NBA's midseason tournament similar to Soccer being considered

[D.o.s.]

If you're adding a tournament mid-season, how 'bout cutting the playoff series (other than the finals) back to 5 games?  That's enough to determine the best team. 

Of course, too much money for that to actually happen, probably more than would be gained by adding the tourney.

Hence a 3-on-3 tournament. Not only is it a really fun version of the game to watch, you're exposing fewer players to the added wear and tear of the week or so.

But, presumably it would be the three best players, the guys who were already playing the most minutes.  People would be p---ed if they were watching Michael Beasley instead of LeBron James last year.

Depends on how you divided it up, especially if you had some kind of Rookie-Sophomore limitation (or some other distinction).

[KG_ended_Bias]

This would never fly because the ultimate goal would be the NBA Championship at seasons end! But if it does fly the incentive should be a #1). The team who wins the tournament gets an automatic entry to the draft lottery & a chance at winning the lottery no matter how good their season record is. For instance, if winning team wins the midseason tourney & finishes with the best record or would have made the playoffs regardless of winning the tourney, they only get top 10 odds regardless . But if a doormat team lucks up & wins said tourney, they get even more lottery chances & it should be percentage based. Example being if a team that finishes anywhere from 1st to 3rd worst in the league would get #1 odds along with the leagues worst team. Teams with the 4th to 6th worst gets top 3 odds. 7th thru 10th top 5 odds. And 11th thru 14th gets top 8 odds! Important to remember that if the NBA champion wins both they only get the least amount of odds but yet they indeed get in.

I wanted to say that both teams who make the tourney final gets a automatic playoff entry but that could create bracket problems & would be very difficult to figure out & yet almost impossible. Especially if those top 2 teams are from the same conference. So lottery pick is the only thing I could come up with within reason.

[kozlodoev]

Gary Washburn @GwashburnGlobe: Silver said the league is considering the idea of a midseason tournament, similar to soccer. Interesting. #nba

"Silver's exploratory idea involves a tournament that would be showcased in Las Vegas. Similar to soccer, it would essentially be a quick tourney for NBA teams to win a trophy outside of the NBA Championship." - sbnation

Let me explain what this is really about, because it's impossible to understand from this tweet:

1. Soccer doesn't have "mid-season" tournaments.

2. Typically, soccer schedules in Europe feature a "national championship" (tiered league style with promotion/demotion), and a "national cup" (open style and knockout).

3. The point of the latter is that it gives the chance to all teams in the system to win a trophy (since teams outside of the top league level obviously cannot compete for the national championship). It also provides a different type of competition, since national championships don't typically have playoffs.

4. There is nothing "quick" about national cup tournaments, since they're played in parallel with national championship and typically last almost until the end of the season.

5. With this in mind, it's obvious that the idea as such is utterly pointless -- since there's no tier structure in the NBA, all teams are already eligible to win the NBA championship.

6. This "idea" is so far beyond dumb that I can't believe it's even being talked about.

[Donoghus]

I really hope Silver isn't starting to go Goodell on us.

[the_Bird]

If you're adding a tournament mid-season, how 'bout cutting the playoff series (other than the finals) back to 5 games?  That's enough to determine the best team. 

Of course, too much money for that to actually happen, probably more than would be gained by adding the tourney.

Hence a 3-on-3 tournament. Not only is it a really fun version of the game to watch, you're exposing fewer players to the added wear and tear of the week or so.

But, presumably it would be the three best players, the guys who were already playing the most minutes.  People would be p---ed if they were watching Michael Beasley instead of LeBron James last year.

Depends on how you divided it up, especially if you had some kind of Rookie-Sophomore limitation (or some other distinction).

If it was just rookies and sophomores...  who cares?  If it's not the league's best players, you aren't going to get any more attention that the rookie-versus sophomore game on All Star weekend (a few hardcore fans, zero casual fans), and any "championship" that results would be meaningless.

For anything like this to work would require the best players be essentially mandated to participate, and that's never, ever going to be agreed to by the player's union.  It's a nonstarter.

[slamtheking]

have no interest in this at all.  the league needs to address a number of other issues (some previously pointed out in other posts) like the draft/tanking, trade guidelines, salary structure, players forcing trades, etc...

[D.o.s.]

If you're adding a tournament mid-season, how 'bout cutting the playoff series (other than the finals) back to 5 games?  That's enough to determine the best team. 

Of course, too much money for that to actually happen, probably more than would be gained by adding the tourney.

Hence a 3-on-3 tournament. Not only is it a really fun version of the game to watch, you're exposing fewer players to the added wear and tear of the week or so.

But, presumably it would be the three best players, the guys who were already playing the most minutes.  People would be p---ed if they were watching Michael Beasley instead of LeBron James last year.

Depends on how you divided it up, especially if you had some kind of Rookie-Sophomore limitation (or some other distinction).

If it was just rookies and sophomores...  who cares?  If it's not the league's best players, you aren't going to get any more attention that the rookie-versus sophomore game on All Star weekend (a few hardcore fans, zero casual fans), and any "championship" that results would be meaningless.

For anything like this to work would require the best players be essentially mandated to participate, and that's never, ever going to be agreed to by the player's union.  It's a nonstarter.

I bet you're a real hit at parties.

[the_Bird]

Actually, I am!

I like to think I'm a realist.  Casual fans care about the stars.  The NBA, even more so than probably any other major sport, is a league that's all about the superstar.  Bird.  Magic.  Jordan.  Kobe.  LeBron.

Nobody's going to watch a three-man squad of Marcus Smart, KO, and James Young other than hardcore fans. 

Who would be the C's three-man representatives, if it wasn't limited to young players?  Rondo, Green, and Sully?  That's depressing.

[GreenWarrior]

that's why I think if they were to do a small tourney over the course of all star weekend of either 2 on 2 or 3 on 3 teams they could get away with not using stars.

hell they could have a bunch of players from around the league throw they're name in, have 8 10 teams with 1 captain(preferably a semi-star at least) and have them choose their teammates in a fantasy draft.

they could start it on Fri. night and end it on Sat. night with the rest of the festivities. it'd be a helluva lot better than their stupid celebrity game on Fri. night and the stupid skills challenge.   

[guava_wrench]

What a ridiculous idea. Teams that already all play one another playing one another with no impact on championship? Silly.