So apparently simmons has proposed a system in which non-playoff teams play eachother to determine who gets the top picks. Shane Battier has also spoken out in support of a similar system. Would you support such a system?
I LOVE this idea, that they have to earn the top pick, and its among the losers so it still makes sense that they are not playoff teams, but it gives the fans something and players incentive to keep playing hard, I think its a great idea
Potential playoff teams (like the Rockets) who are struggling to get the 8th seed would "tank" just to miss the playoffs and destroy real teams that suck..
There shouldn't be 7th/8th seeds in the playoffs anyway, it's useless wasted air time which only serves to put more money in the owners' pockets. Six seeds in each conference is more than plenty.
So the best non-playoffs team would get the top pick? Isn't that against the whole ponit of the draft?
Maybe if we do it in tiers or something. The top 4 compete for the first pick, the next four compete for the 5th, and last 6 compete for the 9th pick. That way, teams that totally tanked still have to at least fight with other crappy teams for the 1st pick. Teams with the high W-L get homecourt in each tier. Still has some flaws, but its better than just ping-pong balls.
Anyway, there are ways to do this where it's more fair. For example, make it so that the playoffs are only to determine who wins the first overall pick, and the rest of the lottery is as normal (just starts with the 2nd pick instead of the 1st). You could even make it so that the "draft playoffs" are between the 10th, 9th, 8th, and 7th seeds in each conference. So, the 11th-15th seeds just go into the lottery as usual and probably get a top 10 pick. That way there is no "mediocrity treadmill" because average teams get a very good shot to win themselves a future star, but bad teams still get great draft slots.
Another problem would be players who don't want rookies to take their minutes or worse, replace them. They might jack up jumpers to lose on purpose. Some guys just care about the business side over winning. I don't see any Rockets like that. It's a fun idea, but a bad one.
The worst team should get the top pick. Then it would be like a race to see who's the slowest. Aka, anyone who is driving in front of me when I need to get somewhere.
I think there could be a motivational problem. Say you're a marginal starting PG for a team and your contract ends next year. Say in the next draft, there is a stud PG ala Kyrie Irving projected to be the first pick. Why would you try to get him to come your team when you know he'll replace you on your contract year? I know we like to pretend NBA players are professionals and act accordingly but we know that's just not the case. *
Add incentives for the players. Give starters each a $500K league-paid bonus for winning the draft playoffs, and bench players a $250K bonus. Also, permit teams to match the bonuses offered by the NBA with no cap penalty (so you could offer $1M to each starter, no small chunk of change). Finally, the draft playoffs would be an incentive in their own right, at least somewhat--more exposure for the players and a chance in the limelight to improve their career.
Anyway, does it matter THAT much if the players dog it a bit? The average fan won't be able to tell most likely, and in the end, one team is still crowned the victor of the draft playoffs and that team still gets the first overall pick--same end result.
I would think it would give GM's of bad teams an incentive to put a competitive team on the court instead of just tanking. A high draft pick is one of the best assets in basketball. You should have to earn them. Obviously smart GMs would still "microtank" if they didn't feel they could compete in the playoffs.
Keep the draft pick side of the lottery as it is. Share luxury tax money for the lottery teams, in reverse order. 14th pick gets the most, then 13th etc.
I think this idea is teh dumb. What if you are a center on team X, approaching restricted free agency, and you know the top pick is a great young big man. Wouldn't you have a conflict of interest competing for the top pick? I think the top pick should be awarded to the non-playoff team with the least number of flops during the season.
