September 29, 20179 yr NBA Draft Reform -The Ringer Those organizations’ odds at getting a pick in the top three dip, as well: The bottom three teams will all have a 40 percent chance at a top-three pick, as opposed to 64 percent, 56 percent, and 47 percent, respectively, from the current model. So a team could be the absolute worst in the entire league—we’re talking last season Brooklyn Nets bad—and it will have less than a 50 percent chance at cracking the top three. The team that finishes second-worst is not even fully guaranteed to hit within the top five anymore; now there’s a 20 percent chance it does not. I'm a fan. Your thoughts?
September 29, 20179 yr Stupid. It was fine the way it was. If you're going to change it up, just go to the straight-forward worst to first method.
September 29, 20179 yr Author Stupid. It was fine the way it was. If you're going to change it up, just go to the straight-forward worst to first method. But then how could they rig the draft?
September 29, 20179 yr I think its rather dumb how the NBA drafts in the first place. Team that finishes last should get the first pick. However they should also take a hit against their cap for finishing last.
September 29, 20179 yr Author I think its rather dumb how the NBA drafts in the first place. Team that finishes last should get the first pick. However they should also take a hit against their cap for finishing last. What's the precedent for that?
September 29, 20179 yr What's the precedent for that? That way you penalize the tankers to get the pick. You get the first pick but, lose x amount in the cap, and then stair step the hit on the cap up to a certian level, say pick 10. (just throwing out a number)
September 29, 20179 yr Author That way you penalize the tankers to get the pick. You get the first pick but, lose x amount in the cap, and then stair step the hit on the cap up to a certian level, say pick 10. (just throwing out a number) That works against making those teams better and keeping them out of the lottery by taking money that could be spent on bigger contract players. From my perspective, the idea is to remove some of the incentive for losing. Not punish teams.
September 29, 20179 yr That works against making those teams better and keeping them out of the lottery by taking money that could be spent on bigger contract players. From my perspective, the idea is to remove some of the incentive for losing. Not punish teams. How so, if they want/need the cap money the team has to perform better and earn those funds back. Cant sit in the basement for years and years.
September 29, 20179 yr Author How so, if they want/need the cap money the team has to perform better and earn those funds back. Cant sit in the basement for years and years. Yeah, go tell the Sixers to quit sandbagging. I'm sure that would have gotten them out of the cellar.
October 2, 20179 yr How so, if they want/need the cap money the team has to perform better and earn those funds back. Cant sit in the basement for years and years. It's not that easy.
October 2, 20179 yr Author It's not that easy. Are you kidding?! The Nets should totally be in contention by now.
October 2, 20179 yr Are you kidding?! The Nets should totally be in contention by now. Can't tell if serious :idunno:
October 2, 20179 yr Author Can't tell if serious :idunno: They gave up Gerald Wallace, Kris Humphries, MarShon Brooks, Kieth Bogans, and unprotected 1sts in '14, '16, and '18. Does that sound like a trade that would make a team contenders?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.