For the good of the NBA, shouldn't some of these teams stop tanking?

[Eric Cartman]

Contrary to popular belief, tanking will in many cases leave you in a mediocrity at best state.

For reference see the current Charlotte Bobcats and PELICANS.

[GOBB]

Contrary to popular belief, tanking will in many cases leave you in a mediocrity at best state.

For reference see the current Charlotte Bobcats and PELICANS.

Yeah and only one team wins the NBA title, so just because you have a franchise player, impact players doesnt mean you're going to win a title.

[Qwyjibo]

Contrary to popular belief, tanking will in many cases leave you in a mediocrity at best state.

For reference see the current Charlotte Bobcats and PELICANS.

Well you still need good management to go along with tanking. The Bobcats don't suck because they tanked. They suck because they've had piss poor management. The Pelicans are a poor example because they tanked and got a legit franchise player. Tanking didn't cause them to waste money on Tyreke Evans.

[Sarcastic]

That may be right. To me it's a whole other discussion, as there's a lot of variables to consider when it comes to fixing the draft. The lottery was constructed specifically to eliminate tanking and now it seems that isn't good enough.

It's not a different discussion. The system in place perpetuates tanking. Look at sports that don't have a draft. Do you think the University of Alabama would lose games on purpose to get a recruit? Hell no. They get the best players because they win and pay their coaches top dollar.

It's a retarded system we have that rewards losing. Until it's replaced then we will always have tanking.

[ballup]

It's not a different discussion. The system in place perpetuates tanking. Look at sports that don't have a draft. Do you think the University of Alabama would lose games on purpose to get a recruit? Hell no. They get the best players because they win and pay their coaches top dollar.

It's a retarded system we have that rewards losing. Until it's replaced then we will always have tanking.

If you do a rookie free agent system, then there won't be balance in the league as rookies will more likely to go to hotspots like LA. It only somewhat works on the collegiate level because most good college players don't stay the full 4 years.

[Sarcastic]

If you do a rookie free agent system, then there won't be balance in the league as rookies will more likely to go to hotspots like LA. It only somewhat works on the collegiate level because most good college players don't stay the full 4 years.

Yea because Alabama, Oregon, and Louisiana have had a hard time recruiting the best players away from all the NY, and Los Angeles schools.


If the teams in shitty cities build themselves up with a winning culture, the players would go. Also a cap could be put in place to prevent every recruit from joining up in one place.

If you had a free agent system in the NFL, who do you think would attract more players, the NY Jets or Green Bay Packers?

[GOBB]

Yea because Alabama, Oregon, and Louisiana have had a hard time recruiting the best players away from all the NY, and Los Angeles schools.


If the teams in shitty cities build themselves up with a winning culture, the players would go. Also a cap could be put in place to prevent every recruit from joining up in one place.

If you had a free agent system in the NFL, who do you think would attract more players, the NY Jets or Green Bay Packers?

Ny jets

[robert de niro]

tanking is really bad, it only damages the sport. In many other leagues and sports bottom 3 teams go down to the lower division and the top 3 of that lower division go up, it's a way of keeping it competitive, NBA is rewarding the slack teams BIG

[ballup]

Yea because Alabama, Oregon, and Louisiana have had a hard time recruiting the best players away from all the NY, and Los Angeles schools.


If the teams in shitty cities build themselves up with a winning culture, the players would go. Also a cap could be put in place to prevent every recruit from joining up in one place.

If you had a free agent system in the NFL, who do you think would attract more players, the NY Jets or Green Bay Packers?

The college landscape is much different than the NBA landscape. The NBA has much less teams and viable players to choose from compared to the collegiate level due to its higher demands. In addition, college is only a means for many players to the pros. There's more of an incentive for college players to go to less popular schools, which is to show off their talent so that they can raise their stock for the pros. Higher draft stock stays with the player throughout his professional career and it helps players get more chances in the pros. The same cannot be said for the pros because the pros is the end, not the means.

The best recruits out of college would want to play in the cities with better winning backgrounds, not to the bottom teams where they have to go through some tough years in order to compete. Weaker teams need the opportunity to get a cornerstone piece to change their fortunes.

It's not easy to build a winning culture. These teams are competing against each other, not all teams can be winners and even if they could, it would take decades before there would be some semblance of even winning cultures.

That NFL analogy proves the imbalance I'm pointing out. The best recruits would want the Packers because they've had a previous record of a winning culture. There wouldn't be a balance in the league because the best recruits can just go to the contenders, creating a richer get richer scenario.

[ripthekik]

tanking is bad.

[COLOR="White"]and real men wear green likes diicks[/COLOR]

[poido123]

[QUOTE=robert de niro]tanking is really bad, it only damages the sport. In many other leagues and sports bottom 3 teams go down to the lower division and the top 3 of that lower division go up, it's a way of keeping it competitive, NBA is rewarding the slack teams BIG

[Eric Cartman]

Well you still need good management to go along with tanking. The Bobcats don't suck because they tanked. They suck because they've had piss poor management. The Pelicans are a poor example because they tanked and got a legit franchise player. Tanking didn't cause them to waste money on Tyreke Evans.

You are right on the Pelicans.

Ok what about the Sacramento Kings?

[gyu]

Give the teams that just missed the playoffs the highest probability to win the lottery (9th has highest, then 10th, etc.).

[IncarceratedBob]

The thing is that when you have the chance to get a sure fire hall of famer and certain franchise player like Wiggins you need to do whatever it takes to get him. I can't blame the teams tanking, the one who wins the lottery will get multiple championships for their trouble

[Jameerthefear]

Worked for us twice before, so why not again...