|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 14, 2021 2:31:59 GMT
Good day. May I suggest something that at the very least, provides a potential reason to at least be happy to be at the middle for one season.
Rule: A team who will complete three straight seasons as one of the seven worst teams via record, will be penalized by reducing their hard cap by $10M in the 2nd and 3rd season, after incurring the streak.
Example: Clippers is in the running of completing the streak. If it did complete it, by 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 season, the hard cap for the Clippers will be reduced by $10M. If, for example, the hard cap is $140M, for the Clippers during those seasons, it will be $130M.
I think, 2nd and 3rd season and $10M, is the most balanced combination where tankers will, at the very least, feel it.
Realistic? - This is in a way, represents the reality that tanking or being a bad team is a very bad to the finances of an NBA franchise. So, the point is, a minimum of three straight losing season should realistically reduced the financial capacity of a franchise in the medium term. Thus reducing the hard cap will represent some financial restrictions to that effect.
Like the 76ers in real life. One of the biggest franchises in the league who tanked the hardest in this modern times, is now in-line for their first luxury tax, five years after they fired Hinkie, eight years after they hired him.
______________ Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 14, 2021 2:55:32 GMT
How about you get a badge/icon next to your GM name? haha
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 14, 2021 11:45:14 GMT
I support this rule, this is without a doubt the biggest issue we need to address in D5
|
|
|
Post by George Gervin on Apr 14, 2021 13:19:37 GMT
Not sure I love your example of the Clippers given they literally lost two #1 overall selections that would’ve been Doncic and LaMelo Ball had they not traded those picks so as to compete when they had a pretty impactful veteran core that was regularly in the playoffs. Sometimes shit happens with vets who fall apart, but the Clips went for broke and it didn’t work out.
Maybe a better example of your point is the Wizards, who their win totals the last six D5 seasons (have not been higher than 11th in the East in this window) are: 31, 28, 22, 27, 29, and 33.
Edit: The Wiz projected record this season would be 19-63 at their current win percentage, so that’d be a seventh straight year missing the playoffs and 5/7 with 29 wins or fewer.
|
|
Kevin Hollis
Former Thunder GM for 7 years
All Star
Posts: 2,838
Dec 16, 2022 11:27:40 GMT
|
Post by Kevin Hollis on Apr 14, 2021 13:56:47 GMT
I don't understand how squeezing tanking teams from a money perspective will make a difference. If anything, it will only make the team worse and continue to tank. If you want to stop the tanking yoy, then you would probably have to fuck with the draft percentages or some kind of factor that moves them back x spots based on years of tanking.
Just a thought. Not sure how else to fix it.
|
|
|
Post by George Gervin on Apr 14, 2021 13:59:22 GMT
I don't understand how squeezing tanking teams from a money perspective will make a difference. If anything, it will only make the team worse and continue to tank. If you want to stop the tanking yoy, then you would probably have to fuck with the draft percentages or some kind of factor that moves them back x spots based on years of tanking. Just a thought. Not sure how else to fix it. Hmmmm— you mean something like this potentially, which is the most radical way to eliminate tanking grantland.com/the-triangle/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 14, 2021 14:14:55 GMT
I don't understand how squeezing tanking teams from a money perspective will make a difference. If anything, it will only make the team worse and continue to tank. If you want to stop the tanking yoy, then you would probably have to fuck with the draft percentages or some kind of factor that moves them back x spots based on years of tanking. Just a thought. Not sure how else to fix it. I have more radical ideas but knowing that I am outnumbered, I decided to present a much more acceptable path for the mean time. As what you have said, it is not really that game-changing but for me right now, just a little bit of penalty, just a little bit of reason to at least shorten all-out tanking, is better than not having anything. I think, this one is not asking that much Ian Noble ? What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Brian Scalabrine on Apr 14, 2021 14:46:11 GMT
This is terrible idea that will only backfire and make tanking worse.
Taking away cap space from bad teams will only make them even more unable to acquire talent and tank even harder.
|
|
|
Post by Andrei Kirilenko on Apr 14, 2021 14:48:40 GMT
only tankers disagreeing with this rule again
|
|
|
Post by James Kay on Apr 14, 2021 14:52:54 GMT
only tankers disagreeing with this rule again I haven’t disagreed yet bc I thought this was a joke
|
|
|
Post by Alex English on Apr 14, 2021 15:34:17 GMT
I agree this wouldn't be effective. It's not direct enough and the penalty can only make teams worse, which would reinforce tanking. We need something more targeted if we want to stop tanking, like if a GM tanks for three straight years, then we murder them.
|
|
|
Post by Arvydas Sabonis on Apr 14, 2021 15:34:33 GMT
I really don't understand the need to tell others the "right" way to play the game. Everyone has the same goal in the end, win the championship. How you get there should not matter. Some people like to stay for ever in the mid of the pack and hope for a miracle draft pick in late lottery that will lift you to the top, or hope for some star FA agent to decide to sign with them out of all the other good teams. To be honest, if I look at the record of Cavs for past 6 years, it's only lottery picks or first round exists. For me being in that range would be just boring as hell, as you don't really have a chance to win championship and in draft you are missing out on all the good prospects. But it's everyone's own choice to do so.
Some teams in NBA never really tank (Spurs) and they still manage to rebuild successfully. Other teams try to go for the Philly Process route, because it's also shown to work..Same here in D5, let each to their own. Why is it your issue if someone wants to choose the other way to rebuild than you?
If you look at the thread: dynasty5ive.proboards.com/thread/16055/d5-all-time-standingsBoston was for 4 straight years under 25 wins, so these penalties proposed here would have been valid for them. That would have likely only made it harder for them to get out of the bottom instead of easier. Now they have the best team, so clearly the strategy to tank for few years was good. Why do we want to make that rebuilding route more difficult. I bet that none of the tankers plan to be in the bottom for many years. Everyone just wants to draft the next Lebron/Kobe/Dirk asap and maybe a good sidekick star in the next season and be out of the bottom in few years max. Only reason it can take longer is that if you are unlucky with the draft picks and only draft busts. Why would we want to punish those unlucky teams even more by adding some penalties to sign players in FA?
There is already some changes in the draft lottery odds, so that is making totally bottoming out less desirable. But often that is still necessary to do just to at least for one year get also the salary situation in good order in addition to improving odds for draft picks.
|
|
Chris Mullin
Golden State Warriors
Starter
Posts: 1,303
Feb 19, 2024 21:58:28 GMT
|
Post by Chris Mullin on Apr 14, 2021 15:44:27 GMT
I agree this wouldn't be effective. It's not direct enough and the penalty can only make teams worse, which would reinforce tanking. We need something more targeted if we want to stop tanking, like if a GM tanks for three straight years, then we murder them. Bingo.
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 14, 2021 23:24:39 GMT
I really don't understand the need to tell others the "right" way to play the game. Everyone has the same goal in the end, win the championship. How you get there should not matter. Some people like to stay for ever in the mid of the pack and hope for a miracle draft pick in late lottery that will lift you to the top, or hope for some star FA agent to decide to sign with them out of all the other good teams. To be honest, if I look at the record of Cavs for past 6 years, it's only lottery picks or first round exists. For me being in that range would be just boring as hell, as you don't really have a chance to win championship and in draft you are missing out on all the good prospects. But it's everyone's own choice to do so.
Some teams in NBA never really tank (Spurs) and they still manage to rebuild successfully. Other teams try to go for the Philly Process route, because it's also shown to work..Same here in D5, let each to their own. Why is it your issue if someone wants to choose the other way to rebuild than you?
If you look at the thread: dynasty5ive.proboards.com/thread/16055/d5-all-time-standingsBoston was for 4 straight years under 25 wins, so these penalties proposed here would have been valid for them. That would have likely only made it harder for them to get out of the bottom instead of easier. Now they have the best team, so clearly the strategy to tank for few years was good. Why do we want to make that rebuilding route more difficult. I bet that none of the tankers plan to be in the bottom for many years. Everyone just wants to draft the next Lebron/Kobe/Dirk asap and maybe a good sidekick star in the next season and be out of the bottom in few years max. Only reason it can take longer is that if you are unlucky with the draft picks and only draft busts. Why would we want to punish those unlucky teams even more by adding some penalties to sign players in FA?
There is already some changes in the draft lottery odds, so that is making totally bottoming out less desirable. But often that is still necessary to do just to at least for one year get also the salary situation in good order in addition to improving odds for draft picks.
Nope. I am not forcing anybody to just a certain way. Especially if all the previous big changes in our rules enhanced tanking as a tactic. The point is, it reached the point that it is already UNREALISTIC. What happened to Hinkie? What happened to the tanking job in Atlanta? What did OKC did with Harden? Wanna bet how long the current OKC will tank? They started their tank this year with plethora of picks. Do you think they will tank for at least three years? They will not. Almost all of you are ignoring that SUPER TANKING is beyond realism and continue to believe that it should be allowed because it is a wise thing to do and that freedom thing. I am obviously outnumbered, but I still want to hear your opinion Ian Noble? What do you think?
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 15, 2021 10:41:23 GMT
I am obviously outnumbered, but I still want to hear your opinion Ian Noble? What do you think? Without having delved into this discussion, or the original proposal, in much detail, I have to say I don't like the idea of enforcing a increasingly low Hard Cap on underperforming teams. It deviates hugely from reality, I don't think it would be effective because top rookies will always have the highest value, and I don't believe tanking itself needs to be eliminated as a method of rebuilding a team anyway. Rules that encourage different methods of building a team make more sense, like the other thread that James Kay started re: 120% contracts which do far more to encourage parity and present different options to GMs trying to reach a championship.
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 15, 2021 11:20:34 GMT
I am obviously outnumbered, but I still want to hear your opinion Ian Noble ? What do you think? Without having delved into this discussion, or the original proposal, in much detail, I have to say I don't like the idea of enforcing a increasingly low Hard Cap on underperforming teams. It deviates hugely from reality, I don't think it would be effective because top rookies will always have the highest value, and I don't believe tanking itself needs to be eliminated as a method of rebuilding a team anyway. Rules that encourage different methods of building a team make more sense, like the other thread that James Kay started re: 120% contracts which do far more to encourage parity and present different options to GMs trying to reach a championship. This is not something that will eliminate tanking though. What it only does is penalize teams who SUPER TANK. Nevertheless, I hope you will support the idea of James then. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Noble on Apr 15, 2021 13:02:39 GMT
Without having delved into this discussion, or the original proposal, in much detail, I have to say I don't like the idea of enforcing a increasingly low Hard Cap on underperforming teams. It deviates hugely from reality, I don't think it would be effective because top rookies will always have the highest value, and I don't believe tanking itself needs to be eliminated as a method of rebuilding a team anyway. Rules that encourage different methods of building a team make more sense, like the other thread that James Kay started re: 120% contracts which do far more to encourage parity and present different options to GMs trying to reach a championship. This is not something that will eliminate tanking though. What it only does is penalize teams who SUPER TANK. Nevertheless, I hope you will support the idea of James then. Thanks. Hmm I don't think there's any teams who tank because they want to keep tanking, everyone does it because they want their franchise player. You got Zion with a very lucky lottery bounce, didn't have to tank I got Embiid BKN got Booker SAS got Doncic NOP got Trae UTA got Tatum After acquiring some talent every single team has always then made the push to contend.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Krzyzewski on Apr 15, 2021 14:51:13 GMT
To continue the previous point, we just got LaMelo and will have a decent pick this year. Our plan is 100% to compete going forward.
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 15, 2021 23:06:47 GMT
This is not something that will eliminate tanking though. What it only does is penalize teams who SUPER TANK. Nevertheless, I hope you will support the idea of James then. Thanks. Hmm I don't think there's any teams who tank because they want to keep tanking, everyone does it because they want their franchise player. You got Zion with a very lucky lottery bounce, didn't have to tank I got Embiid BKN got Booker SAS got Doncic NOP got Trae UTA got Tatum After acquiring some talent every single team has always then made the push to contend. Always? You got #1, #4 and #6 of the 2016 draft. You ended up with the #5 worst record in 2017.
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 15, 2021 23:10:32 GMT
This is not something that will eliminate tanking though. What it only does is penalize teams who SUPER TANK. Nevertheless, I hope you will support the idea of James then. Thanks. Hmm I don't think there's any teams who tank because they want to keep tanking, everyone does it because they want their franchise player. You got Zion with a very lucky lottery bounce, didn't have to tank I got Embiid BKN got Booker SAS got Doncic NOP got Trae UTA got Tatum After acquiring some talent every single team has always then made the push to contend. NOP got Jaren Jackson and Young in 2018. They ended up with the 6th worst record in 2019. 7th in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry West on Apr 15, 2021 23:38:27 GMT
Hmm I don't think there's any teams who tank because they want to keep tanking, everyone does it because they want their franchise player. You got Zion with a very lucky lottery bounce, didn't have to tank I got Embiid BKN got Booker SAS got Doncic NOP got Trae UTA got Tatum After acquiring some talent every single team has always then made the push to contend. NOP got Jaren Jackson and Young in 2018. They ended up with the 6th worst record in 2019. 7th in 2020. Hana please restrain this trash talk until you win a playoff series
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 15, 2021 23:45:30 GMT
NOP got Jaren Jackson and Young in 2018. They ended up with the 6th worst record in 2019. 7th in 2020. Hana please restrain this trash talk until you win a playoff series I am not trash talking. Those are facts against the argument that Ian presented. I apologize if anyone feels like I am trashing them for choosing to tank but that was never my intent.
|
|
|
Post by Jerry West on Apr 15, 2021 23:47:52 GMT
Hana please restrain this trash talk until you win a playoff series I am not trash talking. Those are facts against the argument that Ian presented. I apologize if anyone feels like I am trashing them for choosing to tank but that was never my intent. Look I do agree that's there some tanking of teams that nobody needs to mention that are a bit to extreme, no doubt about that. That said, tanking 2 or 3 seasons because your players got old and its time to move to a new generation is perfectly normal.
|
|
|
Post by Hanamichi Sakuragi on Apr 15, 2021 23:50:07 GMT
I am not trash talking. Those are facts against the argument that Ian presented. I apologize if anyone feels like I am trashing them for choosing to tank but that was never my intent. Look I do agree that's there some tanking of teams that nobody tankers to mention that are extreme, no doubt about that. That said, tanking 2 or 3 seasons because your players got old and its time to move to a new generation is perfectly normal. Thanks man. I appreciate it.
|
|