11 Teams hold 75% of tradable draft picks

[shrink]

Read on Twitter

“10% of the entire 2029 first round!”

So they added two picks. Big deal. Seems like people using semantics to enrage.

[GoBobs]

This 3-2-1 system is so needlessly complicated

It is so........ Dumb

Teams are still going to try to get in this slot or that slot. Why not just flatten the odds?

HOw can they be this dumb?

make it make sense..... lol...

[Daddy 801]

This is bad. Teams are gonna try to copy OKC model and just hoard picks when it really doesn’t work that way.

But it does work. That’s why teams are doing it.

Not anymore. Not with these new rules.

How so? It’s literally been working and allows any team once they get good to continue to stay relevant. OKC and Spurs and use those picks to continue getting depth or they can trade for a Giannis level player if they want. As a Jazz fan I know it’s what could potentially get us another star. If Ant or Donovan leave the picks and swaps we own are going to be valuable. Nothing about the rule changes sinus he’s those picks. In fact, in the case of OKC, Spurs, and Jazz (who won’t be in lotto anymore) the rule changes are beneficial because a pick from another team has a higher chance of moving up.

[JN61]

Aren't they changing the draft rules anyways so they can award Lakers and Knicks n 1 picks of the future out of blue?

[Sane]

11 teams is 36% of the NBA. Why wouldn’t they hold most of the picks? They contain mostly losing teams.

What’s really interesting about the NBA is there are winning teams now who intelligently hold a lot of picks that aren’t their own. Never used to be the case, contenders used to piss these away.

[Sixers in 4]

No here is the issue with fixing this. Big market teams will just pay less for stars in trades. No team trades their star players unless they are forced to.

[JonFromVA]

I think one of the issues that most bothers me is that some teams (looking at you OKC) literally don't have the roster spots to even house all the draft picks they own.

Meaning a number of the draftees (new and past) will not get the development, reps, PT they'd normally receive if the picks were evenly distributed among the league. There'll be dozens of 19-20 year-olds the next few seasons who will fall out of the league after a rookie contract -- simply because they needed more time to develop but couldn't get it on an already overly young roster.

A ton of young guys will become NBA vagabonds as a result.



Let's call it "The Pokusevski Paradigm".

It's an opportunity to collect those players at a discount and build something special like when the Pistons managed to snag Billups, Hamilton, and the two Wallaces at low cost via free-agency and trades.

[Jamaaliver]

It's an opportunity to collect those players at a discount and build something special like when the Pistons managed to snag Billups, Hamilton, and the two Wallaces at low cost via free-agency and trades.

[clippertown]

It’s a tough call. Personally, I hate the lack of limits on future draft picks. If you offer a maximum of 20 future picks, teams will all ask for them.

The Clippers are a case study. They gave up so many picks for PG13 but have remained competitive during that time. Would the picks and SGA have been a better path, sure, but the team still over-achieved during that time. They certainly did better than many of the teams that were struggling at the time and are still struggling today while trying to build through the draft. From a fan perspective, knowing how terrible the Clippers are at drafting, I would rather have the Clippers recent history vs Utah or Portland for example. The enormous number of picks traded was the key.

[Lalouie]

Is this good or bad for the league?

Can a league survive with 2/3 of the teams unable to rebuild through the draft properly?

Is it time for a revised Stepien Rule to protect Front Offices from themselves?

Read on Twitter

if you favor parity then this is what you want because that will mean roughly speaking that these 11 teams will own between 22 and 23 players in the draft. that also means that some of those 22 or 23 players will also include lottery picks.

if we count the number of teams that we consider as contenders there's but a handful. this year there's the Celtics, knick's, could have been sixers, Cleveland, Detroit, OKC, Spurs, and Denver. that's only eight teams and really only two that stand out, that is, as of right now.

this means there will be more teams involved, and some of these very 8 will also get a boost, where before there's a good chance they would have drafted at the end of the draft. that is, philosophically and broadly speaking, the more teams you add with improved pick slots the better. because realistically speaking even in this year's parity there's only ever really FOUR teams that matter

and now you can double that..... there is no such thing as League wide parity, but you can deepen the postseason contenders. frankly I would think that the 11 involved is rather an anomaly because most of them are bad teams. I would expect that in any normal year having access to quantity would be held by a more even distribution of good and bad teams instead of the 3/11 ratio here

[Cavsfansince84]

This 3-2-1 system is so needlessly complicated

It is so........ Dumb

Teams are still going to try to get in this slot or that slot. Why not just flatten the odds?

HOw can they be this dumb?

make it make sense..... lol...

It makes sense because the lottery is only for the top 3-4 spots. After that it goes by record. So if you want to guarantee your team a top 5 pick by virtue of being the worst team by w-l you also get a slightly worse chance at getting the top 3-4 picks. It will be ok bro.

[garrick]

It's bad when a team like SAS or OKC hoards picks for years and then starts becoming really good.

With the second apron rules the smart teams are going to hold on to their picks while the stupid teams will trade away their assets for short term relief like Phoenix and be left in a huge hole because they have very few picks remaining and a team could in theory trade a pick every other year and pick swap the remaining picks so that they are never drafting in the lottery no matter how bad their record is.

The league needs to do a better job of protecting stupid teams from destroying themselves and hurting their fans by being stuck with garbage teams with no real way to improve the roster. You can no longer really build via free agency because your bench needs to be filled by a lot of cheap rookie contracts otherwise you are hitting the luxury tax if you want a decent roster around your star player.

[durden_tyler]

Not the fault of the smart teams that they took advantage of dumb teams.

[Myth]

Saying a team has 13.3% of the entire first round sounds a lot more significant than saying a team has 4 picks in that first round.

Yep. Not only that, how often does a team draft 4 players at once? They’ll consolidate when the time gets closer, either for active players, to move up, or simply push back to another draft year.

[Daddy 801]

No here is the issue with fixing this. Big market teams will just pay less for stars in trades. No team trades their star players unless they are forced to.

That only works if every other small market teams also refuses to pay. It’s a bidding war. LA doesn’t want to pay what (fill in the blank team) will pay, then you don’t trade with LA. LA can’t choose to have the issue go away by making low ball offers.

[Daddy 801]

It's bad when a team like SAS or OKC hoards picks for years and then starts becoming really good.

With the second apron rules the smart teams are going to hold on to their picks while the stupid teams will trade away their assets for short term relief like Phoenix and be left in a huge hole because they have very few picks remaining and a team could in theory trade a pick every other year and pick swap the remaining picks so that they are never drafting in the lottery no matter how bad their record is.

The league needs to do a better job of protecting stupid teams from destroying themselves and hurting their fans by being stuck with garbage teams with no real way to improve the roster. You can no longer really build via free agency because your bench needs to be filled by a lot of cheap rookie contracts otherwise you are hitting the luxury tax if you want a decent roster around your star player.

Why should the league be forced to fix a bad front office?

[rand]

It's bad when a team like SAS or OKC hoards picks for years and then starts becoming really good.

With the second apron rules the smart teams are going to hold on to their picks while the stupid teams will trade away their assets for short term relief like Phoenix and be left in a huge hole because they have very few picks remaining and a team could in theory trade a pick every other year and pick swap the remaining picks so that they are never drafting in the lottery no matter how bad their record is.

The league needs to do a better job of protecting stupid teams from destroying themselves and hurting their fans by being stuck with garbage teams with no real way to improve the roster. You can no longer really build via free agency because your bench needs to be filled by a lot of cheap rookie contracts otherwise you are hitting the luxury tax if you want a decent roster around your star player.

Why should the league be forced to fix a bad front office?

Agree. Well-managed franchises which know how to assess risk deserve to triumph over the shot taking mediocrities.

As for the fans, well they must suffer.

[Sixers in 4]

No here is the issue with fixing this. Big market teams will just pay less for stars in trades. No team trades their star players unless they are forced to.

That only works if every other small market teams also refuses to pay. It’s a bidding war. LA doesn’t want to pay what (fill in the blank team) will pay, then you don’t trade with LA. LA can’t choose to have the issue go away by making low ball offers.

I don't know what you're talking about. Star players nearing the end of their contracts frequently decide where they will go. How many of these big trades have gone to small market teams? There are a few but most go big market teams. Just being real who this helps.

I don’t think big market teams need any more advantages than they already have. Nobody’s making them give up all their picks. They can do a proper rebuild, and building through the draft is the only way small market teams can compete and survive. This discussion is looking for solutions to a non-existent problem.

[Pointgod]

Saying a team has 13.3% of the entire first round sounds a lot more significant than saying a team has 4 picks in that first round.

Yep. Not only that, how often does a team draft 4 players at once? They’ll consolidate when the time gets closer, either for active players, to move up, or simply push back to another draft year.

Nets say hold my beer

[baldur]

So?
Should we implement communism in the nba?