Adam Silver says NBA monitoring 'serious' tanking issue, claims they considered introducing relegation

[tremonthustler1]

OKC CHOSE to go that route. No one forced them to have only young inexperienced kids on their squad. Pretty sure there's veterans out there, players that have been to college for 3 or 4 years with more NBA-ready bodies, players in the G-League, overseas, etc. No one forced them to basically have a NCAA team in the NBA. They chose those players. And that's my point : they chose those players because they don't want to be good too fast. Did they even TRY To get some good solid veterans this summer? Did they even try to package some of their draft picks and young players to bring in a couple of actual NBA players with experience? They want to keep on being bad in order to keep up getting those young talented players through the draft until they feel they got the right mix to start taking games seriously. Exactly like the Sixers did. They chose to be bad long before training camp even started.

As to the bolded I'm personally not a fan at all of this whole "NBA title or blow it up" mentality. Never have been never will be. So what "everyone" is telling Utah etc to do doesn't affect me because that's not my opinion on the matter. I still don't understand why Utah let both Gobert AND Mitchell go. The whole reasoning of "let's suck for 3 or 4 years" being somehow better than "let's be an average team for 3 or 4 years" makes no sense to me.

OKC chose to go that route when they traded for Chris Paul. Only, CP3 wound up revitalizing himself there and took them to the playoffs in the bubble (and everyone gave them credit for that). They're going the other way because talent wins in the NBA ultimately and they know more than anyone that it's hard to get talent to go there, so they're getting as many young guys as possible to see who fits before properly building a roster. The difference OKC and a team that packed it in is that everyone on the roster has an opportunity to stick around and every minute is devoted to developing someone.

OKC had Favors and Muscala last year, before that, Al Horford was there, George Hill was there. They traded for JaMychal Green and everyone waited to see who he'd go to after he got bought out. Do they not wanna be too good too fast? Sure, but there's something to that. They wanna build a long term roster. They're doing the opposite of what we clown Sacramento for. OKC has young guys and a boatload of picks. When they feel ready to make that jump, they'll do what Cleveland just did. Cleveland won with mostly young guys and are now cashing in their chips. NO won without Zion and now they're in a better place. OKC is waiting til they're ready to do the same. Y'all just look at the names on the roster and think they have to be better than this.

 

[pete clemenza]

Relegation? Relegate a bad team to where, the G League Tanking is what it is at this point. They let Hinke and Philly get away with it for years and it became a thing. Should've nipped it in the bud when they had a chance.

 

[mbewane]

OKC chose to go that route when they traded for Chris Paul. Only, CP3 wound up revitalizing himself there and took them to the playoffs in the bubble (and everyone gave them credit for that). They're going the other way because talent wins in the NBA ultimately and they know more than anyone that it's hard to get talent to go there, so they're getting as many young guys as possible to see who fits before properly building a roster. The difference OKC and a team that packed it in is that everyone on the roster has an opportunity to stick around and every minute is devoted to developing someone.

OKC had Favors and Muscala last year, before that, Al Horford was there, George Hill was there. They traded for JaMychal Green and everyone waited to see who he'd go to after he got bought out. Do they not wanna be too good too fast? Sure, but there's something to that. They wanna build a long term roster. They're doing the opposite of what we clown Sacramento for. OKC has young guys and a boatload of picks. When they feel ready to make that jump, they'll do what Cleveland just did. Cleveland won with mostly young guys and are now cashing in their chips. NO won without Zion and now they're in a better place. OKC is waiting til they're ready to do the same. Y'all just look at the names on the roster and think they have to be better than this.

That exactly what I'm saying : they chose to go this route. That's their choice, no one forced them. I just feel that if you decide to not put on a court that can't be competitive TODAY you shouldn't be rewarded. I don't see why that's so controversial. And I'm not saying that the worst team shouldn't be able to draft AT ALL, they would still be able to draft later picks of course. I'm just putting ONE pick (the number one pick) out of the reach of the worst team. If they know how to scout and draft they should still be able to find valuable players and keep building a competitive team. If not that's on them.

 

[Paper Boi]

Relegation? Relegate a bad team to where, the G League Tanking is what it is at this point. They let Hinke and Philly get away with it for years and it became a thing. Should've nipped it in the bud when they had a chance.

relegation ain't coming, it even says in the article.

but imagine trying to tell owners who got arenas they need to sell out and teams they paid hundreds of millions/billions for you gonna send their team to the minor leagues. that shyt would never fukking fly.

players on those teams would be demanding to be traded/refusing to play too...

imagine you paying someoen $30 mil+ a year to play against the santa cruz warriors in front of 200 people that shyt could never happen with basketball. people do not have the same attachment to the minor league/g-league teams like they do for those local minor league teams in soccer, it simply isn't financially viable in any way.

 

[tremonthustler1]

That exactly what I'm saying : they chose to go this route. That's their choice, no one forced them. I just feel that if you decide to not put on a court that can't be competitive TODAY you shouldn't be rewarded. I don't see why that's so controversial. And I'm not saying that the worst team shouldn't be able to draft AT ALL, they would still be able to draft later picks of course. I'm just putting ONE pick (the number one pick) out of the reach of the worst team. If they know how to scout and draft they should still be able to find valuable players and keep building a competitive team. If not that's on them.

The #1 pick doesn't even win you a title. There are teams who look for more ping pong balls who realistically aren't even getting a top pick. They just don't wanna be the Knicks being one pick away from Curry. You can draft well, but this isn't baseball where you can sign Jose Altuve for 15 racks and he becomes one of the best players of this generation or the NFL where your 7th rounder can become a pro-bowler. I get that we expect everyone to start a season and tell you "you never know. It could happen. Everyone's 0-0." But it's about the bigger picture and in the NBA the key is to sell hope. If you can't sell that one way or another, you have no product.

Relegation? Relegate a bad team to where, the G League Tanking is what it is at this point. They let Hinke and Philly get away with it for years and it became a thing. Should've nipped it in the bud when they had a chance.

You know why Hinkie "got away with it?" Because Philly fans supported it, and they supported it because they were sick of rooting for a team with a medium floor but a low ceiling. Embiid hasn't even gotten them any farther than when they started, but Embiid and the hope for these talented players to maybe be Sixers gave them a reason to give a fukk. Meanwhile pundits were wondering why the Sixers weren't offering Greg Monroe and Al Jefferson max money just to give it the ol' college try.

 

[dh86]

It’s outlined in the NBA constitution that all 30 NBA teams have to try to win. The level of bad basketball we’re going to see after the all star break isn’t fair to the fans, which should come first.

 

[mbewane]

The #1 pick doesn't even win you a title. There are teams who look for more ping pong balls who realistically aren't even getting a top pick. They just don't wanna be the Knicks being one pick away from Curry. You can draft well, but this isn't baseball where you can sign Jose Altuve for 15 racks and he becomes one of the best players of this generation or the NFL where your 7th rounder can become a pro-bowler. I get that we expect everyone to start a season and tell you "you never know. It could happen. Everyone's 0-0." But it's about the bigger picture and in the NBA the key is to sell hope. If you can't sell that one way or another, you have no product.

Exactly, so establishing a rule that the worst team in the league can't get the first pick shouldn't be so controversial and would diminish the tanking.

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

Exactly, so establishing a rule that the worst team in the league can't get the first pick shouldn't be so controversial and would diminish the tanking.

No way would all of the owners in the league go for that rule and even you know that. The lottery is fine as it is in it's current form, but the odds need to be tinkered around with just a bit more. As other posters have mentioned, some of these teams are just bad and it's not for the lack of trying.

 

[mbewane]

No way would all of the owners in the league go for that rule and even you know that. The lottery is fine as it is in it's current form, but the odds need to be tinkered around with just a bit more.

Owners gonna bytch about any potential change anyway. Just like fans actually.

 

[Phantum]

They should have all the lottery teams play a tournament in Siberia for the #1 pick.

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

Owners gonna bytch about any potential change anyway. Just like fans actually.

True, but they're the ones calling the shots not Silver. Creating that type of rule would have the potential to backfire big time. Hell your Knicks could end up being the worst team in the league and you'd be pissed if they got denied the #1 pick because of the rule you want to be created.

 

[mbewane]

True, but they're the ones calling the shots not Silver. Creating that type of rule would have the potential to backfire big time. Hell your Knicks could end up being the worst team in the league and you'd be pissed if they got denied the #1 pick because of the rule you want to be created.

It's called negociations, they can at least suggest a change and work things out. Otherwise there would be no need for a commissioner at all if only the owners are calling the shots.

Matter of fact I could care less about how high we draft. What I do care about is drafting well and developping those players in a competitive environment. Over the past 20 years only 2 number one picks have been MVPs (Lebron and Rose) and six have been champs (Bron, AD and Kyrie in leading roles, then Wiggs, plus Dwight and Bogut). Drafting the number one pick is no guarantee.

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

It's called negociations, they can at least suggest a change and work things out. Otherwise there would be no need for a commissioner at all if only the owners are calling the shots.

Matter of fact I could care less about how high we draft. What I do care about is drafting well and developping those players in a competitive environment. Over the past 20 years only 2 number one picks have been MVPs (Lebron and Rose) and six have been champs (Bron, AD and Kyrie in leading roles, then Wiggs, plus Dwight and Bogut). Drafting the number one pick is no guarantee.

You say that, but Knicks fans bytch and complain every single year about not being lucky in the draft most notably during the Zion/Ja draft and how they ended up at #3. Let the Knicks end up with the #1 pick this year and I guarantee that you'll be singing a different tune

 

[mbewane]

You say that, but Knicks fans bytch and complain every single year about not being lucky in the draft. Let the Knicks end up with the #1 pick this year and I guarantee that you'll be singing a different tune

You asked about ME, now you're talking about "Knicks fans". I told you how I (as in ME PERSONALLY) felt, but you're out here throwing generalizations about "Knicks fans".

What's the number one draft good for if it's to draft a Markelle Fultz, Anthony Bennet or a scared Ben Simmons. Or if you can't develop the player as he needs to be developped. Since when have the Knicks been known for knowing how to develop their players? Given our trash management it's a safe bet that we would manage to draft a bust anyway. Why should I trust them to magically make better choices when they have the frst pick as opposed to the third for example.

 

[Thavoiceofthevoiceless]

You asked about ME, now you're talking about "Knicks fans". I told you how I (as in ME PERSONALLY) felt, but you're out here throwing generalizations about "Knicks fans".

What's the number one draft good for if it's to draft a Markelle Fultz, Anthony Bennet or a scared Ben Simmons. Or if you can't develop the player as he needs to be developped. Since when have the Knicks been known for knowing how to develop their players? Given our trash management it's a safe bet that we would manage to draft a bust anyway. Why should I trust them to magically make better choices when they have the frst pick as opposed to the third for example.

I wouldn't lump Bennett in that group considering that Cleveland never wanted to make that pick, but couldn't find anyone to trade with them. The majority of teams in the league are shytty at developing players hence them still being in the lottery years later, but that doesn't mean that they don't want the #1 pick.

Remember that a few months from now when the majority of teams go into full tank mode for Wemby.