2017-18 official NBA discussion thread

[bmags]

I don't know what it is. But in baseball, there's the allure of letting these players getting a chance to play and see how they do, even if terrible, and if some are too good you trade them for some more players to play in the minors. But there are minors to pay attention to.

 

In NBA, it's mainly the "we are going to try and be so bad we will literally just bench any players too good". And because of the lack of positions, there's less of a flow of "just need a chance" players to try their hand.

 

I guess its mainly that MLB has the basic premise of development, whereas NBA tankers right now literally just seem to want to cancel their season if it means #1 pick.

 

And I'm not saying it doesn't make sense, the difference between picking #6 overall and #1 in baseball is big but not that big, not "you are screwed for another year" big. But in NBA terms it's basically like "wellp, gotta skip next season too".

 

I still think my rewarding the best of the worst is better than this crap.

[Chisoxfn]

It's pretty close to the only way. That's the problem, and more teams are doing it. People pay a lot of money to watch the NBA . Tanking not only ruins the games for the fans of the teams trying to lose, it makes the games these teams are involved in vs. teams actually trying way less interesting and entertaining.

 

They actually went to the lottery because teams weren't trying. Now it is getting worse. I wouldn't mind making all non playoff teams given equal odds on the draft. Make it all ping pong balls, no guarantees one way or the other. You can tank or you can win 40 games, you might pick 1st, you might pick in the teens.

 

I am sick of rewarding losing.

I legit think the proposal you outline is what will happen (maybe not exactly even weighting, but pretty close to even weighting). The one spot you have to be careful is you don't want to have teams in the playoff picture bottoming out and not wanting to make the playoffs (because a 9 seed is way better than an 8 seed). Either way Tanking has gotten so bad. And whomever commented on Lakers fans embracing the tank..the was true for a year or two, right now most Laker fans are begging to get back to the 8th spot. They have only one way of getting to the top right now and that is winning big in free agency or getting lucky in the draft (since they don't have their pick in this years draft...just the Cavs). Their core they drafted (with lots of high picks) is flat out not good enough nor does it project to be very good. Pretty much every Laker fan I know is depressed about their future and resigned to the fact that their only way forward is selling the LA shtick and hoping James just wants to come to Hollywood. Otherwise they are basically resigned to the fact that they'll overpay some good players who will make them a mediocre playoff team (and provide minimal upside).

 

Knicks fans are not excited about a "tank". They have tanked for the last 20 years (or so it feels). They have flat out sucked every which way.

 

Bulls fans are excited now...but if they are in the spot the Lakers are in 3 years from now, they too will be begging for a Hinrich / Ben Gordon / Luol Deng Bulls team that is at least respectable.

[southsider2k5]

At some point in time, there will be a fan revolt with the idea that paying full price for halfassed [insert sport here] is bulls***, and people aren't going to want to pay it anymore. I think that is what all professional sports organizations are trying to avoid. I can't imagine paying full price for a Bulls ticket right now as they intentionally sending guys like Cam Payne and Jerian Grant out there, while benching Zach Levine.

[Jenksismyhero]

At some point in time, there will be a fan revolt with the idea that paying full price for halfassed [insert sport here] is bulls***, and people aren't going to want to pay it anymore. I think that is what all professional sports organizations are trying to avoid. I can't imagine paying full price for a Bulls ticket right now as they intentionally sending guys like Cam Payne and Jerian Grant out there, while benching Zach Levine.

 

But that's on the organization, right? Not the actual practice or strategy of tanking. If the Bulls agreed to cut their prices in half for a rebuild, they could. But (1) Bulls fans still show up to see these young Bulls or (2) they show up to see the other team (like Simmons/Embid, Lebron, etc). So the Bulls can still sell the tickets and make money. And to be fair to the Bulls, they're being as open and honest about this as they can without pulling a Cuban and getting fined for coming out and saying the work "tank."

 

I have yet you run into a Bulls fan or hear a Chicago media personality complain about what the Bulls are doing. EVERYONE is in agreement that they need to tank as hard as possible. No one cares that they're not winning. No one cares that they've benched two starter-quality players. No one cares that they traded away Mirotic to make the team worse in the short term.

 

I just don't see why the NBA cares. They created this mess by allowing super teams to exist in the first place. And their basic model has been to have dynasties with super star players anyway. So competitive balance is a very weak argument because there has never been competitive balance.

[Jenksismyhero]

I legit think the proposal you outline is what will happen (maybe not exactly even weighting, but pretty close to even weighting). The one spot you have to be careful is you don't want to have teams in the playoff picture bottoming out and not wanting to make the playoffs (because a 9 seed is way better than an 8 seed). Either way Tanking has gotten so bad. And whomever commented on Lakers fans embracing the tank..the was true for a year or two, right now most Laker fans are begging to get back to the 8th spot. They have only one way of getting to the top right now and that is winning big in free agency or getting lucky in the draft (since they don't have their pick in this years draft...just the Cavs). Their core they drafted (with lots of high picks) is flat out not good enough nor does it project to be very good. Pretty much every Laker fan I know is depressed about their future and resigned to the fact that their only way forward is selling the LA shtick and hoping James just wants to come to Hollywood. Otherwise they are basically resigned to the fact that they'll overpay some good players who will make them a mediocre playoff team (and provide minimal upside).

 

Knicks fans are not excited about a "tank". They have tanked for the last 20 years (or so it feels). They have flat out sucked every which way.

Bulls fans are excited now...but if they are in the spot the Lakers are in 3 years from now, they too will be begging for a Hinrich / Ben Gordon / Luol Deng Bulls team that is at least respectable.

 

That's not totally true. They've handed out some awful contracts in an attempt to win over the years. Things haven't panned out, but it's not because they purposefully tanked and drafted poorly.

 

Teams like Sacramento and Orlando have "tanked" year after year and still aren't any good. But it's tough to argue that the strategy doesn't work when other s*** franchises, like Seattle/Oklahoma and Golden State, sucked for a few years and came away with multiple hall of fame caliber players and are now at the top of the league.

 

[southsider2k5]

But that's on the organization, right? Not the actual practice or strategy of tanking. If the Bulls agreed to cut their prices in half for a rebuild, they could. But (1) Bulls fans still show up to see these young Bulls or (2) they show up to see the other team (like Simmons/Embid, Lebron, etc). So the Bulls can still sell the tickets and make money. And to be fair to the Bulls, they're being as open and honest about this as they can without pulling a Cuban and getting fined for coming out and saying the work "tank."

 

I have yet you run into a Bulls fan or hear a Chicago media personality complain about what the Bulls are doing. EVERYONE is in agreement that they need to tank as hard as possible. No one cares that they're not winning. No one cares that they've benched two starter-quality players. No one cares that they traded away Mirotic to make the team worse in the short term.

 

I just don't see why the NBA cares. They created this mess by allowing super teams to exist in the first place. And their basic model has been to have dynasties with super star players anyway. So competitive balance is a very weak argument because there has never been competitive balance.

 

Not necesarily Bulls specific, but more general. Once people stop showing up, the party is over.

[southsider2k5]

But that's on the organization, right? Not the actual practice or strategy of tanking. If the Bulls agreed to cut their prices in half for a rebuild, they could. But (1) Bulls fans still show up to see these young Bulls or (2) they show up to see the other team (like Simmons/Embid, Lebron, etc). So the Bulls can still sell the tickets and make money. And to be fair to the Bulls, they're being as open and honest about this as they can without pulling a Cuban and getting fined for coming out and saying the work "tank."

I have yet you run into a Bulls fan or hear a Chicago media personality complain about what the Bulls are doing. EVERYONE is in agreement that they need to tank as hard as possible. No one cares that they're not winning. No one cares that they've benched two starter-quality players. No one cares that they traded away Mirotic to make the team worse in the short term.

 

I just don't see why the NBA cares. They created this mess by allowing super teams to exist in the first place. And their basic model has been to have dynasties with super star players anyway. So competitive balance is a very weak argument because there has never been competitive balance.

 

This is also a s***ty standard. Two things actually matter. What are their ratings, and what are their ticket sales. Right now I can go to a game for $34. When was the last time that happened? That is about the price of a baseball ticket for a White Sox game. I am also going to bet that their no-shows rate is as high as it has been in a long time.

[Jenksismyhero]

Not necesarily Bulls specific, but more general. Once people stop showing up, the party is over.

 

Possibly, but I don't think it'll get to that point. I think the average NBA fan, the ones that would actually buy a ticket, understand what the teams are trying to do. There's nothing to gain from being a good, bad team. And so long as the franchise has a direction, it should be allowed.

 

The White Sox are a perfect example. We all begged them to tank and rebuild for years. And now instead of heading in the same direction with little to no hope for the future, there's some exciting light at the end of the tunnel. Everyone fan I know was fine sucking last year and will be fine when they suck this year. We know the plan and see the potential future.

 

I think fan reaction is the same in the NBA.

[southsider2k5]

Possibly, but I don't think it'll get to that point. I think the average NBA fan, the ones that would actually buy a ticket, understand what the teams are trying to do. There's nothing to gain from being a good, bad team. And so long as the franchise has a direction, it should be allowed.

 

The White Sox are a perfect example. We all begged them to tank and rebuild for years. And now instead of heading in the same direction with little to no hope for the future, there's some exciting light at the end of the tunnel. Everyone fan I know was fine sucking last year and will be fine when they suck this year. We know the plan and see the potential future.

 

I think fan reaction is the same in the NBA.

 

The White Sox had another attendance drop in 2017, and the 2nd worst TV ratings in all of baseball, which fell again last year. So while you can claim "support", fans aren't really supporting it in their consumption of baseball.

[southsider2k5]

I can also mention that "embracing" the Bulls tank has translated into a loss of about 1000 fans per game, or a 5ish% drop in attendance. They are drawing their lowest attendance since 2005. They are also in danger of losing their attendance crown for the first time in about a decade.

[Jenksismyhero]

Are you worried about rich people losing money? Who cares what the attendance is.

[Dick Allen]

Are you worried about rich people losing money? Who cares what the attendance is.

It is how it starts. And then can snowball. What happens if the Bulls get the 8th pick and something in the teens with NOs pick and get a guy with Hinrich like impact and another Noah Vonleh? Do they tell LaVine, Laurie and Dunn to take next year off so they can lose some more and try it again?

 

Trust the process is currently a 7th seed. NBA hell still with all those top picks.

[Chisoxfn]

That's not totally true. They've handed out some awful contracts in an attempt to win over the years. Things haven't panned out, but it's not because they purposefully tanked and drafted poorly.

 

Teams like Sacramento and Orlando have "tanked" year after year and still aren't any good. But it's tough to argue that the strategy doesn't work when other s*** franchises, like Seattle/Oklahoma and Golden State, sucked for a few years and came away with multiple hall of fame caliber players and are now at the top of the league.

The Warriors did not tank. Klay, Durant (FA), and Draymond had nothing to do with tanking. Even Steph wasn't that high of a pick. OKC was rebuilt...not sure if they tanked, they happened to just be bad and capitalized on their picks during a window of bad. Tanking and being bad/rebuilding are two very different things to me.

[Bananarchy]

I can also mention that "embracing" the Bulls tank has translated into a loss of about 1000 fans per game, or a 5ish% drop in attendance. They are drawing their lowest attendance since 2005. They are also in danger of losing their attendance crown for the first time in about a decade.

So you're telling me the team has to be this bad for attendance to drop? Wow.

 

They could be an 8-10 seed in the east and shoot back up in attendance again. Good choice by the FO to rebuild.

[Dick Allen]

There's a difference between being bad because of rebuilding, and flat out trying to lose. Again, if the Bulls select 8th next year and get a good, but not franchise type player, and get a typical mid first rounder with the NO pick, do they bench all of their good players again next year so they will lose? At what point does it stop? Other teams will surely be trying to lose. A contest to see who can be the worst should not be rewarded. I get it's the correct thing to do, but the league needs to change it immediately.

 

This doesn't interest people. It's basically playing exhibition games. No one really cares about those.

Edited February 28, 2018 by Dick Allen

[Brian]

That stupid 7 game win streak earlier in the season pisses me off even more now.

[Jenksismyhero]

The Warriors did not tank. Klay, Durant (FA), and Draymond had nothing to do with tanking. Even Steph wasn't that high of a pick. OKC was rebuilt...not sure if they tanked, they happened to just be bad and capitalized on their picks during a window of bad. Tanking and being bad/rebuilding are two very different things to me.

 

A 7th (Steph), 6th (Udoh, a bust), Klay (11th) and Harrison Barnes (6th) helped them. They obviously lucked into Draymond, made good moves grabbing Livingston and Iguodala, and then signed KD after they were already great. Whether they tanked or not, my point was that being bad for consecutive years is a path to being good again. What doesn't' work is when you're in NBA hell like Memphis, Indiana, Washington, etc. Teams that have one or two good players but no great players and you just continue to draft in the 20's. Sure, you sell tickets but you're never going to be a legit threat to compete.

 

I guess I don't see much difference between tanking and being bad and rebuilding. Tanking is a smart part of rebuilding. Like I said before, there's nothing to gain from being a good, bad team. You want to be a horrible team so you get the best possible prospect moving forward. So long as a franchise does it openly, so long as it's not for an extended period of time and so long as there's a clear plan in place, I think it's a perfectly acceptable practice.

[Y2Jimmy0]

So you're telling me the team has to be this bad for attendance to drop? Wow.

 

They could be an 8-10 seed in the east and shoot back up in attendance again. Good choice by the FO to rebuild.

 

 

Bulls are currently leading the league in attendance again

[Y2Jimmy0]

That stupid 7 game win streak earlier in the season pisses me off even more now.

 

 

It should. If they went even 4-3 in those games they'd have 17 wins right now and the #1 pick in the draft

[Dick Allen]

It should. If they went even 4-3 in those games they'd have 17 wins right now and the #1 pick in the draft

They would have the best odds at the #1 pick.

 

The ironic thing is the draft lottery was created to stop all the losing on purpose. It's a league were very few teams have a legit shot. If this is allowed to continue, someday 20 + teams may be trying to lose.

[Harry Chappas]

Every non-playoff team should have an equal shot at any draft pick in the lottery.

 

Not really complex.

[Quin]

Every non-playoff team should have an equal shot at any draft pick in the lottery.

 

Not really complex.

 

Then #7 and #8 seeds try to tank in.

 

Maybe equal odds, but you can't have a top 5 pick in consecutive years

[Jenksismyhero]

I think they should keep the system as is, but add a rule that you can't pick in the lottery more than 2 years in a row. So you get two chances, then you're bumped down to #15.

[Soxbadger]

I think they should keep the system as is, but add a rule that you can't pick in the lottery more than 2 years in a row. So you get two chances, then you're bumped down to #15.

 

 

This is a good start, but I think fairer would be you cant be top 5 in 2 straight drafts (unless you pick obtained via trade.) 15 is too harsh.

[Y2Jimmy0]

I think they should let the team with the worst record have the #1 pick but 14th worst should pick 2nd, 2nd worst should pick 3rd, 13th worst should pick 4th etc. This would stop some of it IMO.