duncan wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Feelings About The Playoffs And Tanking
Collapse
X
-
Your ex came by; you can call me Jonas Valanciunas, cause I'm the king of rebounds!
-
Not quite sure where this fits, but I decided to post in this thread cause it's a good one. I found this article,
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/070411
It discusses the nature of tanking, the nature of the lottery, league parity, contraction, and other topics. It's a good read. Bullets from the link:
1. Change the lottery from weighted odds to straight up one ping pong ball per lottery team.
2. Top six seeds in each conference a lock for playoffs. The rest battle it out in a mini-tournament for the respective 7th and 8th seeds.
3. Contraction (of both season and teams), with a lottery for the players on the contracted teams.
I particularly like 1 and 2. What he's trying to address is the problem of tanking as a legitimate strategy. No one likes it but the way the league is set up now it's not unreasonable to try. But at least with the elimination of the weighted odds, teams would have no excuse to try to lose games, and consistently bad franchises wouldn't be necessarily rewarded with high lotto picks. I don't want to go into all the details, so read the article and post your thoughts.
Comment
-
But are you in favour of it?
Say you were the NBA's equivalent of Solon, and were brought in on a one-time deal with full authority to fix the chasm between the league's elite and impoverished. Your goal is to increase competitiveness and eliminate the tank motive.Last edited by jeff_hostetler; Thu Jan 27, 2011, 01:45 PM.
Comment
-
jeff_hostetler wrote: View PostI don't see it that way. Say the Raps get a top quality PG in the draft. For argument's sake let's call him Kyrie Irving.
If you've got Irving, Derozan, _, Ed Davis and Bargnani, all you need is to fill that blank with a quality defensive 3 who can hit the open J and in general act a utility guy - of which there are many - and you'll be in the playoffs for the next 3-4 years at least. Derozan has the shortest contract of those 4, with two years remaining. I can't forsee him signing elsewhere if this is the core the Raps have. So. Irving, a point who can dribble, penetrate, score, pass and defend with the best of them, has two 20 point scorers to assist him. That's plenty. If you get that defensive 3, then that's 3/5 better than average defenders in your starting 5. Pretty solid if you ask me. I also am confident that down the line Alabi will turn into something useful.
The Wiz have nothing like the Raps in terms of quality players to surround an elite young PG.
Comment
-
jeff_hostetler wrote: View PostBut are you in favour of it?
Comment
-
I'd like to think I'm objective enough (and detached enough), that if the ACC was never at capacity for a Raptors game and struggled to draw and keep their fans to the point that keeping them in the league was simply a capitalist exercise to the detriment of quality b-ball; that if their fans were blase about the whole thing, that i'd probably accept the loss of the team if such a reality presented itself.
Such is not the case though. The Raps have an insane fan base. With all the pluses and minuses that accompany such insanity. But it's great, and so if the Raps were shut down at this point I would be upset. Especially in light of the off-the-wall bias thrown this way by the U.S. sports media and announcers (Boston...)
Contraction though was the least attractive and least important component of that article. It was more an afterthought that I don't really think needs to be included at this time. It was how to combat the tank motive and make the league more exciting for the lower-echelon clubs that was the point.
Comment
-
Forget that though. Would you feel slighted, given the current situation, if the league put the Raptors on the chopping block? Every fan base in the league thinks they're the best.
Contraction is not the answer even if arena doors need to be closed in places. Those teams should be moved to better markets.
Comment
-
Well, like I said, I don't think at this juncture cutting the Raps is justified. To contract the Raptors would defeat the purpose of contraction.
Every fan base may think they're the best, but take yourself outside that base - all bases and look at the league realistically - and it becomes clearer that some teams are just simply a weak draw. Ever seen Atlanta play at home? Yeesh.
Don't get me wrong here though: I'm not in favour of contraction. I didn't really even want to talk about contraction. Lottery reform, anti-tank mechanisms. Possible playoff reform. Those are the issues that were the meat of the article I posted.
Comment
-
Ok so let's look at the struggling teams.
http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance
The Hawks and 76ers have been around for over 40 years. The Pacers and Nets, over 30. Is it right to take franchises away from cities who have been in the league so long and have no intention of ever moving? What about the Kings? They're lousy in gate numbers now but early this decade you'd be hard pressed to see a stronger fan base when it came to showing up for games and being enthusiastic. They struggle at the gates now because their fans aren't rewarding mediocrity. Who decides who leaves and how do they leave? What do you tell the ownership groups in Philly, Indiana, Atlanta, New Jersey or Sacramento? Sorry but we're closing you down. Your $300M franchise isn't worth the price of a Big Mac combo anymore, have a nice day? Does the league buy them out? That could cost $1B to buyout four teams. What about their long term lease or mortgage agreements on arenas? Who pays for those? I'm sure the owners of the building or holders of the mortgages will want their money. Does a league who had to take out a loan a couple years back for 15 teams have the money to buyout those teams? And why would the PA sign up for potentially 14% of the league getting laid off?Last edited by Apollo; Thu Jan 27, 2011, 02:39 PM.
Comment
-
Nine New Faces wrote: View PostGotta disagree. Look, what happened to Chris Bosh after he was told he was the franchise and then expected to lead a playoff-bound team without much help into the second round, but couldn't. Same with Vince and his inability to make it to the finals. The league is filled with guys who've had that franchise tag put onto players who haven't been able to produce. High expectations coupled with a decent roster and not quite enough talent or drive can really damage a player. To win consistently in the NBA you need at least one great to amazing player that makes the game much easier for their lower-paid teammates. Especially for a team not going into the luxury tax to buy upgraded help around at least 2 stars if you expect get deep into the playoffs.
Basically it comes down to this: when you look at Bargs and DeRozan, do you see two guys that genuinely make the players around them better? I don't. DeRozan might get there but his game needs at least 3 more years of work before he can score consistently in a playoff atmosphere. That's before we talk about his defense. And as for Bargs, I just don't see the commitment to defense ever being there. And neither is a leader.
The reason that everyone seems to argue though has more to do with whether you believe in aiming for a championship or settling for the being the Hawks or the Jazz.
If this team made the playoffs, no one would expect them to go deep in the playoffs. The key goal is just making it to the dance, especially for a young team like ours. Just making it there is an accomplishment. It gives the team something to strive for next year. ANd why shouldn't expectations raise beyond that? As an athlete, you have to challenge yourself. You can't be happy to get knocked out early every year.
As for comparing us to the Jazz. I'd love to be a fan of the Jazz. That team is consistently good, all in part of being well coached, and they're always a threat.
I'm a bit perplexed as to why you (and other Raptors fans on this board) wouldn't want to see this team in the playoffs..
Comment
-
MangoKid wrote: View PostI'm a bit perplexed as to why you (and other Raptors fans on this board) wouldn't want to see this team in the playoffs..
The simple fact of the matter is that it's not enough to have one superstar. You need multiple stars, including one all-time great player, for the most part. The Detroit Pistons are the one anomaly here, and that's because they were champions in a weak year, and had 4 all-stars, and one borderline all-star all playing in their prime, each uniquely suited for their own particular positions.
The point of competitive sports isn't just to be good. It's to become a champion, and in the NBA, you simply cannot do that without having perennial all-stars, plural.
The NBA needs to recognise this in how it structures the league. Regarding fans who wouldn't want to see the Raptors in the playoffs this season, it's because they recognise this most frustrating component: it will not help them to become a champion. They are of the "championship or bust" mind set. Given how the league is, they are simply being realistic.
I would love to see the Raps in the playoffs, to have them put together a string of winning seasons, but without the championship, it's just sex with no orgasm: fun for a while but ultimately tiring and pointless.
Comment
Comment