I was just thinking today as I was watching the Champions League final, wouldn't the NBA be better if they didn't have a draft? I think with players now coming from all corners of the world it would be easier if the league gets rid of the draft. It'll give scouts a bigger role and I think without the draft, there would be a better chance for the league to get better international players. I know the draft is meant to give the weaker teams an advantage at getting better, but with all the busts and only a few eventually living up to their high draft expectations, I don't think it would make much difference at all. For every LerBon, Yao, Hakeem, and Duncan... there countless Boguts, Stromile, Kwame, Darko, and other mediocre players. My point is most teams don't know how their draft pick will turn out either way. The upsides of this is that there will be no more tanking. Players like Scola and Sabonis could be scouted earlier and play for the NBA while they are still young and at their peaks. Players like Yi could choose where to play instead of being forced to play for a team he hasn't even heard of. The downside is of course all the good players can just go to the few better teams who can afford them while the smaller market teams are stuck with B-level players. Stern might have to get rid of the divisions and conferences, and not only that, but most likely overhaul the whole system. I can live with that. I could be wrong, since I'm comparing this to the soccer system. I realize that the only way this will work is if there are other international leagues in the world that are just as prominent to keep from all the good players joining the same teams in the same league. However there's always wishful thinking. Just my thoughts. Yours?
No, then that would means in a sense, the rich would get richer. How would a bad team or a small market team get the top player? It would be a bidding contest basically. All you would have are the big cities getting the best players, wouldnt make sense at all. stupid thread btw
That's what makes leagues like the NBA fun. There is a system of checks and balances. The draft being a big factor. We don't have to worry about billionaire owners creating an all star team, basically buying a championship. Even teams that do pool all star caliber players like the boston celtics end up having weaker role players, as shown in the previous two rounds. Even though I don't know much about soccer, i know that Chelsea and ManU always make it to the finals. How boring is that knowing that these two stacked teams will always have the most talented players on earth. Btw, what an exciting games, who would have thought it would have ended in a tie . Great exciting free kick ending . Just playin'...
I actually like the draft, and i feel it might be better when soccer also uses a draft. In soccer it are always the same teams that win (namely the rich teams).
No, and you've stated the reason why. The rich teams will get better and better. Most leagues are dominated by 2 to 3 top teams and I am not a fan of modern day football.
Maybe I'm forcing this too much to be like soccer.. like I've stated this could only work if there are other leagues out there just as strong, much like how there are the Spanish league and EPL and a few good teams from Germany. The no-draft system will only work with multiple leagues so the players will be spread out. I'm hoping one day the Euro league will be stronger so players can be more spread out. I think it would be awesome if we can have a Champions League type of thing where the top 4 basketball teams from each league go into a playoff mode with each other.
It will normalize over time. Basically, at some point the good players will realize that the good team won't give them PT and will go to smaller teams to develop. Also, the big teams will have to trade with smaller teams to make space for players (limited roster space). There's still a salary cap too, so money is a huge factor, and generally speaking, the bottom teams have more money to spend.
No way. It is absurd. All you have to do is look at the Premier League and other leagues around the world and you can see that all the players just go to where the money is. Ie. Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Barcelona, Real Madrid etc. Their competitions are so lob sided its not even interesting unless those top 4 or 5 teams are playing each other. Just a bad idea IMO. The draft spreads the talent and its an important part of our league.
Hmm, how often have they been in the finals the last years? Chelsea? Did they ever make it to the finals bevore that? Manu? Hmm, was it 1999? But still, I like the draft. This way every team gets a better chance at being competitive. Perhaps they should make some slight changes to prevent tanking or parking a player overseas for several years, without him having the chance to play for another team.
Wouldn't this be what Stern wants? Boston, NY, Lakers... (Houston? ) in the conference finals every year?
that's not what fans of the smaller market teams want. and I personally get bored of the same teams in the finals over and over again. thats why you gotta have some type of parity.
Draft or no draft, as long as the teams have salary caps I think that should spread the talent around more. Besides unlike soccer, there are half the players on the floor at any given time so it's not like a team could have 7-9 all-stars. Players have egos and if a team stacks up on stars, they all would want to start or friction would occur. But either way.. isn't it consistent that the bigger markets would attract the better players? I think the no-draft could help some of the smaller markets if they have good scouts.
I think the draft should only be made for players coming from amateur basketball, i would love the NBA to remove all the restrictions to bring over foreign stars such as Scola, the NBA could have witnessed players like Bodiroga who never went to the NBA because of draft rules and was 10 times better than Stojakovic. It is also ridiculous that you force a player winning about 3 million per year to have a 50% pay cut just to play in the NBA.
so lebron signing with the spurs for his rookie contract would be ok because in 4 years they wouldn't be able to resign him? they might have won 4 straight championships. i think the lottery and the draft are working very well for the nba.
Just FYI, I don't hate the draft and it's served well up to this point. Plus it's obviously good for the smaller market teams. However if the draft was lifted, wouldn't the term "rookie" lose some of its significance as well in terms of contracts? The league could abolish the rookie contract rule and let newcomers be sign to a max deal. However theoretically if the contract/salary rule stays the same, if the Spurs can convince a rookie of Lerbon's caliber to play for them until his "rookie" contract expires, I would have no problem with that. I guess it all comes down to preference. I wouldn't mind having an EPL-like system. I would much rather see a Lakers or Knicks in the finals than a Bucks or Bobcats.
Ther's no way the NBA wiil get rid of the Draft bacause then all the big-market teams (NY, LA, CHI ) would buy up all the talent, leaving the small markets continually struggling.
according to the maxim: "If it is not broke, don't fix it." Please explain to me what is broke about the NBA draft. Seems all that you have said is it would stop tanking. Sorry, that's not enough of a reason to eliminate the draft. completely absurd
