If Silver is serios, and I very much doubt it, the first thing that should happen would be to ban Danny Ainge from the NBA for his multi-year tanking efforts!
I love Buddy and am sorry to see him go. He got caught in the unfortunate environment we have where salary matching can force teams to trade guys they like.
But I was a #NO. He just wasn't around long enough, though I will always be grateful for game 7 and his sending the Rockets home as losers. He'll at least get an honorable mention from me.
1. Serious solution. Flat odds lottery across all 30 teams. That’s it. If you’re a bad team, you’ll eventually get lucky. Can’t have anything else, too many welfare cheats.
2. Best, fun solution. At the all-star break, teams take turns, by ascending wins order, drafting a different Tank Team to tank for them. So for instance, SAC would get the first pick and they pick UTA. At the end of the season, teams are assigned a draft order by the current rules, so say UTA gets #3. Now since UTA was SAC’s tank, SAC gets the #3 pick.
The result is that no team is able to tank for themselves. Probably most teams will have no incentive for themselves to lose. If a team traded their pick already, they can pick a Tank team like OKC to try to screw the other team. Etc. And fans get the pleasure of rooting for another specific team (their Tank) to lose.
Yes, teams could form consortiums to lose together, but that would still be more interesting than the current BS system.
I like your #2. That would be entertaining and would eliminate the incentive for teams to tank.
My proposal: a modified version of the 'Gold plan' idea. Current playoff/play-in teams would be assigned draft position as they are now. For those who don't make the postseason, keep track of their winning percentage after being eliminated. Assign the highest final winning percentage (after elimination) to the top pick, 2nd highest to the 2nd pick, etc.
This would incentivize teams to keep playing hard after they are eliminated from the playoffs, and might actually favor the teams that get eliminated late. For example, if a team isn't eliminated until the last game or two, they could have a 1.000 winning percentage after elimination. So there would be no incentive at all for being the biggest loser and no advantage to getting eliminated early.
Both teams who lost the play-in game for the last spot in playoffs would get a bye in the first round. All others (12) would play one game (better record team with hca) to advance to quarterfinals. And then play until we get the winner of the first pick.
Picks in between are decided by regular season games(more wins better pick).
Personally, I think being bad once shouldn't be punished (or rewarded). Being bad 2+ times in a row, shame on the owner/front office.
One possible modification of what I proposed below is to have negative tank points accumulate from season to season, and only reset if the team makes the playoffs (real 1st round, not play-in).
Although an unintended consequence might be that teams aren't willing to give long contracts and take the risk of tanking multiple years in a row. Player's union wouldn't like that at all.
Imo the best solution (which will never happen) is to just abolish the draft. Bad teams can hoard cap space to sign rookies. Good teams can't. Plus no more artificially restricting the earnings of rookies.
A few years back, I saw something suggesting that the draft order for the next 20 years be set now. For example, when you're trading for that Laker pick in 2027, you know exactly where it's gonna land. There are pros and cons, and occasionally you're gonna have a good team with a great pick and a bad team with a bad pick, but it completely eliminates tanking. and it does make trading for picks a completely different experience.
I like the idea of a draft lottery for all the non-playoff teams and the first round losers. 22 teams with equal odds. The only reason to tank would be in the first round of the playoffs and that's not much of a reason at all.
I mean that gives huge incentive to tank for anyone 6th seed or worse because they have about a 0% chance of winning, and instead can potentially reload with a top pick.
Have a 'lottery' after every game. Every game would assign tank points. 25% chance each of:
- a loss adding a tank point and a win not counting either way (pro-tank)
- a win adding a tank point and a loss not counting (anti-tank)
- loss adding and win subtracting (very pro-tank)
- loss subtracting and win adding (very anti-tank)
To keep things fresh, maybe randomize (+- 10%?) those odds for each team (it could add to more or less than 100 'ping-pong balls').
The odds would be applied to each team (or maybe combined?).
The results could either be published all at once at the draft lottery, or (maybe more fun) at the end of every week/every month/when all teams have played 10 games. The lottery teams would then be ranked by tank points, which would then either be the draft order, or (probably) determine lottery odds.
Doing it during the season would also give teams more clarity as to where they stand before the deadline (maybe stopping several tanks per season), but maybe hurt deadline trades that involved protected draft picks.
Edit: This is intended to stop losing but it might create an entire class of teams that aim for mediocrity rather than sucking, and actually hurt teams that are really bad. It might also result in teams purposely losing in the play-in, since the odds would be much flatter. Maybe the lottery would only be top-10?
Suppose the Nets' odds/ping-pong balls distribution for that week was 20/30/20/20, and the Pacers' was 30/15/25/20. The Pacers would have better odds of gaining points by losing, whereas the Nets would probably be better off trying to win. But they wouldn't know those odds until after a certain number of games had been played.
If you combined the ping-pong balls for each team, the odds would be: 27% pro-tank, 25% anti-tank, 25% very pro-tank, 22ish% very anti-tank for both teams (the total ping-ping balls for each outcome would be: 50/45/45/40).
Personally, I would prefer the 1st option (each team gets individual odds).
#YES, not just for games 7 & 3 and the vibes. I believe his buddy cop routine with Jimmy elevated the entire team chemistry and made Jimmy appear more likable given his icy departure from Miami.
Good teammates are worth their weight in gold, which is why guys like Buddy, TJD, JTA, LoonDawg will always be higher in my lists. Especially in an environment where the coach keeps juggling lineups out of necessity and you maybe in the dog house for long stretches. I don't buy the Daryl Morey maxim of talent over chemistry.
Some interesting developments vis-vis tanking - but i think it is more talk then action
'Adam Silver on the draft lottery and tanking: "What we're doing now is clearly not working. It's time to look at new ways of doing things.”\
https://bsky.app/profile/keithsmithnba.bsky.social/post/3metxmzb4jc2r
If Silver is serios, and I very much doubt it, the first thing that should happen would be to ban Danny Ainge from the NBA for his multi-year tanking efforts!
#YES. Bring Buddy back!
I love Buddy and am sorry to see him go. He got caught in the unfortunate environment we have where salary matching can force teams to trade guys they like.
But I was a #NO. He just wasn't around long enough, though I will always be grateful for game 7 and his sending the Rockets home as losers. He'll at least get an honorable mention from me.
#YES - in a short time he brought us a lot of joy and #Game 7 was absolutely iconic!! Will miss him on our team!
#YES
No notes.
Highsmith dream is over. He signed a multi year deal with the Suns.
Dame just won the 3 point contest, third win in a row.
Already over? The only event I was remotely interested in watching and they schedule it during the day? ASW going from bad to worse.
It’s going up against the Olympics. Downside of NBA on NBC I guess.
Here is my solution to tanking.
1. Serious solution. Flat odds lottery across all 30 teams. That’s it. If you’re a bad team, you’ll eventually get lucky. Can’t have anything else, too many welfare cheats.
2. Best, fun solution. At the all-star break, teams take turns, by ascending wins order, drafting a different Tank Team to tank for them. So for instance, SAC would get the first pick and they pick UTA. At the end of the season, teams are assigned a draft order by the current rules, so say UTA gets #3. Now since UTA was SAC’s tank, SAC gets the #3 pick.
The result is that no team is able to tank for themselves. Probably most teams will have no incentive for themselves to lose. If a team traded their pick already, they can pick a Tank team like OKC to try to screw the other team. Etc. And fans get the pleasure of rooting for another specific team (their Tank) to lose.
Yes, teams could form consortiums to lose together, but that would still be more interesting than the current BS system.
I like your #2. That would be entertaining and would eliminate the incentive for teams to tank.
My proposal: a modified version of the 'Gold plan' idea. Current playoff/play-in teams would be assigned draft position as they are now. For those who don't make the postseason, keep track of their winning percentage after being eliminated. Assign the highest final winning percentage (after elimination) to the top pick, 2nd highest to the 2nd pick, etc.
This would incentivize teams to keep playing hard after they are eliminated from the playoffs, and might actually favor the teams that get eliminated late. For example, if a team isn't eliminated until the last game or two, they could have a 1.000 winning percentage after elimination. So there would be no incentive at all for being the biggest loser and no advantage to getting eliminated early.
My solution would be draft prize playoffs.
Both teams who lost the play-in game for the last spot in playoffs would get a bye in the first round. All others (12) would play one game (better record team with hca) to advance to quarterfinals. And then play until we get the winner of the first pick.
Picks in between are decided by regular season games(more wins better pick).
Just incentivizes being 9th, can still mean intentional losing happens for the teams that are near that
#2 would also create some fun rivalries
Personally, I think being bad once shouldn't be punished (or rewarded). Being bad 2+ times in a row, shame on the owner/front office.
One possible modification of what I proposed below is to have negative tank points accumulate from season to season, and only reset if the team makes the playoffs (real 1st round, not play-in).
Although an unintended consequence might be that teams aren't willing to give long contracts and take the risk of tanking multiple years in a row. Player's union wouldn't like that at all.
Imo the best solution (which will never happen) is to just abolish the draft. Bad teams can hoard cap space to sign rookies. Good teams can't. Plus no more artificially restricting the earnings of rookies.
A few years back, I saw something suggesting that the draft order for the next 20 years be set now. For example, when you're trading for that Laker pick in 2027, you know exactly where it's gonna land. There are pros and cons, and occasionally you're gonna have a good team with a great pick and a bad team with a bad pick, but it completely eliminates tanking. and it does make trading for picks a completely different experience.
I like solution #1 if smaller market teams were given a slightly higher chance of landing a lottery pick.
Bring him back on a minimum and play him spot minutes, I'd love it, which is one of my hwfl tests.
And we'll always have game 7 buddy.
#yes
The NBA seems determined to stop tanking and I'm just wondering how badly they are going to further break the NBA trying to do so.
The NBA is already broken due to tanking.
I fully back the NBA attempting to bring integrity to the sport. They may fail, but trying and failing is better than doing nothing.
Only way to stop tanking is to get rid of the draft entirely, no way small market teams will go for it.
I like the idea of a draft lottery for all the non-playoff teams and the first round losers. 22 teams with equal odds. The only reason to tank would be in the first round of the playoffs and that's not much of a reason at all.
I mean that gives huge incentive to tank for anyone 6th seed or worse because they have about a 0% chance of winning, and instead can potentially reload with a top pick.
#no. Wonderful person wonderful teammate, but just not a good enough basketball player except in one game seven, in addition to the short tenure.
OT: dumb tanking proposal:
Have a 'lottery' after every game. Every game would assign tank points. 25% chance each of:
- a loss adding a tank point and a win not counting either way (pro-tank)
- a win adding a tank point and a loss not counting (anti-tank)
- loss adding and win subtracting (very pro-tank)
- loss subtracting and win adding (very anti-tank)
To keep things fresh, maybe randomize (+- 10%?) those odds for each team (it could add to more or less than 100 'ping-pong balls').
The odds would be applied to each team (or maybe combined?).
The results could either be published all at once at the draft lottery, or (maybe more fun) at the end of every week/every month/when all teams have played 10 games. The lottery teams would then be ranked by tank points, which would then either be the draft order, or (probably) determine lottery odds.
Doing it during the season would also give teams more clarity as to where they stand before the deadline (maybe stopping several tanks per season), but maybe hurt deadline trades that involved protected draft picks.
Edit: This is intended to stop losing but it might create an entire class of teams that aim for mediocrity rather than sucking, and actually hurt teams that are really bad. It might also result in teams purposely losing in the play-in, since the odds would be much flatter. Maybe the lottery would only be top-10?
Example: Nets vs Pacers
Suppose the Nets' odds/ping-pong balls distribution for that week was 20/30/20/20, and the Pacers' was 30/15/25/20. The Pacers would have better odds of gaining points by losing, whereas the Nets would probably be better off trying to win. But they wouldn't know those odds until after a certain number of games had been played.
If you combined the ping-pong balls for each team, the odds would be: 27% pro-tank, 25% anti-tank, 25% very pro-tank, 22ish% very anti-tank for both teams (the total ping-ping balls for each outcome would be: 50/45/45/40).
Personally, I would prefer the 1st option (each team gets individual odds).
#YES
HWFL was created for players like Buddy
#YES
Two words: Game seven
#NO wasn't here long enough
#YES, not just for games 7 & 3 and the vibes. I believe his buddy cop routine with Jimmy elevated the entire team chemistry and made Jimmy appear more likable given his icy departure from Miami.
Good teammates are worth their weight in gold, which is why guys like Buddy, TJD, JTA, LoonDawg will always be higher in my lists. Especially in an environment where the coach keeps juggling lineups out of necessity and you maybe in the dog house for long stretches. I don't buy the Daryl Morey maxim of talent over chemistry.