NBA Postseason Change Ideas

[Ellipse]

I think the international soccer concept of everybody having a chance in the playoffs would really sell the product. Teams like Sactamento, Atlanta and Charlotte get absolutely zero coverage right now. Hell, they got their most coverage this year based off of who they would trade instead of on their actual performance. If they had a series, they would be in the spotlight for at least a week.

Right now, nobody cares about a 3rd of the NBA after Christmas. With an all participating playoffs, every team will have buzz. Sure, there will be some blowouts just like the 1 and 16 seed matchup of the NCAA tourney, but those games still get attention because everybody knows a 16 will beat a 1 eventually.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

The biggest mistake the NBA could make is emulating the NCAA tourney. The Best-of-5 first-round format was dropped because the NBA didn't like a hot 8th seed beating a 1 seed in the first round.

 

[Ellipse]

That's all we need is for the GSW's getting a top ten pick in multiple years, unless the NBA promises to give the jazz the first pick. Lol. Let the conspiracy theorist's run wild


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, so the issue isn't just tanking but also penalizing good teams for being good. Are there any more problems we are trying "fix", or is it just those two?

The problem statement needs to be clear or we may end up solving the wrong problem and making the current situation worse.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I'm telling you just giving draft points or some sort of allocation based on where teams finish would work to deter tanking... would add excitement and help teams in the middle. It would provide more hope to fanbases and NBA loves hope. Would provide a means to balance trades. Would also help teams get the guys they like and not just guys that fell to their range but were the BPA.

To get rid of intentional tanking you have to take away the tipping points. If bad teams are rewarded about the same as the teams around them in the standings then there is no reason to do shady things the league hates and that kill team culture.

 

[sgjazzfan]

Hard cap with no Max contract, rotating draft where you get the top pick every 30 years, but would get a top 5 pick every 6 years. Play every team 3 times. No divisions, no conferences. Top 16 make the playoffs.

I do like the 8 division games and 2 games vs every one else idea though. Division winners get the top 6 seeds and the other 10 best records maker the playoffs.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

Oh, so the issue isn't just tanking but also penalizing good teams for being good. Are there any more problems we are trying "fix", or is it just those two?

The problem statement needs to be clear or we may end up solving the wrong problem and making the current situation worse.

Don't put all 30 teams in the lotto


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[franklin]

Also, as far as anti-tanking ideas, I think the 2nd round should be an inverse of non-playoff teams records. Currently it's based on record, worst team drafting 1st in the 2nd round. Instead it should be the best non-playoff team drafting 1st in the 2nd round.

Combine that with the upcoming flattening of odds in next year's lottery, there might be more incentive to win games towards the end of the season than to lose.

They could also take away the top pick from the 8 top playoff teams (not based on regular season record but post-season results) and lottery them with equal odds to the 10-17th place teams who would then have 2 first round picks. That would do a lot for the league's parity problem and tanking issue.

 

[Jack Strop]

I see no reason whatsoever to change the lottery. Unless the league institutes a hard cap, with no exceptions, the larger market teams and those with owners who have deep pockets, will continue to dominate. I'd love for every team to be given $110M and then see what happens. You'd have a choice between using 80% of it on 3 stars and then filling with minimum salary types, or going with a deeper team. There could also be draft compensation depending on FA losses and additions (like the NFL): end of 1st or 2nd depending on the nature of the loss. For example, Jazz would get a pick at the end of the 1st for the Hayward and Hill losses. Had they signed a top FA, the compensation would move to end of 2nd round (or none).

 

[radiohegel]

Yeah, but some teams might be so far out of the bottom 3 that they might just try to improve their 2nd round pick?

IDK, I think it would work better if the odds were even flatter than the new upcoming change.

And even if it doesn't, I think it's nice for the teams who actually played relatively well. Maybe the play-in game can get the 1st overall pick in the 2nd round too.

What if you gave the play in winners a guaranteed top-6/8 (or so) spot in the lottery? Maybe say picks 6 and 7 are allocated to the winners of the play in for each conference (order maybe even just decided by coin flip), unless they happen to strike gold and get a top three pick in the lottery selection. That way you have another avenue to getting a really great draft pick, and probably as good of one as you will likely get in a tank slog like what's happening with the bottom this year.

 

[♪alt13]

teams 1-6 get a bye
teams 7-10 play a 3 game series

I think this largely takes care of the whole top 16 teams thing because only the bottom 5 in each conference will be in the lottery. The NBA gets an additional 8 to 12 playoff games and those games are all good match ups. Further it gives the teams that actually might be playing in June a week off before the playoffs start.

 

[gregbroncs]

Playoff format is fine, but I think taking the 16 best teams is better. The play in games kind of sounds fun. I wish they would abolish conferences for AS purposes. The game doesn't matter but the status clearly does. I think it is part of the reason Hayward left.

They want to do away with tanking, but no matter what they do 7-10 teams will have motivation to be bad. The new lotto format was supposed to fix it but I think it will may make it worse.

They should go to some sort of bidding system... you get allocated draft "space" based on where you finished in the standings and a bonus for making the playoffs. You can roll forward the "space" so if you are the worst team and the draft sucks you can choose not to bid your allocation for a terrible player. Could also trade the allocations to other teams (within a limit). Would help facilitate trades... a second round pick may not be valuable but getting some extra space would. This type of system would put more responsibility on good management and not luck. Would allow middle teams to get better by saving their space until they have enough to bid on a difference maker.

Only way I've heard that abolishes tanking is to do a rotating draft. In a 30 year period every team will draft at every position in the draft.

 

[♪alt13]

Only way I've heard that abolishes tanking is to do a rotating draft. In a 30 year period every team will draft at every position in the draft.

If only the bottom 10 teams were in the lottery and they all had a 10% chance at number 1, Why would you tank? Finishing with the worst and the 10th worst record is exactly the same and I don't see a team purposefully missing the Playoffs for a 10% chance at the number one pick.

 

[gregbroncs]

If only the bottom 10 teams where in the lottery and they all had a 10% chance at number 1. Why would you tank? Finishing with the worst and the 10th worst record is exactly the same and I don't see a team purposefully missing the Playoffs for a 10% chance at the number one pick.

That makes it so the teams that are 11th through 20th have a great reason to tank. This idea may make it so a full 2/3rds of the league has incentive to tank.