NBA Playoffs 2018

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Dat

It's pretty amazing the way Tatum is being discussed based on his play in these playoffs...possible future MVP, one of the few "untouchable" players in the NBA in terms of whether or not he could be traded, etc. While some of it may be hyperbole, it's an amazing run he's been on.

In the 4th quarter, I think Lebron was just trying to see if he could get some guys going because he knows they can't win even when he puts up 40-10-10 performances unless other guys keep the defense honest. Jackson and Van Gundy, though, were talking a lot about the Cavs sniping at each other on the court and generally being disconnected while the Celtics were hyper-connected. One of Lebron's weaknesses can be his lack of unifying a team in those kinds of situations.

I agree and for a more mundane reason, it's just really hard to keep doing it year after year. The Pat Riley "disease of more" starts to creep in, key injuries happen, etc. Whenever a pundit says, "X move sets this team up for the next 10 years" I always laugh. What the heck lasts that long in pro sports anymore, let alone the NBA. I feel like 5 years is kind of the max. GSW are in year 4.

---

There's a great article in the WSJ today praising Tatum for how great he is at an early age - and how he got that way. It was sort of startling to discover that they covered his development from when was about seven years old right up through any periods he's sitting on the Boston bench getting a breather. They managed to cover his accomplishments and never once mention that he did get what might have been some beneficial exposure to Coach K and the Duke staff.

What the article focuses on by the way is the fact that throughout his entire life, he's been able to study great players (mainly Kobe) on You Tube.

Just kind of surprised to not see a single mention of his time at Duke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elvis14

A few comments on the playoffs in general. One thing that I've noticed, especially in the 3 games played so far in the conference finals is the intensity. Wow are these guys into these games! It's just fantastic. Heck, Draymond was so fired up Monday night he almost got thrown out in the first quarter. I know some people only watch the playoffs and think that the regular season isn't good or doesn't matter. I think the regular season is great and really enjoy watching games when I can (especially when Duke players are involved) but these playoff games are at another level. I don't think the players could physically and mentally withstand this level of play through 82 regular season games (and many playoff games). I'm not sure I could handle watching a full season of games like this (I was ready to punch Chris Paul in the head Monday night and I generally like State Farm Boy).

---

I look forward to the playoffs every year for that uptick in intensity. Alas, we still have this Tankapalooza problem in the regular season, despite the NBA's ongoing efforts to reduce the odds for most lottery teams to get the top picks to about the same chance as me winning Powerball.

The young Turks, who watch a lot of Premier League, have a one-word answer to increase the intensity level during the regular season: RELEGATION.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UrinalCake

Also I’m not sure there’s a cap system that can account for players willingly accepting less money to be able to play together. Every system is designed around the premise that players will want the most money they can get.

---

I beg to differ. Every cap system is designed around the premise that a significant number of owners will spend themselves into bankruptcy without some sort of external constraint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turk

The young Turks, who watch a lot of Premier League, have a one-word answer to increase the intensity level during the regular season: RELEGATION.

---

Relegation would be the most fun thing to happen to American professional sports in a long time. I mean, you want folks to tune in to watch a lousy December game between the Texans and the Giants, mix in relegation fears and you would have a heck of a audience!

That said, the way American pro sports work just does not allow for it. There is a very limited lower/minor league system and it largely is comprised of teams that are directly affiliated with larger teams. Obviously, you cannot relegate the Suns, for example, and bring up their minor league team. It just does not work.

We could only have relegation if we fundamentally changed the way American pro sports work. Take half -- or maybe a third -- of the teams in each major sport and put them in a lower division. Of course, then you would have the issue of how to draft players, how to divide up TV money, and a host of other issues. The bottom line is that it just couldn't happen, the changes required are too great.

I don't know what solution there is to tankapalooza. It really is largely a problem in the NBA and not in other leagues because great players are so much more valuable in the NBA than other sports. I mean, put Tom Brady on the Browns and they still are probably not a playoff team. Put Lebron on the Hawks and they'd be among the favorites in the Eastern Conference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JasonEvans

I don't know what solution there is to tankapalooza. It really is largely a problem in the NBA and not in other leagues because great players are so much more valuable in the NBA than other sports. I mean, put Tom Brady on the Browns and they still are probably not a playoff team. Put Lebron on the Hawks and they'd be among the favorites in the Eastern Conference.

---

The only real cure for tanking is doing away with the draft lottery and making the draft order completely random or scheduled. There was an idea floated a few years back for a system wherein every team would draft in each of the thirty slots exactly once every thirty years, based on an elaborate system. Kills any incentive to tank but is almost certainly unpalatable to the NBA for other reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matches

The only real cure for tanking is doing away with the draft lottery and making the draft order completely random or scheduled. There was an idea floated a few years back for a system wherein every team would draft in each of the thirty slots exactly once every thirty years, based on an elaborate system. Kills any incentive to tank but is almost certainly unpalatable to the NBA for other reasons.

---

You mean the wheel?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/th...-to-the-wheel/

What about something blatantly capitalist, like auctioning off draft picks.

So for each pick allow teams to bid for the pick with minimums for each draft slot.

Each team gets one pick per year

So for the first pick, all teams can bid

The winning big is the players salary and any $ over the min bid also gets taxed

Teams have to pick right after they win a bid, so the "lottery" and draft all happen in 1 glorious evening

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phaedrus

You mean the wheel?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/th...-to-the-wheel/

---

Yes, that's exactly what I was thinking of. I kind of love the wheel, especially for the NBA.

Maybe at some point in the future,the talent level in the G-League could reach a level that makes relegation an option. Maybe shared revenue could be partially based on a performance ratio multiplier: (actual winning percentage)/(pre-season expected winning percentage). I agree that randomizing the draft order would likely be the least abrasive option for the owners.

I know how to fix the salary cap/superteam problem...institute the old baseball reserve clause. You get to keep the players you draft and develop. That way nobody has to lose a Kevin Durant for nothing.

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matches

The only real cure for tanking is doing away with the draft lottery and making the draft order completely random or scheduled. There was an idea floated a few years back for a system wherein every team would draft in each of the thirty slots exactly once every thirty years, based on an elaborate system. Kills any incentive to tank but is almost certainly unpalatable to the NBA for other reasons.

---

My favorite way to fix tanking was one I saw a few years ago. I'll try to explain it simply.


Basically after you're officially eliminated from the playoffs every win after that counts as a point and whomever has the most points at the end of the season gets the top pick or the best odds in the lottery. It would make for better end of seasons as playoff contenders whom are fighting for seeding or that 7 and 8 spot have to go against the bad teams that are really intent on winning for draft seeding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JNort

My favorite way to fix tanking was one I saw a few years ago. I'll try to explain it simply.


Basically after you're officially eliminated from the playoffs every win after that counts as a point and whomever has the most points at the end of the season gets the top pick or the best odds in the lottery. It would make for better end of seasons as playoff contenders whom are fighting for seeding or that 7 and 8 spot have to go against the bad teams that are really intent on winning for draft seeding.

---

What's to prevent a team from tanking up until the point they are eliminated from the playoffs and then turn it on?

Is that an improvement over what we have now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dudog84

I know how to fix the salary cap/superteam problem...institute the old baseball reserve clause. You get to keep the players you draft and develop. That way nobody has to lose a Kevin Durant for nothing.

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

---

I'm up for a tier based salary system. These numbers aren't exact but I hope you get the idea .

Your roster can't exceed these restrictions

1 player making 31+ million a year

2 players making 25+ million a year

3 players making 19+ million a year

.
.
.
.
.

15 players making 1+ million a year

Those numbers are just made up but I think you get the idea of the structure. It basically only allows for 1 veteran star and 1 younger star 3 quality starters and then role players. Unless of course a star or 2 wanna take massive contract hits per year by losing out on 6 to 8 million dollars a year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimsumner

What's to prevent a team from tanking up until the point they are eliminated from the playoffs and then turn it on?

Is that an improvement over what we have now?

---

Many teams don't know they are gonna tank right away. They wanna see if the new additions can make them contend so they try for a little bit.

But yes you're correct there would still be some tanking but it wouldn't last as long since they would much more quickly get knocked from playoff contention. After that you get the entire season of them actually trying and not just half @s$ing it (not sure if that word is censored). It would make for an exciting last 2 months of the regular season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JNort

I'm up for a tier based salary system. These numbers aren't exact but I hope you get the idea .

Your roster can't exceed these restrictions

1 player making 31+ million a year

2 players making 25+ million a year

3 players making 19+ million a year

.
.
.
.
.

15 players making 1+ million a year

Those numbers are just made up but I think you get the idea of the structure. It basically only allows for 1 veteran star and 1 younger star 3 quality starters and then role players. Unless of course a star or 2 wanna take massive contract hits per year by losing out on 6 to 8 million dollars a year.

---

So if you draft and develop really well the players have to leave by default?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JNort

Those numbers are just made up but I think you get the idea of the structure. It basically only allows for 1 veteran star and 1 younger star 3 quality starters and then role players. Unless of course a star or 2 wanna take massive contract hits per year by losing out on 6 to 8 million dollars a year.

---

I'm unconvinced that the cure is better than the disease. Via your "fix" (depending upon where lines are drawn), the pre-KD GSW would have had to shed two of their three home-grown, now veteran stars simply because they drafted and did player development too well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimsumner

What's to prevent a team from tanking up until the point they are eliminated from the playoffs and then turn it on?

Is that an improvement over what we have now?

---

It is a huge improvement IMO, if only for the sake of creating a situation where there are more teams actually trying to win. All we're asking for is more competitive games. But like you say, people will always try to game the system. However, at least it would be blatantly obvious when a team is eliminated from the playoffs and then suddenly their entire rotation is revamped and guys on the injury report are miraculously healed in time for a run at the #1 pick. There are probably ways to punish this in the most obvious cases.

But regardless of appearances, I think it would be much harder to accomplish this than you are making it out to be. If you haven't been playing your best rotations, and keeping veterans on the bench for most of the season, you aren't going to suddenly have a great team on your hands. Those guys won't have the chemistry and timing of teams who have been playing together the whole season. It's hard to win in the NBA, especially if more teams are actually trying to win, as would be the case in this scenario. Transforming a bottom feeding season in to a huge win streak would be nearly impossible.

It's definitely a flawed plan, but I think it is certainly an improvement over the current system. I think relegation is the best solution, but unfortunately, it's not an option currently.

The real problem is the anti-free market CBA with has a maximum player contract.

When you have a maximum player contract cap and that cap is too low for the elite superstars, you basically prevent teams from openly bidding on those players, if you'r egoing to get similar pay no matter which team you pick, why wouldn't you pick the ones that are most likely to win? Winning at that point becomes the differentiator when all the teams are restricted from bidding beyond a certain dollar amount.

It's fine for competitive reasons to have team salary caps, but individual player salary caps is what's driving this super team scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dudog84

I know how to fix the salary cap/superteam problem...institute the old baseball reserve clause. You get to keep the players you draft and develop. That way nobody has to lose a Kevin Durant for nothing.

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

---

The baseball "reserve clause" died with the Andy Messersmith arbitration hearing, way back in 1975. The other sports never had that right. Baseball right was due to a Supreme Court ruling in 1922 that baseball was exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act. Majority opinion was written by Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kshepinthehouse

So if you draft and develop really well the players have to leave by default?

---

No not if they want to make less. It would just keep the league more balanced, a team basically would never have more than 2 all stars on a team.