Discussion in 'Pistons and NBA' started by mikhail1973, Jun 20, 2013.
Give the best team the no 1 pick.
I think this would just shift which teams are tanking. With this new scenario, there would a bunch of the bottom 10 teams all tanking trying to get into the bottom 5.
Make them free agents.
That would give Bowser an unfair advantage.
This has the potential to be very bad. And knowing how things with the potential to be very bad go in the NBA, probably not a great idea.
The real advantage here is that it doesn't make sense to be the absolute worst team out there. There are some teams which will naturally be bad, but this should get rid of that real fighting to be the worst stuff. Also the smaller spread of odds means you have to consider the revenue impact of being terrible much more than before. I like it, its definitely a step in the right direction.
What would be bad about bidding on players? Just go with a hard cap.
Which would make the exceptions that were created in the past defunct. But maybe they are no longer relevant?
It would be interesting to find the stats on occasions where Bird rights have actually resulted in the team keeping their player because they could pay them more.
It couldn't possibly be worse than the current system.
The reason the league doesn't want to do it is because it would create a system where owners could damage their own interest very easily. Imagine if you could give a max first extension level contract (5yrs 90m) to a guy just finishing his first year of college? Imagine how hamstrung a team would be if it gave that to Olowakandi, Thabeet, Oden, Beasley, Kwame Brown?
I don't like it because this inevitably means there will be similar salary handicaps as the current scale, say the best you can offer is 35m over 5 years, or something similar. In this situation, a team like LAL has a huge advantage over a team like Detroit. They aren't worried about paying a possible superstar 7m a year, because even if he sucks they can just waive the guy and absorb the hit without breaking a sweat.
Seems like similar risks as the current FA system.
BREAKING: Cavaliers Agree To Trade Andrew Wiggins, LeBron James For Kevin Love | The Onion - America's Finest News Source
I am glad this was published by the Onion......America's most trusted news source....
The draft is designed to create parity which results in fan interest. It may need tweaking but nothing this radical.
The more people try to create parity the further they end up from it. Something something hubris and unintended consequences.
I have yet to see any convincing arguments for parity = increased fan interest. The european soccer leagues seem to do pretty good without parity and no one is watching the ones with parity.
If the NBA actually promoted all of its team's instead of Lebron, Lebron, Kobe, Lebron, Melo, Lebron...they'd HAVE fan interest. Instead, now, they have to use gimmicks. If I live in Milwaukee or Phoenix, I'm not watching to see Lebron. If you utilize national marketing campaigns to get other regions and cities more interested (read: in love with their own teams). Fans start caring about people other than the top 2 to 3 guys you keep shoving down their throats and they then have renewed interest and a reason to watch games in Nov. and Dec.
The NBA doesn't even start marketing ITS OWN league until Christmas. Unlike the common theme that the games don't matter, they CAN and DO matter, especially if the NBA (of all groups) starts treating them that way.
It is similar. So essentially it is just adding risk
Well said. By first creating strong, local interest you by default create National interest. Look at the NFL. People die for football, but it is all based solely on their love for their TEAM. Then, that local interest has now morphed into the National conglomerate via fantasy football, MNF, SNF, Thursday games etc.
I really liked the first part of this post, but I stopped reading half way through when you typed two sentences that did not include LeBron or Kobe.
Separate names with a comma.