tokens for the number one. Also allows teams trading players to get more tokens than the worst team, multiple ways to get the top pick. Reduces tanking. You will still have tanking but teams can pull them selves out of tanking faster.

Much more interesting drafting system IMO. Especially if salaries then need to match bid value.

If the worst team gets the most tokens... why wouldn't you expect just a much tanking?

This idea could get some interesting trades, but I don't see it helping to solve the tanking "problem".

Well if "tokens" can be stashed from previous years that make tanking a little less relevant, but as I pointed out in another thread about draft reform and/or anti-tanking. If you are trying to address tanking via draft reform it's not going to work because it misses the point.