KalibakCruel Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I've got a crazy idea to make the NBA a lot more interesting, and it will also fix the massive imbalance between the West and the East: First, add two more teams to the league (revive the Sonics and add another team. I think one for Louisville and/or Kentucky makes sense). Second, scrap the current conferences. Third, establish a World Cup style bracket. Teams would never have a fixed position, and a lottery system would place each team randomly into one of eight 4 team sub conferences. Fourth, may the best team stand!This has a couple of issues. First, as someone else mentioned, there's barely enough talent for 30 teams, 32 would make bunch of teams d-league.Second, logistics. Unless you make the season a lot shorter (which won't happen for money reasons) you'll have teams traveling cross country on short schedules and basically playing like jet lagged zombies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Ayras Lord Commander Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 This has a couple of issues. First, as someone else mentioned, there's barely enough talent for 30 teams, 32 would make bunch of teams d-league.Second, logistics. Unless you make the season a lot shorter (which won't happen for money reasons) you'll have teams traveling cross country on short schedules and basically playing like jet lagged zombies. I know....but frankly the season should be shorter anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KalibakCruel Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 I know....but frankly the season should be shorter anyways. Won't argue there. Season can drag on sometimes. But at the same time i love watching basketball so I'm okay with it lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Thursday Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Legitimately competing for a championship is probably beyond the reach of a lot of teams though; who should instead focus on just being good enough to regularly make playoffs runs in the hopes that some other team makes a desperate deal with them that opens up a short window on more than that. I agree that being between the 5th and 12th best team in your conference is a wasteland for teams that have the potential to be elite, but for the small markets teams its not bad to be the Atlanta Hawks. In other news, Zach Lowe has an article up that the NBA submitted an official proposal revamping the lottery system to the competition committee. There's also still talk about "The Wheel" proposal, but its on the backburner for now. Nobody seems to be talking about one of the biggest things that can be done to prevent tanking - redesigning the rules about pick protection. A team that puts top-X protection on their pick has a strong incentive to try to get a top-X pick, and that's where the most egregious examples of tanking occur. Modify the system so that in all future trades picks can only be protected from the bottom up and you significantly reduce the worst excesses of tanking (while in fact encouraging teams to play well in order to keep their picks). One idea I heard a while back that I think would be interesting is to flat out ban teams from owning a pick that is tied to their own finishing position that year. At the beginning of the year, every team selects another team in the league whose pick they own (team with the worst record gets first choice). They can trade that pick as normal, except they are banned from giving a team its own pick back. You'd get grudge match games where one team holds another team's pick and has extra incentive to win, and there would be much less reason to tank since you are only improving someone else's draft positioning. ST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 The solution to tanking is contraction, which obviously won't happen since even shitty franchises are immensely profitable and the Players Association would never let it happen either. If you ditch 4 teams, the overall quality of the league goes up dramatically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KalibakCruel Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Yeah the NBA just doesn't have enough talent for parity. I don't think there's any other team sport where ONE player can be the difference between you being a contender, and you being in the lottery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlefingers In The Air Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 Football. But it's more position than any particular player: Quarterback. We all said the Colts would suck for years once PFM couldn't play. But we were proven wrong. They just had to have a competent QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Ayras Lord Commander Posted July 16, 2014 Share Posted July 16, 2014 The NBA is also the absolute worst league for player development. The D League and the NCAA are not cutting it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 The solution to tanking is contraction, which obviously won't happen since even shitty franchises are immensely profitable and the Players Association would never let it happen either. If you ditch 4 teams, the overall quality of the league goes up dramatically. Contraction may raise the quality of the league but it doesn't solve tanking. Doesn't matter how many teams there are. If a Lebron James or Kevin Durant is coming out in the draft, teams will fall all over themselves for the chance to draft them. I do like the current proposal though to flatten out lottery odds between the best and worst teams in the lottery. Short of a radical overhaul, I think it does the best job of balancing providing hope to the downtrodden franchises of the NBA, while also not overly incentivizing them to tank. You gonna go against the spirit of the game and alienate your fanbase for a 5% greater chance at Andrew Wiggins? The cost-benefit analysis stops panning out at that point. And yes expand the lottery beyond the first 3 picks. This is just common sense. Philly tanked this year because they knew even if they didn't win the lottery, they'd still almost certainly be picking in the top 3. Their tanking became a guarantee that they'd get an elite prospect instead of the crapshoot we think of it as. Can't believe they haven't changed that sooner, but better late than never. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KalibakCruel Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Football. But it's more position than any particular player: Quarterback. We all said the Colts would suck for years once PFM couldn't play. But we were proven wrong. They just had to have a competent QB. a QB can only make you relevant, not a champion. Flacco and Wilson were the last two winners. Eli beat Brady twice, and Peyton just got demolished. Luck made the Colts decent again, but that team is multiple position players away from competing. Big Ben has been playing arguably the best years of his career lately but without a line to protect him and depth to throw to, Steelers are underachieving.QB is arguably the most important position on the field, but they're not game changers by themselves like in the NBA. LeBron can carry a team to 60 wins alone, QBs still need a line to protect them and a target to throw to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 The Pacers have moved quickly to replace Lance Stephenson with....Rodney Stuckey. Granted he doesn't provide any of Lance's rebounding, playmaking or defense but he does share Lance's tendency to play hero ball. This should be a smooth transition for the Pacers as they're already used to screaming at their SG multiple times a game to stop thinking he's Kobe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Ayras Lord Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Pacers needed Swaggy P. Just sayin! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Pacers needed Swaggy P. Just sayin! You know, the Pacers might be the one team that could win with Nick Young. Now I'm kinda bummed out the Lakers overpaid him so they could lose stylishly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Football. But it's more position than any particular player: Quarterback. We all said the Colts would suck for years once PFM couldn't play. But we were proven wrong. They just had to have a competent QB. Who are you calling 'competent'? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Ayras Lord Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 You know, the Pacers might be the one team that could win with Nick Young Swaggy P. Now I'm kinda bummed out the Lakers overpaid him so they could lose stylishly. I've never heard of Nick Young. Only Swaggy P!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When god comes to you in a dream and says you must be known here after as Swaggy P, you cease to be Nick Young. Doesn't your own signature imply such, Jamie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I actually agree with Jaime about Young. He'd create some weird matchups with Paul George, and probably get 2's playing defense on him when it should really be a 3. Lance played bigger than his size on defense, but he never really caused any matchup issues on offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime L Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 I've never heard of Nick Young. Only Swaggy P!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When god comes to you in a dream and says you must be known here after as Swaggy P, you cease to be Nick Young. Doesn't your own signature imply such, Jamie? My signature only implies God always gets the last laugh. Kinda like the guy Swaggy P is guarding :P I actually agree with Jaime about Young. He'd create some weird matchups with Paul George, and probably get 2's playing defense on him when it should really be a 3. Lance played bigger than his size on defense, but he never really caused any matchup issues on offense. Yeah, true. Also Young can self create on the offensive end, something the Pacers sorely need. And his terrible defense could be covered up somewhat by George and Hibbert. I checked for a second to see if Rich Man's Swaggy P (AKA Jamal Crawford) was still being shopped but looks like he's staying with the Clippers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Ayras Lord Commander Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 My signature only implies God always gets the last laugh. Kinda like the guy Swaggy P is guarding :P Yeah, true. Also Young can self create on the offensive end, something the Pacers sorely need. And his terrible defense could be covered up somewhat by George and Hibbert. I checked for a second to see if Rich Man's Swaggy P (AKA Jamal Crawford) was still being shopped but looks like he's staying with the Clippers. WTF! Nothing more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabronius Maximus Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Pretty lame ESPYs as usual, but I liked this Drake vs Blake thing:https://youtube.com/watch?v=kTYaCBTPRbkDrake with Bill Simmons was my favourite part :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KalibakCruel Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Pretty lame ESPYs as usual, but I liked this Drake vs Blake thing:https://youtube.com/watch?v=kTYaCBTPRbkDrake with Bill Simmons was my favourite part :lol:This was legitimately funny..except for Chris Brown...That was weird, at the end the whole "America's sweetheart" comment...just like, really bad taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.