idea to get rid of tanking

[Eja117]

Here's an idea to get rid of tanking....the teams that get the worst records get to share TV revenues proportionately. TV revenues are tied to wins. Also the 3 worst teams have to give up their 2nd rounders, meaning all 2nd round picks in trades are conditional going forward.  Coaches that have the worst record in the NBA are automatically suspended from the league for 3 years, and coaches with the 2nd and 3rd worst record are suspended one year.
Players on a team with the worst record have to forfeit 10 game checks.

Boom. Done. No tanking ever again.

To end tanking you have to hurt the people doing it. Not reward them.  Everything works this way.

Put up or shut up

[bballdog384]

What about taking the average of the records at the All-Star break and at the end of the season? Or pick a random date and base it on records from that day?

[AidaCelt]

My opinion on this is that:

1. tanking isn't a major issue anyway. Lose games for the "opportunity" the win the lottery and draft #1 or are most teams just not that good in the first place?

2. nobody talks about tanking in the NFL or NHL, yet NHL is a lottery system and if you don't get the #1 pick you at least get to select only 1 pick down from your finishing position (worst team "loses" the lottery still picks 2nd and the NFL is just a reverse draft.

3. the idea of having those that finished close to playoffs get the better chance of the #1 pick means that those teams that actually are no good, are disadvantaged by getting a low lottery pick and less chance of rebuilding.

4. the league is built around "trying" to provide an even league. If the worst team is genuinely the worst team and picks #14, how is this providing that team with an opportunity to be competitive and therefore sell tickets?

[fairweatherfan]

I actually like a slight modification of Simmons' proposal - top 7 make the playoffs, the other 8 in each conference play a single-elimination tournament for the 8 seed.  Every team outside the top 7, including those 8 seeds, gets one ping-pong ball, but only the top 4 are drawn, and the other picks go in reverse order of record (worst teams pick higher).

Everyone outside of that top 7 has an equal chance at the top picks, but the really bad teams still are a bit closer to the top of the line.  The only real perverse incentive there is that some mediocre teams might try to drop out of the top 7 in the regular season and bulldoze the tourney, but that's a tough bet to make.

[D.o.s.]

Looks like the Wheel's being tweaked:
http://grantland.com/features/wheel-of-misfortune/

[Fafnir]

Looks like the Wheel's being tweaked:
http://grantland.com/features/wheel-of-misfortune/

I still don't like it, especially from a fan perspective. The Mark Cuban quotes about hope are an important part of being an NBA fan of a rebuilding/bad team.

I mean if the C's were locked into a 5 slot segment I still think Danny would have moved Pierce/KG after last season and with Rondo's injury. It'd mean there was nothing to hope for once it was clear the near .500 level of play wasn't sustainable.

[Roy H.]

A simple approach:

Start with 80 lottery balls.

The bottom 10 teams each get five balls.

The middle 10 teams each get two balls.

The best 10 teams each get one ball.

The top 5 slots in the draft are determined by lottery; everything else is reverse order of finish.

The downside is that truly terrible teams could get stuck at the bottom.  The upside is that more fans would be invested in the process, and it would curtail tanking.

[Tr1boy]

I actually like a slight modification of Simmons' proposal - top 7 make the playoffs, the other 8 in each conference play a single-elimination tournament for the 8 seed.  Every team outside the top 7, including those 8 seeds, gets one ping-pong ball, but only the top 4 are drawn, and the other picks go in reverse order of record (worst teams pick higher).

Everyone outside of that top 7 has an equal chance at the top picks, but the really bad teams still are a bit closer to the top of the line.  The only real perverse incentive there is that some mediocre teams might try to drop out of the top 7 in the regular season and bulldoze the tourney, but that's a tough bet to make.

it's too complex

If people don't like the idea of the 9-10th team getting best odds to win the lotto, i like my other idea that every team is part of the lotto process with equal chance to the top 5 picks. Then the rest of the picks go by order from last to best record. 

If you want to tank and at worse take the 6th pick, then go ahead.

[D.o.s.]

Looks like the Wheel's being tweaked:
http://grantland.com/features/wheel-of-misfortune/

I still don't like it, especially from a fan perspective. The Mark Cuban quotes about hope are an important part of being an NBA fan of a rebuilding/bad team.

I mean if the C's were locked into a 5 slot segment I still think Danny would have moved Pierce/KG after last season and with Rondo's injury. It'd mean there was nothing to hope for once it was clear the near .500 level of play wasn't sustainable.

I agree with you and Cubes.

I also don't think that there's a problem with tanking in the NBA. I think it's gotten buzzwordy as the information the average fan has had has exploded.

[wdleehi]

To many of these ideas hurt the truly bad teams. 



How about penalties for bad, clearly tanking trades?

Take the 76ers.  The Holiday trade was a rebuilding trade where they got value.  No penalty.

The Turner trade and the Hawes trades were pure dumping talented players for nothing.  Penalty for each.  Let's say dropping two slots in the draft per offense.  So, if they finished with the worst record, they get the lotto chance of the 5th worst teams.  Teams 2 through 5 move up. 

Don't spend up to the salary floor, drop 2 slots. 

[D.o.s.]

To many of these ideas hurt the truly bad teams. 



How about penalties for bad, clearly tanking trades?

Take the 76ers.  The Holiday trade was a rebuilding trade where they got value.  No penalty.

The Turner trade and the Hawes trades were pure dumping talented players for nothing.  Penalty for each.  Let's say dropping two slots in the draft per offense.  So, if they finished with the worst record, they get the lotto chance of the 5th worst teams.  Teams 2 through 5 move up. 

Don't spend up to the salary floor, drop 2 slots.

I like the one about the salary floor, but I don't think you can really assign a penalty for Hawes and Turner.

[wdleehi]

To many of these ideas hurt the truly bad teams. 



How about penalties for bad, clearly tanking trades?

Take the 76ers.  The Holiday trade was a rebuilding trade where they got value.  No penalty.

The Turner trade and the Hawes trades were pure dumping talented players for nothing.  Penalty for each.  Let's say dropping two slots in the draft per offense.  So, if they finished with the worst record, they get the lotto chance of the 5th worst teams.  Teams 2 through 5 move up. 

Don't spend up to the salary floor, drop 2 slots.

I like the one about the salary floor, but I don't think you can really assign a penalty for Hawes and Turner.

Why not?  They traded two starters for 2nd round picks.  What long term benefit is there to the team except losing more this year?

[Spilling Green Dye]

Here's an idea to get rid of tanking....the teams that get the worst records get to share TV revenues proportionately. TV revenues are tied to wins. Also the 3 worst teams have to give up their 2nd rounders, meaning all 2nd round picks in trades are conditional going forward.  Coaches that have the worst record in the NBA are automatically suspended from the league for 3 years, and coaches with the 2nd and 3rd worst record are suspended one year.
Players on a team with the worst record have to forfeit 10 game checks.

Boom. Done. No tanking ever again.

To end tanking you have to hurt the people doing it. Not reward them.  Everything works this way.

Put up or shut up

Amazingly enough I really like this!  I think if they slightly increased the revenue sharing w/ the players and then implemented this it would have a big impact on improving the quality of the games. 

[D.o.s.]

The problem with that, of course, is that there will always be a "worst team." And teams will always go through cycles of being better and worse. So you'd be penalizing teams for what is an inevitable situation, which would make it harder for them to get out of the cellars, which would hurt them more and more as they were continually penalized.

But, yeah, aside from the fact that it's terribly shortsighted, it's a great idea.

[Roy H.]

To many of these ideas hurt the truly bad teams. 



How about penalties for bad, clearly tanking trades?

Take the 76ers.  The Holiday trade was a rebuilding trade where they got value.  No penalty.

The Turner trade and the Hawes trades were pure dumping talented players for nothing.  Penalty for each.  Let's say dropping two slots in the draft per offense.  So, if they finished with the worst record, they get the lotto chance of the 5th worst teams.  Teams 2 through 5 move up. 

Don't spend up to the salary floor, drop 2 slots.

I like the one about the salary floor, but I don't think you can really assign a penalty for Hawes and Turner.

Why not?  They traded two starters for 2nd round picks.  What long term benefit is there to the team except losing more this year?

The Sixers would say that they picked up assets for two players who weren't going to be on the team next year, and they opened up playing time for guys who might be part of the long-term picture.

It's nonsense, but it's justifiable.  It's one reason why I wouldn't want to involve the Commissioner's office in determining draft order based upon the quality of in-season moves.