Anti-Tanking / New Lottery System

[NuggOlesk]

Then there is a team who tanked: 12 win, tanked again, 14 wins, now playes fair 40 wins.

1,2+4,2+24=29,4 , so he still gets a prize. Still tanker only needs 2 season to tank, 3rd mis POs then good pick and probable FA money.

But if a good team loses his FA, next season is in the middle and loses some good players to retirement, so 3rd season starts with a bad team. Oki, he finds 1-2 good players, but can not get a good FA, he will try to win, but has a bad team, gets that 23 wins, but he was a good team last 2 seasons, so he is punished for it?
We wouldn't chance much for tankers, but good GMs get punished

If a tanker tanks two seasons to get one good draft pick, I'm good with that. Nobody is tanking two seasons. Plus current season record always worth more than previous seasons. 29W does not guarantee you the first pick, actually you get what, 5th higher odds at best.

That even wasn't the main point. + Have you made any calculations what would be the "W" for non tanking bad teams? That 5th at higest is random number!

Main poin is, that good teams that have a bad luck, at start of a new life cycle, they get punished! You sayd nothing about that.

[GreenBear]

The equal odds matter takes away the most important aspect of the draft: helping bad teams get better, build a future.

Tankers already ruined that. I'm just telling you how to stop tanking. Removing the incentive is the only way to do it. Equal odds for the top 3 picks would do that.

The proposed 3-year systems still give incentive to tank (just in an unnecessarily, more complicated way). So I wouldn't support that.

It doesn't seem like we're getting a consensus, and I doubt we're going to, which is not surprising. This is what the tankers want...

[Marcos_Beck]

Indeed, Nugg.. That's basically the only hole in the proposed 3-year system: good teams going into rebuild mode would take one year more to kickstart a rebuild with a top-5 pick unless lottery helps them.
But good teams who start rebuildings generally picks at the mid teens for the first rebuild years so.. I guess it's pretty normal to expect that. We would hardly wound anyone here, IMO.

As for what Doug said, there's no perfect system. I'd rather mitigate tankers' benefits without harming bad teams too much rather than eliminate them but also eliminate the chance of bad teams by nature become good again via draft. And we know how flawed is the system. Tankers will always find a way to get on top of what we're controlling if they want to tank.. Unfortunately.

[bt]

That wasn't necessarily what I was thinking but I can maybe post an example tomorrow.

[NuggOlesk]

Indeed, Nugg.. That's basically the only hole in the proposed 3-year system: good teams going into rebuild mode would take one year more to kickstart a rebuild with a top-5 pick unless lottery helps them.
But good teams who start rebuildings generally picks at the mid teens for the first rebuild years so.. I guess it's pretty normal to expect that. We would hardly wound anyone here, IMO.

But that means a good team must suck 1 extra year, then they rather trade picks to be good. Put their pick has less value now.

Other thing, this would generate massive end of season tanking. Like if you know you are out of PO, lose much, you have better pick value if the next season will be bad also.
It would only help at the start of the season until maybe max 3/4 of season, then would many lose incentive to win games. Use end of season tanking to prepare for tanking season and they have a good chance on top 3 pick.
Then it is tanker against tanker again, and no help.

[lakeshowak7]

Just not seeing how this can be stopped.

How is this more detrimental to the league than some of the trade rapes we've seen and have been approved?

[KW]

I don't see a reason to change anything. If guys want to make their teams bad, that's their decision. They're far from guaranteed to get stars out of it.

[NuggOlesk]

I don't see a reason to change anything. If guys want to make their teams bad, that's their decision. They're far from guaranteed to get stars out of it.

I also would not mind keeping the same system, and have more other rules...like we have this season, min. 16 points spent, so no 1-1-1-1 anymore. Maybe this already chances tanking so much that it will be much less of a problem,

but if we do chance we need to find the best solution with smalest holes and not doing harm to teams trying to win/get to the POs.

If we keep the old, lets see how season goes, and if seen new tanking things, thing other rules to prevent that.

That said, we still can all think of a way to make a tank-proof draft, we have no hurry with it, so it must be much better than right now or no change at all!

[Sun Scorched]

I also would not mind keeping the same system, and have more other rules...like we have this season, min. 16 points spent, so no 1-1-1-1 anymore. Maybe this already chances tanking so much that it will be much less of a problem.

... and hurts teams that aren't tanking......

[NuggOlesk]

I also would not mind keeping the same system, and have more other rules...like we have this season, min. 16 points spent, so no 1-1-1-1 anymore. Maybe this already chances tanking so much that it will be much less of a problem.

... and hurts teams that aren't tanking......

I don't support that! I was talking overall, as I didn't even know that some use 1-1-1-1 and that you used 14 points or what it was?
Rules should always help to be the best in fair grounds. I don't know how many winning teams used under 16 last season, if there where more, I wouldn't mind that being lower (14 or what ever).
If you where the only winning team using it, and a lot of tank teams, then it may be the needed sacrifice. But again, I think all rules that prevent tankers to tank should also be fair against teams that want to win.
I don't know how many used what, so I am not taking sides on that matter right now. I just want all to be fair and that teams that want to win, win and nothing but win, shouldn't get the short end of a stick.

[bt]

Indeed, Nugg.. That's basically the only hole in the proposed 3-year system: good teams going into rebuild mode would take one year more to kickstart a rebuild with a top-5 pick unless lottery helps them.
But good teams who start rebuildings generally picks at the mid teens for the first rebuild years so.. I guess it's pretty normal to expect that. We would hardly wound anyone here, IMO.

But that means a good team must suck 1 extra year, then they rather trade picks to be good. Put their pick has less value now.

Other thing, this would generate massive end of season tanking. Like if you know you are out of PO, lose much, you have better pick value if the next season will be bad also.
It would only help at the start of the season until maybe max 3/4 of season, then would many lose incentive to win games. Use end of season tanking to prepare for tanking season and they have a good chance on top 3 pick.
Then it is tanker against tanker again, and no help.

You're missing the point.

Nothing will stop GM's tanking but if it's over a prolonged period, it sticks out a lot more and admins could then step in or issue sanctions. It's easy to tank a season and get away with it, not so much to do it for 2-3 seasons on end unless you genuinely suck as a team.

[NuggOlesk]

Indeed, Nugg.. That's basically the only hole in the proposed 3-year system: good teams going into rebuild mode would take one year more to kickstart a rebuild with a top-5 pick unless lottery helps them.
But good teams who start rebuildings generally picks at the mid teens for the first rebuild years so.. I guess it's pretty normal to expect that. We would hardly wound anyone here, IMO.

But that means a good team must suck 1 extra year, then they rather trade picks to be good. Put their pick has less value now.

Other thing, this would generate massive end of season tanking. Like if you know you are out of PO, lose much, you have better pick value if the next season will be bad also.
It would only help at the start of the season until maybe max 3/4 of season, then would many lose incentive to win games. Use end of season tanking to prepare for tanking season and they have a good chance on top 3 pick.
Then it is tanker against tanker again, and no help.

You're missing the point.

Nothing will stop GM's tanking but if it's over a prolonged period, it sticks out a lot more and admins could then step in or issue sanctions. It's easy to tank a season and get away with it, not so much to do it for 2-3 seasons on end unless you genuinely suck as a team.

To be honest, you are missing the point, and big time.
As you say tanker tank anyway, but there are ways to make it non faktor, so it will remove tanking. Yeah always there are things to do against any system, but the tanking itself can be removed!
But I am not ok, of good teams losing their value.
I am not ok if my pick loses value just because some of you are afraid of tankers and can not make up a better system, that is dumb!
Make up extra rules, to prevent tanking strats or lets make a new better system, where teams who want to win don't lose.
You only talk about tankers, and you are top dog, ofc you don't care, but we have a lot of middle class teams, most teams are middle class. Teams that are not the "title" teams, but also are not tanking. THEY all lose. Only top teams win from that, because tankers can not make up ground fast.
So you are missing the point x10000 and you only think of yourself!

[GreenBear]

To be honest, you are missing the point, and big time.
As you say tanker tank anyway, but there are ways to make it non faktor, so it will remove tanking. Yeah always there are things to do against any system, but the tanking itself can be removed!
But I am not ok, of good teams losing their value.
I am not ok if my pick loses value just because some of you are afraid of tankers and can not make up a better system, that is dumb!
Make up extra rules, to prevent tanking strats or lets make a new better system, where teams who want to win don't lose.
You only talk about tankers, and you are top dog, ofc you don't care, but we have a lot of middle class teams, most teams are middle class. Teams that are not the "title" teams, but also are not tanking. THEY all lose. Only top teams win from that, because tankers can not make up ground fast.
So you are missing the point x10000 and you only think of yourself!

Nugg for president 2016. Down with the 1%ers!

[bt]

To be honest, you are missing the point, and big time.
As you say tanker tank anyway, but there are ways to make it non faktor, so it will remove tanking. Yeah always there are things to do against any system, but the tanking itself can be removed!
But I am not ok, of good teams losing their value.
I am not ok if my pick loses value just because some of you are afraid of tankers and can not make up a better system, that is dumb!
Make up extra rules, to prevent tanking strats or lets make a new better system, where teams who want to win don't lose.
You only talk about tankers, and you are top dog, ofc you don't care, but we have a lot of middle class teams, most teams are middle class. Teams that are not the "title" teams, but also are not tanking. THEY all lose. Only top teams win from that, because tankers can not make up ground fast.
So you are missing the point x10000 and you only think of yourself!

No, as I have no idea what the hell you are talking about, lol. Is it because I directly quoted you about missing the point that got you all up in a sweat?

But, I assume for some reason that you're talking directly to me about the rough system Marcos proposed? One I also don't think works as he described it. Is that it?

I never proposed any examples about my potential multi year idea. I just said it might work and that teams might stand out more so if they tank over a longer period. Go back and read my posts again.

You can direct all your comments about good teams losing their value to Marcos though.

[andrei]

Why are teams tanking?

Because it is easier to get a top pick if they do.

Why would they choose to do this if there are other options to rebuild?

Because FA (both PA and Game) is useless for rebuilding teams as nobody wants to sign. They have to overpay every time. Every single year FA makes the rich richer and the gap grows more and more.

Because trading is tough and a newer GM going into a trade with experienced GM is likely to lose.

What other options do rebuilding teams have?

?

[lakeshowak7]

Why are teams tanking?

Because it is easier to get a top pick if they do.

Why would they choose to do this if there are other options to rebuild?

Because FA (both PA and Game) is useless for rebuilding teams as nobody wants to sign. They have to overpay every time. Every single year FA makes the rich richer and the gap grows more and more.

Because trading is tough and a newer GM going into a trade with experienced GM is likely to lose.

What other options do rebuilding teams have?

?

I proposed in the Facebook chat that we should bring back player agents.

Tanking creates a negative culture on a team in real life and in most cases players won't sign there or may even not resign with the team.

If you tank like Brett is currently doing you should have an increased chance of losing players to free agency, etc.

If a 3 year system is seriously being considered (not even sure how'd you mathematically quantify some events), then perhaps it may just be even more beneficial to bring back player agents.

[WillyJakkz]

Speaking of tanking why in the world is MIL starting Danilo Gallinari at SG when Buddy Hield is rotting on the bench?

Are they league controlled or do they have a GM.

If they are league controlled that is not good as a stsrting lineup.

[andrei]

yeah LBJ is also injured - will adjust

[NuggOlesk]

Speaking of tanking why in the world is MIL starting Danilo Gallinari at SG when Buddy Hield is rotting on the bench?

Are they league controlled or do they have a GM.

If they are league controlled that is not good as a stsrting lineup.

Gallo is 21 ppg with very good shooting and playing like a star! Why shouldn't he be in the lineup

[WillyJakkz]

Speaking of tanking why in the world is MIL starting Danilo Gallinari at SG when Buddy Hield is rotting on the bench?

Are they league controlled or do they have a GM.

If they are league controlled that is not good as a stsrting lineup.

Gallo is 21 ppg with very good shooting and playing like a star! Why shouldn't he be in the lineup

Gallo is playing well but should he be starting SG?