Home› Sports Talk

NBA draft wheel

jdip9jdip9 Posts: 1,894 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
Link

I think this is a really cool idea. I suppose it takes away a little from the advantage that really good GMs have, but it does create a bunch of cool scenarios, starting with the initial selection of spots 15-30. Anything that eliminates tanking would be good for the league, IMO.

Comments

  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭
    The problem is some teams, like my Sacramento Kings, are at a disadvantage. It's very hard to attract free agents to many of the smaller markets (Sac, Mil, Cleveland to name a few). Thus we have to overpay for second rate free agents (i.e. max contracts to people like Mike Bibby). The draft is one way to help even the playing field (see OKC) for the lower tier teams. Yes, some teams tank but I don't think it's that many. Some are just bad teams year after year after year. image
  • MGLICKERMGLICKER Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The problem is some teams, like my Sacramento Kings, are at a disadvantage. It's very hard to attract free agents to many of the smaller markets (Sac, Mil, Cleveland to name a few). Thus we have to overpay for second rate free agents (i.e. max contracts to people like Mike Bibby). The draft is one way to help even the playing field (see OKC) for the lower tier teams. Yes, some teams tank but I don't think it's that many. Some are just bad teams year after year after year. image >>



    Not to mention the 13% rich man tax that is assessed in the Golden State.
  • jdip9jdip9 Posts: 1,894 ✭✭✭
    <<<It's very hard to attract free agents to many of the smaller markets (Sac, Mil, Cleveland to name a few).>>>

    I would say it is hard to attract marquee free agents to any team other than the two LA teams, Chicago, New York, Miami, Dallas, and Brooklyn. Boston is a fairly big market, and the most storied franchise in NBA history, yet has never signed a marquee free agent. So it's not just the small NBA cities that struggle, it is 23 of 30 NBA teams that can't bring in top-tier free agents. No doubt it is harder for smaller markets to compete, but it isn't impossible. Look at Indiana, which is arguably the best team in the NBA, yet I don't believe has chosen any of its core players in the top 10 of the draft, outside of Paul George (no. 10).




  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    Tanking is a myth that poorly run franchise fans use to prop up their teams. The kings are bad for example not because its a small market but because they draft poorly. The spurs are a very small market yet they win consistently because they are among the best run teams in all of sports.

    Rich man tax? Well when you have the best state in the union there's going to be some cost associated with that.
  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Tanking is a myth that poorly run franchise fans use to prop up their teams. The kings are bad for example not because its a small market but because they draft poorly. The spurs are a very small market yet they win consistently because they are among the best run teams in all of sports.

    Rich man tax? Well when you have the best state in the union there's going to be some cost associated with that. >>




    It's true the Kings have drafted poorly (for a long time) but I truly don't believe they tank either. I remember four or five years ago they won on the last day of the season and due to that fell behind (or in front of) several teams with less wins. Thus the Kings got far fewer ping pong balls. I really don't think they tank it. They just suck.

    I also agree about the cost to live in California is worth it. Granted it's a bit cold here in nor cal for my liking but it should be in the 60's today which is better than a lot of the country. I have lived other places and California really is a great place to live to me.

    Back to the topic though, the taxes in California don't stop the Lakers from acquiring free agents.
  • MGLICKERMGLICKER Posts: 7,995 ✭✭✭


    << <i>Rich man tax? Well when you have the best state in the union there's going to be some cost associated with that. >>



    It is certainly a consideration for a big dollar player that has the option of going to Florida or Texas instead.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭
    The Knicks are terrible despite playing in the biggest market. The Clippers were awful for decades despit playing in the second biggest market. The Spurs have been great for years playing in h 30th biggest market. The Pacers have flourished playing in even a smaller market.

  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭


    << <i>The Knicks are terrible despite playing in the biggest market. The Clippers were awful for decades despit playing in the second biggest market. The Spurs have been great for years playing in h 30th biggest market. The Pacers have flourished playing in even a smaller market. >>



    It's not an exact science where everything is 100% fitting the hypothetical. It's real life.
  • 1985fan1985fan Posts: 1,952 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>The Knicks are terrible despite playing in the biggest market. The Clippers were awful for decades despit playing in the second biggest market. The Spurs have been great for years playing in h 30th biggest market. The Pacers have flourished playing in even a smaller market. >>



    It's not an exact science where everything is 100% fitting the hypothetical. It's real life. >>



    No I know I'm just stating that big market teams don't necessarily equate to winning. Just like small market teams like San Antonio and OKC aren't necessarily at a disadvantage. It all comes to how the team I run.
Sign In or Register to comment.