the lone star Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Interesting. I'd like to see mediocre teams jump up more, that'd be cool. Another idea would be to have the 14 lottery teams play each other in a consolation bracket, and the winner gets the #1 pick. Although I'm not a fan of this, as teams that are truly terrible will be terrible for a long long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kempus Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Any reform is stupid. The worst thing about the current system is that the worst team sometimes doesn't have the top pick. They shouldn't reduce the odds of the worst team getting the top pick. Does nothing to deter tanking or improve competitiveness across the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 3 hours ago, kempus said: Any reform is stupid. The worst thing about the current system is that the worst team sometimes doesn't have the top pick. They shouldn't reduce the odds of the worst team getting the top pick. Does nothing to deter tanking or improve competitiveness across the league. I mean could you imagine if it was legitimately based on record alone? I could see numerous teams with less than 10 wins with the games against each other looking worse than me attempting to play in a pick-up game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kempus Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 27 minutes ago, Raves said: I mean could you imagine if it was legitimately based on record alone? I could see numerous teams with less than 10 wins with the games against each other looking worse than me attempting to play in a pick-up game. Its pretty much already like that in certain games. However, it's the question of punnishing teams for tanking, but also punnishing teams who are legitimately bad. How do you balance that? I think the extent of tanking has also been grossly over exaggerated, with the exception of the 76ers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buno67 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 just make it that the team with the worse record gets the #1 draft pick. Simple as that. A lot of times teams have issues with their tanking and how long it last because the worse team in the league doesnt always get the #1 pick. I think that allows the mid level teams to try for the playoffs. Like stated before, if you are a mid level team, its smarter to not make the playoffs so you could enter the lottery and maybe get lucky to get a better draft pick. Just allow it to go by purely record, those mid level teams will try to make the playoffs, so the players get experience and then make more money by having the playoff income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
11sanchez11 Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 I like it how it is tbh. The bad teams mostly stay w/in 1 pick if where they are supposed to and sometimes a little better team gets lucky and gets in the top 3. A little suspenseful but not too punishing for the real bad teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom cody Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 Never been a fan of the draft lottery. Worst team in the league should get #1 pick, if the same team is #30 overall in back to back years then the team should get the #2 overall pick and the next worst team get the #1 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 I think my main issue is that this is a rule that they will be springing onto teams who have made moves this offseason based on the old system, which affects not just my Cavs but other teams as well. If they do decide to go back to a legit your record is where you pick system, they should have it set to be taking place a couple years ahead so that deals made this offseason with the idea of where opposing teams would be don't get messed up, especially with the way the protection system works out. Most of these protections on picks are put in place specifically with the current lottery system put in place and changing that would completely change the value of those picks. I mean most picks that have meaningful protections are resolved by 2020, so if they did do a change it should take effect then so teams can operate with full knowledge of what to expect. It would almost be like saying that for this upcoming season dunks will be worth 3 points each. Completely changes the way a team will approach their roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 10, 2017 Share Posted September 10, 2017 1 hour ago, tonyto36 said: I'd be for top 1-2 protected. Teams like the Cavaliers should not have been rewarded for being completely inept. So your plan to disincentivize tanking... is to make it so the worst record automatically gets the top pick? You do realize doing that would instantly make teams tank even more right? It's only the chance of NOT getting the top pick with the worst record that prevents every team in the bottom ten from just completely bottoming out to try to get the Lebron/Davis type prospect, heck even a Wiggins/Fultz level guy, because of exactly what you said. The transformative player can change your franchise for 15 years. Having your system would cause half the teams in the league to try to go 0-82 every three or four years. You'd see GMs signing 5'5 division III guys, with no one over 5'6 on the entire roster to guarantee they get Lebron. You HAVE to have the lottery. In the NFL and other leagues you don't because there isn't a universal drop off in value from the #1 pick to the #30 pick like there is in the NBA. Every given year you could get tens of players better than the top 3 picks in the NFL. You will NEVER have anything remotely close to that in the NBA. The lottery is necessary to prevent GMs completely dissolving their roster for star players. You single out the Cavs, but no mention of Philly, Brooklyn, or the Lakers? The Cavs actually made moves to try to get more 1st round picks to get more talent to rebuild after losing a top 2 player of time, they made the trade to take on Baron Davis' contract for their unprotected 1st that got them the #1 overall pick, after 3 years of being bad they did try to improve the 4th year by bringing in Luol Deng in hopes of making the playoffs even if it's the 8th seed. Starting the year after LeBron left the Cavs won, 17 games (2nd worst), 21 games (4th worst), 24 games (3rd worst), and then 33 games (9th worst). The Cavs actually improved every year during after the 1st year and were actually never the worst team in the NBA. Sure they got some luck with lottery, but seriously. I mean why are they inept though? They seemed to be doing everything right. They were good for much of the 90s, had some down years from 99-03, got LeBron that year and the constantly started improving immediately making the playoffs starting in his 3rd year and through his last year with the team where they made whatever moves they could to try and put a championship team that fit his skills around him. Then they started rebuilding. Like seriously? If you don't like the letter that's fine, but they haven't exactly done things wrong besides that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 @tonyto36 they were tanking the first 3 years, that was obvious, it was the 4th year they really tried. They also didn't give out bad contracts, they took on a few bad contracts that were 2-3 years, but they got picks in return for them. They actually never paid a Free Agent good money during those years. You're using perfect hindsight on those players, but during most of their acquisitions as well as most of his time there, they weren't those players, but hey keep using your straw man. You want to say the roster was a joke, but the roster was built around his skillset and you know he had a say in who they brought in. Most of the players they did bring in were coming off good seasons and they were trying to improve the team, unfortunately a few of them didn't pan out in a big way and it put them in a hole. It happens. It's happening right now with Houston and the Ryan Anderson contract. Are the Rockets inept but just happen to luck into OKC not wanting to pay a luxury tax for Harden and CP3 forcing his way out of the Clippers? I mean any franchise that has happened to have a LeBron for the majority of nearly 20 years would be a joke without that player. What do you think the Lakers wouldv'e been without Kobe, oh wait they were a joke for quite a few years even with Kobe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 @tonyto36 Let's see here, Big Z was a center that had a great midrange shot, Jamison was a stretch 4, Varejao was a high energy rebounder that didn't use the ball much, Shaq was mainly in their to help deal with guys like Dwight who was in Orlando at the time and gave Cleveland's bigs trouble. So thinking about it, Jamison and Varejao were both similar players to Love and TT, granted not as good, but they still similar and best they could look to do based the situation. Cleveland made attempts for players, but others paid more or teams were pulling a Danny Ainge and not pulling the trigger on a trade. Also the Heat didn't build a team to put around LeBron. LeBron, Wade, and Bosh conspired in the off-season to play together. Having those 3 players and a bunch of shooters is obviously good. The Cavs tried doing exactly that only it's hard to get 2 players of the caliber of Wade and Bosh to pair with LeBron unless their is collusion between those players to make sure it happens. Or in the Cavs situation the 2nd time, they already had Irving, LeBron decides to come back when they have plenty of cap space and the assets needed to trade for the 3rd in Love. Then what did the Cavs do? They traded picks and players to put more shooters around LeBron, hey look that's the same thing as the first time, only they had a better base because someone like Carlos Boozer doesn't stab the Cavs in the back. They were going to pay him, probably as much as the Jazz did, but they were waiting to get more free agents that year first to improve the team and then were going to pay him. Instead he signs a contract early in FA forcing the Cavs to have to either match his offer and miss out on any other FA or go for FAs that year. Seriously your hate for the Cavs is ridiculous. Are they perfect? No. But they aren't this inept franchise you are making them out to be. Also how are all these EVERY mistake? I'm pretty sure Irving was a good pick, TT has been a key player, most of the other players either were used as assets to get their current team or have been contributors to the team. I guess trading for JR and Shump was a mistake, same with Love. You can try to argue the picking when the Cavs had LeBron the first time, but they were picking near the end of the 1st every year when they had a pick, hard to try to get these transcendent players you are thinking they should've picked. I mean I guess the Cavs shoudl've just drafted KD with their non-existent pick that year, or the #24 if they had the pick. What are you talking about Shaq not being kicked out of town. He got traded because Kobe didn't want him around anymore because it was taking away from his limelight. Then they sucked, then Memphis traded them a championship team, and they've sucked for how many years straight now? I guess they're just rebuilding, right, they're not inept. It's not like they had to trade the player they drafted #2 overall a few years ago just to unload a horrible contract they signed the year before... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raves Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 @tonyto36 How were they terrible for 15 years then get bailed out by LeBron? Are you serious? In the 90s the Cavs were actually good, there was just this guy name Jordan, you know he kind of kept a lot of teams down. They were only bad for about 4 years before they got LeBron and they then get good again, just like any team that gets a franchise player does. Then they were bad again when said player was gone, much like nearly every other team, and got good again when the talent rose again. Seriously I just don't know what you mean. You are trying to argue that the I said the Cavs didn't put shooters aroudn LeBron when that's exactly what they did. Most of the players they signed his first time around were great defensive players that could shoot the 3, then they had the bigs like Z, Shaq, Varejao, and Ben Wallace eventually because teams still played with fairly decent big men back then before it became a league of small ball. You know guys like Garnett, Howard, Shaq, etc. Also Big Z most definitely had a good midrange jumper, the fact you are arguing he didn't tells me you don't know much about the Cavs during that era. You can feel confident but you wouldn't be right about that, except maybe the casual fans, because that seems to be what you are and follow the same mentality. Sure the Cavs were bad those 3-4 years before LeBron's return, but so is every team going through the rebuild. If they were inept because of it then so is Philly, the Lakers, Brooklyn, Atlanta now, I mean seriously your points really don't fit. You keep throwing out random years and changing your qualifications for what is or isn't inept, and keep changing the goal line to fit your argument. Now it's all about Gilbert as an owner and their decisions. So I know what your actual argument is, since you haven't provided any actual evidence to back-up your points, although I've tried to discuss the situations and not just call them blatantly good or bad, giving the context of the situation, but you keep just saying 'Oh they are horrible, they are inept, they make bad moves' but you don't actually address it. So here are some things I would like you to address if you wouldn't mind. 1. How were the Cavs horrible for 15 years until LeBron bailed them out. 2. Why is Dan Gilbert a horrible owner? 3. What are these bad decisions the Cavs have made that makes them inept? 4. Do you actually remember discussing, watching, have looked into the players that were or were not possibly available during LeBron's first stint as well as the landscape of the NBA. These are actually some fairly key points to try to hammer through if we are to have a conversation about this. Right now you really aren't providing anything close besides hyperbole. I'm also not someone who blindly says the Cavs have made nothing but good decisions or that Gilbert is a good owner. I will say that the Letter although obviously stupid in hindsight was meant to rally the fanbase who felt betrayed and devastated that LeBron left the way he did, and it was definitely more the way he decided to leave rather than him just leaving. We all knew he could choose to leave elsewhere, but we could never imagine that he would go on national television to do it, but he has consistently been willing to go into the luxury tax to pay for the players to put a team around LeBron that could win. Have they always made the best decisions? Obviously not, mostly that's been about giving into the games LeBron plays to maintain his control over the organization to make sure he gets his friends paid or his players picked, just like he did with that PG that doesn't even see play anymore for Miami. I personally didn't want the Cavs to go after LeBron the 2nd time around and to instead try to actually build a team with a legit offense under Blatt, but they did and I'm happy for the title obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 get rid of the lotto, give the worst team the top pick, let teams tank if they want, but end the financial bail outs of tanking teams that are going broke. that will stop it really fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deltarich87 Posted September 11, 2017 Share Posted September 11, 2017 There is really nothing good about this proposed change. It won't stop teams from tanking and all it'll accomplish is make bad teams less likely to land a star to get out from the bottom of the league They need to just get rid of the lottery and go by overall record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footbull3196 Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 On 9/10/2017 at 11:14 PM, Raves said: @tonyto36 Let's see here, Big Z was a center that had a great midrange shot, Jamison was a stretch 4, Varejao was a high energy rebounder that didn't use the ball much, Shaq was mainly in their to help deal with guys like Dwight who was in Orlando at the time and gave Cleveland's bigs trouble. So thinking about it, Jamison and Varejao were both similar players to Love and TT, granted not as good, but they still similar and best they could look to do based the situation. Cleveland made attempts for players, but others paid more or teams were pulling a Danny Ainge and not pulling the trigger on a trade. Also the Heat didn't build a team to put around LeBron. LeBron, Wade, and Bosh conspired in the off-season to play together. Having those 3 players and a bunch of shooters is obviously good. The Cavs tried doing exactly that only it's hard to get 2 players of the caliber of Wade and Bosh to pair with LeBron unless their is collusion between those players to make sure it happens. Or in the Cavs situation the 2nd time, they already had Irving, LeBron decides to come back when they have plenty of cap space and the assets needed to trade for the 3rd in Love. Then what did the Cavs do? They traded picks and players to put more shooters around LeBron, hey look that's the same thing as the first time, only they had a better base because someone like Carlos Boozer doesn't stab the Cavs in the back. They were going to pay him, probably as much as the Jazz did, but they were waiting to get more free agents that year first to improve the team and then were going to pay him. Instead he signs a contract early in FA forcing the Cavs to have to either match his offer and miss out on any other FA or go for FAs that year. Seriously your hate for the Cavs is ridiculous. Are they perfect? No. But they aren't this inept franchise you are making them out to be. Also how are all these EVERY mistake? I'm pretty sure Irving was a good pick, TT has been a key player, most of the other players either were used as assets to get their current team or have been contributors to the team. I guess trading for JR and Shump was a mistake, same with Love. You can try to argue the picking when the Cavs had LeBron the first time, but they were picking near the end of the 1st every year when they had a pick, hard to try to get these transcendent players you are thinking they should've picked. I mean I guess the Cavs shoudl've just drafted KD with their non-existent pick that year, or the #24 if they had the pick. What are you talking about Shaq not being kicked out of town. He got traded because Kobe didn't want him around anymore because it was taking away from his limelight. Then they sucked, then Memphis traded them a championship team, and they've sucked for how many years straight now? I guess they're just rebuilding, right, they're not inept. It's not like they had to trade the player they drafted #2 overall a few years ago just to unload a horrible contract they signed the year before... Your posts regarding this topic are completely misinformed and nonsensical. Let me explain to you why we're not haters and our viewpoints are justified Big Z was at the point in time where he was playing 20 mpg and averaging 7 points and 5 rebounds. If this was Big Z from 2005, you would have more of a case for him being an acceptable supporting cast player. It absolutely was not. Varejao was a solid defensive presence that couldn't create offensively for himself and lacked a true post up game. The move for Jamison was solid value wise at the time given the fact that they only gave up Drew Gooden and a 1st round pick to get him, but in the end, the fit was not a solid one especially when you take Jamison's defensive liabilities into account. Comparing Jamison and Varejao to Love and Thompson is laughable at best, especially considering that Love would be FAR more valuable than Jamison if the Cavs could use him properly. Do you really think anyone took a 37 year old Shaq seriously when he only averaged 12 points and 7 rebounds, the lowest marks of his career up to that point? Everyone knew he was only there for depth purposes and his role was going to be minimized. In no way was he brought in to be a "Dwight stopper" or go head to head with him Nobody cares about the fact that they tried to make moves for star players. So did every other team in the league. Did you even consider that a big part of the reason they weren't able to make those moves is because they didn't have the proper assets, players, or young talent to do so due to the position they were already in? Please tell me what they were supposed to possibly trade to bring in a guy that was capable of giving LeBron a much needed boost. Don't worry, I'll wait The Heat already had Wade in place and Bosh had reached an agreement with the Heat before LeBron even signed with Miami. They already had a team set up for him to play with, and then they added pieces around him after he got there that complimented his game. That's COMPLETELY different than lucking into Kyrie irving with the Clippers pick (which, by the way, was projected 8th coming into the lottery as opposed to the Cavs' own 1st round pick, which was projected 2nd), lucking into Andrew Wiggins with what was originally the 9th overall projected pick, and then flipping him for Love once LeBron decided to come back. Sorry, but luck played a MUCH bigger part in LeBron's return to Cleveland than it did in his departure None of the moves the Cavs made after lebron returned can be compared to the moves they made when they originally had him because THEY DIDNT ALREADY HAVE KYRIE AND LOVE IN PLACE IN 2010. They tried to build a team around lebron the first time around by surrounding him with a bunch of role players. What does the Carlos Boozer fiasco have to do with anything regarding this mess? The Cavs were a COMPLETELY inept franchise before LeBron, with LeBron, and after lebron. Comparing them to the rockets is just plain stupid. Look at how much the rockets have improved since Harden's first season. Morey succeeded in bringing in Dwight Howard in free agency at the time he was indisputably the best center in the league. Yes, in the end, it didn't quite work out the way they wanted it to, but they still got a couple of VERY productive seasons out of him and a trip to the Western Conference Finals. Morey also made a very smart move by letting Chandler Parsons go and bringing in Trevor ariza for half the price, even if ariza was just a contract year phonmenon with the Wizards. And guess what? Before ariza signed, they had an agreement to bring in Chris Bosh from Miami, who specifically said "I will sign with houston if LeBron leaves" before Miami eventually offered him a crazy amount of money to stay If you look at the rockets moves this year alone, you can see a world of difference between them and the Cavs. They brought in Eric Gordon, took him out of a starting role, and made him into one of the best bench players in the league and eventually the winner of the 6MOY award. They added Nene for depth purposes, who was surprisingly efficient in his role. Yes, the Ryan Anderson contract was ridiculous, but he actually played well for them for what it's worth. They also brought in Lou Williams as a significant upgrade over Corey Brewer off the bench, and Williams also completely fit their offensive scheme. But most importantly, they let Harden become the main ball handler and gave him total control of the playmaking duties, which led to him having the best season of his career with 29 points, 11 assists, and 8 rebounds per game. That's why they won 55 games last season. Oh, and they just traded for Chris Paul this offseason for relatively cheap, who many still regard as a top 5 PG. Suggesting that the Rockets are a "lucky Harden trade away from being irrelevant", just like the Cavs were a LeBron away from being irrelevant, is absolute GARBAGE The fact of the matter is, the Cavaliers tried to move on without LeBron and, aside from lucking out in the lottery 3 out of 4 years, completely failed to do so due to the situation they had put themselves in. You can hate LeBron for leaving the way he did all you want to, but his decision had merit to it without a doubt. If they weren't trying to win after he left, then why did they sign Andrew bynum and trade for luol Deng and spencer hawes? Oh, and do you think that LeBron seriously considers returning to Cleveland if their pick doesn't jump from 9 to 1 and they land Wiggins? The only thing separating Cleveland from the Kings or Clippers has been LeBron and one of the biggest Finals upsets in NBA history due to (guess who) LeBron. Otherwise, they've been god awful in terms of their management, and once again, it's the reason why there is a significant chance LeBron leaves Cleveland yet again this offseason @tonyto36 fantastic posts regarding this topic. I would have repped them if I wasn't out of likes at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.