76ers fighting NBAs lottery changes

[GreenWarrior]

i'm sick of these reactionary solutions to the draft because of the cavs winning it every yr. it happened, it sucks. but these solutions suck even worse.

the best solution I've heard so far is putting the teams not in the playoffs in a tourney and have those teams battle for draft seeding.

[D.o.s.]

i'm sick of these reactionary solutions to the draft because of the cavs winning it every yr. it happened, it sucks. but these solutions suck even worse.

the best solution I've heard so far is putting the teams not in the playoffs in a tourney and have those teams battle for draft seeding.

Seriously. It would beat the hell out of watching the draft lottery every year, and it would help punish teams like the 76ers who have little interest in fielding a competitive squad.

Scheduling would be the biggest concern there, though.

[Moranis]

I rather see GMs construct a team to suck for ONE year for a pick, then actively and aggressively trying to improve the roster by making trades and signing FA

I'd rather see GMs never construct a team to suck specifically for a pick.  I can accept teams constructing a team that sucks as a secondary effect of clearing out bad contracts or letting young players develop, but if you're going to tank for picks, I want the odds to make it so that you will have to be miserable for several years and wreck your fan base if you want to plan to suck for as long as you need to get a #1 pick.

You can adjust the rules so that tanking is a bad idea.  You can't adjust the rules so that GMs don't pursue bad ideas.

And yet Philadelphia is probably better positioned to win a title in the next 5 years than Boston is.  Philadelphia has the reigning rookie of the year, a top contender for rookie of the year this year in Noel, a top contender for rookie of the year next year in Embiid, a top contender for rookie of the year two years from now in Saric, some solid other young players like Wroten and Moultrie, and 30 million in cap space with the only "bad" contract being the easily movable Thad Young.  Philly will have another very high pick next year as well to add another potential rookie of the year candidate. 

Philly is much better positioned to win and win big than Boston is and it isn't close.

MWC was rookie of the year in one of the weakest rookie classes in NBA history.  Noel hasn't played a single minute and was seen as a project BEFORE he blew out his knee.  Embiid couldn't even make it through a college season without a serious injury and then suffered another injury between college and the draft, leading his agent to refuse to let teams see his medical records. And in Embiid's one season, he played just over 23 minutes a game and put up 11 pts, 8 boards and 2.6 blocks.  In addition, all the cap space in the world means nothing if your team and franchise suck so bad that no one wants to play for you.

Even in an optimistic scenario, Philly is going to be horrible for at least 2 more years, bad to mediocre for 1 to 2 more after that and then they're going to have to start worrying about how they're going to afford to keep all these high draft picks.

I suspect the kind of "fan" who doesn't care about how bad his team sucks will eventually cease to be a fan in any real sense of the world.

Mike

It may have been a weak rookie class, but MCW's numbers were quite good and compare favorably with most rookie of the year winners (at least guards).  I mean it isn't every day a player averages 16.7 p, 6.3 a, 6.2 r, and 1.9 s, none the less a rookie.  I mean seriously, compare him to Lillard, Irving, Evans, Rose, Roy, and Paul the last six guards to win the award.  MCW might actually have the best numbers of the group given his obscene rebounding numbers (he is also by far the best shot blocker of the guards and actually had more blocks a game than Griffin the last big man to win the award).  Now he definitely needs to work on his shooting, as it was bad, but statistically lets not act like MCW only was given the award because he had no competition.  I mean his rookie season was probably better than Durant's rookie year (and he compares favorably with Lebron's rookie year as well).

[D.o.s.]

It might behoove you to consider that Blake essentially "stole" John Wall's rookie of the year award, and factor in Wall's 16.4/8.3/4.6/1.8 steals to your comparison.

IMO, Carter Williams is no Wall, even if they compare statistically.

[Future Celtics Owner]

Philly has no class.

[Moranis]

It might behoove you to consider that Blake essentially "stole" John Wall's rookie of the year award, and factor in Wall's 16.4/8.3/4.6/1.8 steals to your comparison.

IMO, Carter Williams is no Wall, even if they compare statistically.

Do I think MCW is as good as Wall, nope, but they do compare statistically as rookies.  Maybe MCW gets even better and becomes a better player than Wall.  Maybe he stays the same or maybe he regresses like Evans.  I have no idea, but it is silly to act like he didn't deserve the award because the rest of his class was weak when he absolutely compares favorably with all of the prior recent winners (at least guards and frankly even wings like Durant and James).  MCW would be the second best player on Boston this year (behind Rondo).  He will probably be the second best player on Philly this year (behind Noel).  Frankly, I would not be surprised at all if Philadelphia has a better record than Boston this year.  Both MCW and Young are better scorers than anyone on Boston.  Noel is by far the best interior defender on either team.  I think both teams will be in the 22-28 win range, so I could see Philly having a better record than Boston.

[Future Celtics Owner]

How about this: when a team like the sixers trades away their best players for essentially nothing, and actively loses.....take away their pick. I think there may be enough evidence that the sixers are deliberately losing, even with the players they have.

They actually played reasonably well in the beginning of the season.

[Fafnir]

No surprise that Moranis is still on the Philly bandwagon. He's wanted to follow their exact blueprint since LeBron signed with Miami.

I do think the lottery changes will probably get delayed by a year, most rule changes take a while to get through the NBA bureaucracy no matter what.

[moiso]

i'm sick of these reactionary solutions to the draft because of the cavs winning it every yr. it happened, it sucks. but these solutions suck even worse.

the best solution I've heard so far is putting the teams not in the playoffs in a tourney and have those teams battle for draft seeding.

I think it's not because the Cavs win but because teams have been putting crappy teams out there on purpose.

I like that solution.  Like the NIT of the NBA.

[Fafnir]

I like that solution.  Like the NIT of the NBA.

So the incentive isn't to tank via roster destruction but by holding out players deliberately and then going full bore late in the season?

I also think that the idea that current players would play hard so that their team can get a higher draft pick to likely replace them on the team a strange one.

[Moranis]

No surprise that Moranis is still on the Philly bandwagon. He's wanted to follow their exact blueprint since LeBron signed with Miami.

I do think the lottery changes will probably get delayed by a year, most rule changes take a while to get through the NBA bureaucracy no matter what.

I don't need to follow that blueprint, but I hate this status quo nonsense.  Rebuilding and competing at the same time just doesn't work.  You really do need to either blow it up or go all in.  I would be fine with either method, I just want to choose a method.  Pick something and do it.  Either trade the young guys and picks and build around Rondo, or trade the vets for picks and young players.  I don't care which, just pick one because the team as currently constructed has no chance at a title so I don't see the point in this roster construction as all it does is delay the next title contenders.  If you aren't a contender and you aren't ever going to be contender without major changes, then you should be doing something differently because all Boston is doing is delaying the inevitable. 

[BballTim]

I rather see GMs construct a team to suck for ONE year for a pick, then actively and aggressively trying to improve the roster by making trades and signing FA

I'd rather see GMs never construct a team to suck specifically for a pick.  I can accept teams constructing a team that sucks as a secondary effect of clearing out bad contracts or letting young players develop, but if you're going to tank for picks, I want the odds to make it so that you will have to be miserable for several years and wreck your fan base if you want to plan to suck for as long as you need to get a #1 pick.

You can adjust the rules so that tanking is a bad idea.  You can't adjust the rules so that GMs don't pursue bad ideas.

And yet Philadelphia is probably better positioned to win a title in the next 5 years than Boston is.  Philadelphia has the reigning rookie of the year, a top contender for rookie of the year this year in Noel, a top contender for rookie of the year next year in Embiid, a top contender for rookie of the year two years from now in Saric, some solid other young players like Wroten and Moultrie, and 30 million in cap space with the only "bad" contract being the easily movable Thad Young.  Philly will have another very high pick next year as well to add another potential rookie of the year candidate. 

Philly is much better positioned to win and win big than Boston is and it isn't close.

Haha, go ahead keep telling yourself that.

Philly has arguably the worst reigning ROY in NBA history; take away Rondo, Green, Sullinger, and Bradley then maybe it's close.

How is Boston going to win a title though?  I'd much rather have Noel and Embiid than any one currently on Boston's roster.  They both have superstar potential and are big men. 

  You've seen enough of Noel on offense to declare that he has superstar potential? Like top 5-10 player in the league potential?

[Moranis]

I rather see GMs construct a team to suck for ONE year for a pick, then actively and aggressively trying to improve the roster by making trades and signing FA

I'd rather see GMs never construct a team to suck specifically for a pick.  I can accept teams constructing a team that sucks as a secondary effect of clearing out bad contracts or letting young players develop, but if you're going to tank for picks, I want the odds to make it so that you will have to be miserable for several years and wreck your fan base if you want to plan to suck for as long as you need to get a #1 pick.

You can adjust the rules so that tanking is a bad idea.  You can't adjust the rules so that GMs don't pursue bad ideas.

And yet Philadelphia is probably better positioned to win a title in the next 5 years than Boston is.  Philadelphia has the reigning rookie of the year, a top contender for rookie of the year this year in Noel, a top contender for rookie of the year next year in Embiid, a top contender for rookie of the year two years from now in Saric, some solid other young players like Wroten and Moultrie, and 30 million in cap space with the only "bad" contract being the easily movable Thad Young.  Philly will have another very high pick next year as well to add another potential rookie of the year candidate. 

Philly is much better positioned to win and win big than Boston is and it isn't close.

Haha, go ahead keep telling yourself that.

Philly has arguably the worst reigning ROY in NBA history; take away Rondo, Green, Sullinger, and Bradley then maybe it's close.

How is Boston going to win a title though?  I'd much rather have Noel and Embiid than any one currently on Boston's roster.  They both have superstar potential and are big men. 

  You've seen enough of Noel on offense to declare that he has superstar potential? Like top 5-10 player in the league potential?

I believe he has 18-20 point scorer potential, which added to his rebounding and defense would put him in that range. 

[Granath]

the best solution I've heard so far is putting the teams not in the playoffs in a tourney and have those teams battle for draft seeding.

I don't think this is a good idea. Actually, it's a really bad idea.

First of all the worst teams are at a disadvantage. Take the NBA this year. Phoenix was the best non-playoff team with 48 wins and they would have a huge advantage in such a "tourney". So the mediocre teams get to improve while the truly bad teams stay truly bad without good assets to improve themselves. That doesn't sound too good.

Secondly, it would encourage certain teams to tank out of the 7th and 8th playoff spot so they could enter this tourney as the favorites. If I'm Danny saddled with a marginal team fighting for the last playoff spot and I have a choice of getting swept by the #1 seed or entering the new-Lebron James sweepstakes as the odds-on favorite, I'm not trying to get that playoff spot. I'm tanking to get into this losers tourney. Tanking out of the playoffs is worse, IMO, than tanking for a top pick. Since the games will likely be played at home, the team will probably make as much revenue to boot than playing on the road in the playoffs.

Finally, you're asking the players on the court to decide the direct seeding. Think about that for a minute and the ramifications of that. I'm a decent SF in a draft where the #1 player is a C and the #2 is a SF and my team gets to the semifinal game. I'm bricking every shot to lose the game so my team doesn't draft my replacement.

In short, it doesn't discourage tanking - it just encourages tanking of a different sort - and opens up a host other problems.

[BballTim]

I rather see GMs construct a team to suck for ONE year for a pick, then actively and aggressively trying to improve the roster by making trades and signing FA

I'd rather see GMs never construct a team to suck specifically for a pick.  I can accept teams constructing a team that sucks as a secondary effect of clearing out bad contracts or letting young players develop, but if you're going to tank for picks, I want the odds to make it so that you will have to be miserable for several years and wreck your fan base if you want to plan to suck for as long as you need to get a #1 pick.

You can adjust the rules so that tanking is a bad idea.  You can't adjust the rules so that GMs don't pursue bad ideas.

And yet Philadelphia is probably better positioned to win a title in the next 5 years than Boston is.  Philadelphia has the reigning rookie of the year, a top contender for rookie of the year this year in Noel, a top contender for rookie of the year next year in Embiid, a top contender for rookie of the year two years from now in Saric, some solid other young players like Wroten and Moultrie, and 30 million in cap space with the only "bad" contract being the easily movable Thad Young.  Philly will have another very high pick next year as well to add another potential rookie of the year candidate. 

Philly is much better positioned to win and win big than Boston is and it isn't close.

Haha, go ahead keep telling yourself that.

Philly has arguably the worst reigning ROY in NBA history; take away Rondo, Green, Sullinger, and Bradley then maybe it's close.

How is Boston going to win a title though?  I'd much rather have Noel and Embiid than any one currently on Boston's roster.  They both have superstar potential and are big men. 

  You've seen enough of Noel on offense to declare that he has superstar potential? Like top 5-10 player in the league potential?

I believe he has 18-20 point scorer potential, which added to his rebounding and defense would put him in that range.

  We'll see, I suppose. Everything I've read about him points to a pretty weak offensive game.