LABron James Discussion: The Final Year?

Discussion in 'Lakers Discussion' started by therealdeal, Jun 8, 2017.

  1. Panko

    Panko - Lakers 6th Man -

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2021
    Messages:
    1,251
    Likes Received:
    3,938
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Offline
    They would get pick #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 a nearly equal % of the time as #9, they just wouldn't get an outsized chance at the top 4 and be guaranteed #5. The deck isn't stacked against them, it just wouldn't be in their favor. It would be equalish for the bottom 7-8 or so. They would still get a healthy share of top picks with a normal distribution, but there's no incentive to tank.

    Besides, the Utah stuff this season and the stuff pika references is worse than Washington Generals stuff anyway imo*.


    This happens due to luck anyway, like with Dallas and San Antonio last year. Or due to injury status like when GSW got the #2 pick in 2020. The current tanking issue is worse than those things happening imo*.


    *And to much of the NBA, which is why we are where we are now, with current draft proposals.


    Love it. Would never get through ownership, obv.


    Agree. That's what the league office does though, try to keep the product afloat despite bad ownerships working against themselves and us. Given that, we seem to be not that far off, except that many of the proposals you suggest and that I agree with are extremely unlikely to get voted through by ownership.

    So although I favor many of your suggestions, I'm curious - what would you pick, if the only options on the table were (1) the current system or (2) the new proposal about to be voted on by owners tomorrow?

    As a side note, I'm also curious if you would pick one of those, or (3) my proposal above with teams #24-30 getting 9.5% then scaling down to team #17 getting 1.2%. Although that's academic, as it's not on the table.
     
    abeer3 likes this.
  2. abeer3

    abeer3 - Lakers Legend -

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    33,779
    Likes Received:
    92,831
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Offline
    the third one over current or the new proposal. i probably prefer current over the new proposal, though, as much like you're foreseeing things balancing out (i.e., rich not getting richer), i actually think the current system is already randomly punishing enough teams (see: indy's lost bet this year).

    i'm also quite wary of whatever this power they're giving to silver is as part of the new proposal. we don't need any more david stern stuff.


    it's frustrating to me what we discuss this when financial changes could probably solve it all, but the owners are too greedy and nervous about their own stupidity to agree to them.
     

Share This Page