Should the 76ers be penalized for purposly fvcking up their roster?

[OGBobbyJohnson]

Call me crazy but I really wouldn't mind Tyler Ulis at PG..He's a floor general but we're gonna need shooters to surround Oak,Embiid & Noel

 

[AAKing23]

Call me crazy but I really wouldn't mind Tyler Ulis at PG..He's a floor general but we're gonna need shooters to surround Oak,Embiid & Noel

We definitely need a scoring PG

 

[FTBS]

They get an opportunity. It's called the lottery. Hell, some squads in the middle won it and all y'all did was complain and cry conspiracy for Chicago and Cleveland.

In every sport, in order to potentially land the top amateur talent you must bottom out. The NBA and NHL are the ones who don't absolutely guarantee it.

Just because you're a treadmill team doesn't mean you're any more competent than a really bad team. Hell, if you're a treadmill team for a while, who's to say that team isn't comfortable being there?

Strawmen are beneath you. I never said a word about Chicago and I actually root for teams in the middle. No matter where they were, Cleveland getting 3 number 1s in 4 years was insane. What is wrong with all non-playoff teams getting the same opportunity like it used to be? Sometimes you'll have a 40 win team luck up and get a superstar. Sometimes it will be 20 win team.

You know good and well there is clear difference between the sports. The other sports aren't as dependent on individual talent or as top heavy.

You are right, all treadmill teams aren't competent. Some just happen to have talent. That doesn't mean those teams shouldn't get more chances to show and prove. Of course some treadmill teams are comfortable that doesn't mean they wouldn't like to be boosted to contender status by a Bron or Duncan or AD type talent.

 

[Bilz]

What is the point of punishing the 76ers for being bad? I don't understand the outrage. The draft picks arent a reward for failure, they're a form of welfare. The idea is that they give the needy a chance to get better. If they are getting top picks and they're still losing, they are the only ones suffering from that.

 

[FTBS]

What is the point of punishing the 76ers for being bad? I don't understand the outrage. The draft picks arent a reward for failure, they're a form of welfare. The idea is that they give the needy a chance to get better. If they are getting top picks and they're still losing, they are the only ones suffering from that.

Actually the decent teams that could actually do something with that talent but don't get a shot at it and are thusly stuck just being decent are the ones suffering. If you can keep sucking year after year with no consequences, you ain't suffering. They shouldn't be punished for being bad but all incentive to be bad should be removed.

 

[Rigby.]

Explain this "reward." There's no reward for losing. NONE. It's never ever worth it.

The irony is that if your goal is to win an NBA title, winning the lottery is the last thing you wanna do, because here's the list of lottery players drafted #1 who won a title with the team who drafted them:

David Robinson
Tim Duncan.

That's the list and they had to do it together.

You gotta stop with the fake outrage though. If this wasn't Philly, you wouldn't care.

But using that logic, Philly could multiply that success with even more lottery picks

 

[Bilz]

Actually the decent teams that could actually do something with that talent but don't get a shot at it and are thusly stuck just being decent are the ones suffering. If you can keep sucking year after year with no consequences, you ain't suffering. They shouldn't be punished for being bad but all incentive to be bad should be removed.

How do you accomplish that though? No matter how the system is set up, we will have accusations that it is being abused. I really don't think tanking is the epidemic that people make it out to be.

 

[Rigby.]

Forget that crap, Cleveland should be a dynasty, getting LeBron, then all those #1 overalls, and then getting LeBron back. They suck

Haven't they lost like 3 games??

 

[tremonthustler1]

Actually the decent teams that could actually do something with that talent but don't get a shot at it and are thusly stuck just being decent are the ones suffering. If you can keep sucking year after year with no consequences, you ain't suffering. They shouldn't be punished for being bad but all incentive to be bad should be removed.

Who are these "decent" teams suffering?


Again, drafting high is NOT a reward. That is outweighed by all of the other things that fukk your team up.

The real winners in your scenario will be bum ass players who aren't good at much but will get drafted high because of the dreaded P word. Instead of hoping they can contribute to your team down the line, you'd be asking them to carry your team.


Put it this way: if I'm a struggling team and I rested my hopes on a Zach LaVine type of player, what do you think the outcome is likely to be?

 

[tremonthustler1]

How do you accomplish that though? No matter how the system is set up, we will have accusations that it is being abused. I really don't think tanking is the epidemic that people make it out to be.

Tanking doesn't really exist unless there's a pick you're really trying to hold onto (like the Warriors and some other teams do).

People are just in denial as to how bad teams can be (you can't have a Golden State Warriors without a Sixers)

 

[FTBS]

How do you accomplish that though? No matter how the system is set up, we will have accusations that it is being abused. I really don't think tanking is the epidemic that people make it out to be.

Simple...give all non playoff teams the same odds. That way there is no benefit to going 16-66, but at the same time you aren't freezing shytty teams out either. It's a true lottery. I don't care about tanking as much as I care about system that is fair and makes sense. It doesn't make sense that it's better to be completely shytty than halfway decent.

 

[Bilz]

Simple...give all non playoff teams the same odds. That way there is no benefit to going 16-66, but at the same time you aren't freezing shytty teams out either. It's a true lottery. I don't care about tanking as much as I care about system that is fair and makes sense. It doesn't make sense that it's better to be completely shytty than halfway decent.

So how about the .500 team who has the choice between trying to win 3 games in the final week so they can get stomped by the Warriors or losing those games and having a good chance at a very high draft pick? No matter what, loopholes will exist.

 

[FTBS]

Who are these "decent" teams suffering?


Again, drafting high is NOT a reward. That is outweighed by all of the other things that fukk your team up.

The real winners in your scenario will be bum ass players who aren't good at much but will get drafted high because of the dreaded P word. Instead of hoping they can contribute to your team down the line, you'd be asking them to carry your team.


Put it this way: if I'm a struggling team and I rested my hopes on a Zach LaVine type of player, what do you think the outcome is likely to be?

Every single team that isn't sniffing a championship and isn't sniffing the likes of Towns or Okafor or Porzingis. Now we gonna act like the treadmill isn't a thing?

at the bolded. Obviously it has to be in the right year and you have to pick the right player, but to act as if getting high draft picks isn't beneficial is just silly. Otherwise teams wouldn't protect them.

If teams draft bum ass players it's on them. Bum ass players get drafted high all the time anyway. Teams already ask their young superstars to carry them. In the scenario I am suggesting, these players would actually have help from the gate and thusly wouldn't be asked to carry their team.

 

[tremonthustler1]

Simple...give all non playoff teams the same odds. That way there is no benefit to going 16-66, but at the same time you aren't freezing shytty teams out either. It's a true lottery. I don't care about tanking as much as I care about system that is fair and makes sense. It doesn't make sense that it's better to be completely shytty than halfway decent.

Then the 8th seed will just opt to try to avoid the playoffs. Before you say "but the playoff revenue and stuff" what do you think bad teams lose over the course of the year?

 

[FTBS]

So how about the .500 team who has the choice between trying to win 3 games in the final week so they can get stomped by the Warriors or losing those games and having a good chance at a very high draft pick? No matter what, loopholes will exist.

I don't care about loopholes though. I wouldn't knock a team in that scenario (like I am not knocking Philly now). At least they tried and were competitive for the overwhelming majority of the season.