Zimbra Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Lottery reform gets soundly defeated at the BoG meeting. 13 teams voted against, much higher than the 7 that were predicted beforehand.- GOOD. Maybe now Grantland will shut up about it. . . I can't imagine this will the the NBA's last try at some kind of reform, so I doubt we've heard the end of it. I imagine we'll see a similar formula, with some tweaks to the numbers, up for another vote in a year or two. Speaking of Grantland (segue!), their show on ESPN debuts tomorrow. I'm interested to watch it; I tend to really enjoy Simmons and Lowe talking about basketball.
Cole Miner Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Basically that was the only win for the Sixers this year that will matter. First overall pick does have significantly more value than the second pick. I get why they want to try and protect the integrity of the game as well. Just seems odd to go after the Sixers when they didn't get the first pick. Weren't even the worst team. I wouldn't have been all that bothered had the changed it. Just the timing seemed bs. My first sentence in this post does say something though about how things are set up. Lottery reform won't change that though.
evilwaldo Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Lottery reform gets soundly defeated at the BoG meeting. 13 teams voted against, much higher than the 7 that were predicted beforehand.- GOOD. Maybe now Grantland will shut up about it. . . Just ask yourself what side of the issue would GRANTLAND be on if the Celtics were the ones tanking. 4
Dolfan in NYC Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 From what I understand, some smaller market teams voted against it in order to get more time to study it, so it looks like reform of some kind may happen in the future. Maybe not under this plan, but something.
Gonzo Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Yeah, the Timberwolves are going to be bad. . .again. . .but this is still pretty awesome. The ". . .and Jason Priestley" at the end is a nice final touch. 1
The Comedian Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 Just seems odd to go after the Sixers when they didn't get the first pick. Weren't even the worst team. 1. The Sixers play in Philadelphia, and "hate on Philly" is an old stand-by trope for all lazy jerkoff sports "journalists". 2. Bill Simmons was pissy that the Sixers did a better job of tanking than his precious Celtics, so he made a big deal out of it. Anyway I'm glad the lottery reform failed because it was fucking idiotic and completely ignored the reason teams have to tank in the NBA in the first place, which is the league's tendency towards dynasties and away from parity. 1
SorceressKnight Posted October 22, 2014 Posted October 22, 2014 1. The Sixers play in Philadelphia, and "hate on Philly" is an old stand-by trope for all lazy jerkoff sports "journalists". 2. Bill Simmons was pissy that the Sixers did a better job of tanking than his precious Celtics, so he made a big deal out of it. Anyway I'm glad the lottery reform failed because it was fucking idiotic and completely ignored the reason teams have to tank in the NBA in the first place, which is the league's tendency towards dynasties and away from parity. But that's the real issue- HOW CAN YOU change the reason teams have to tank in the NBA? No rule out there can change the simple facts that: In basketball, if all things are otherwise equal, the team with the best player on the court will probably win the game, that you need at least one All-Star...and probably two or three, to have a prayer at winning the NBA title, and most NBA players are good friends with each other and would quite like to play together, and will even take pay cuts if necessary in order to play together. Even just adding a franchise player option to the salary cap could help a little bit, but that'd be more likely to lead to players going into Vince Carter-levels of shutting down, demanding franchise money and not wanting to lead their franchise until their team gets fed up and trades them to a team with another star. 1
RandomAct Posted October 23, 2014 Posted October 23, 2014 Fuck the season is so close I am practically edging over here. 1
evilwaldo Posted October 23, 2014 Posted October 23, 2014 The problem is the rookie contracts and second contracts. Players have too much leverage over teams when their rookie deals are over. Guys are coming and making $6 million without being ready to play the game. It reminds me of the NFL before they installed the rookie pool and the whole second contract area is a joke. The player basically names his price and if the team says no plays out his final year of the rookie contract with a no-trade clause and walks to free agency. Just look at the Suns and Bledsoe. He is not a $12 million per season player.
Zimbra Posted October 23, 2014 Posted October 23, 2014 There is a 100% chance this story is about Quin Snyder. 2
evilwaldo Posted October 23, 2014 Posted October 23, 2014 Here is the key problem with rookie contracts. Look at Wiggins deal. Andrew Wiggins $5,510,640 $5,758,680 $6,006,600 $7,574,322 $9,846,619 His last year of his rookie contract he will be making almost $10 million per season and he will be making $5.5 million this year alone. Is he worth $5.5 million? I would say no. The NBA rookie salaries are way out of whack with what other rookies are paid in other pro sports. They get bank without having to prove anything.
AlfredoE Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 Steve Nash out for season. I believe that is the end of his career. Great player. I hope he stays in some capacity within the Laker organization.
Personal Jesus Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 Here is the key problem with rookie contracts. Look at Wiggins deal. Andrew Wiggins $5,510,640 $5,758,680 $6,006,600 $7,574,322 $9,846,619 His last year of his rookie contract he will be making almost $10 million per season and he will be making $5.5 million this year alone. Is he worth $5.5 million? I would say no. The NBA rookie salaries are way out of whack with what other rookies are paid in other pro sports. They get bank without having to prove anything. Basketball more than any other sport allows rookies to contribute. Most of the time, whoever is the Rookie of the Year will be a top 40 player for that season statistically and that's not top 40 money. It's the teams responsibility to take a player in the slot that'll make the salary look like a steal, if teams draft badly that's on them, they have ample time to scout these kids. Sports teams, especially in the NBA now, throw around bad contracts and make bad picks and then franchises and fans want their teams to get bailed out. It's these GMs' job to know a good contract from a bad one, and good pick from a bad one. 3
_MJ_ Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 darren rovell @darrenrovell "In three seasons, the Lakers have paid Steve Nash $27.9 million for 65 games."
Brian Fowler Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 That's almost Grant Hill in Orlandoesque.
AlfredoE Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 65 games? I don't think he played that many. I would guess some of those games included games were he left due to an injury flaring up or those couple of games last year were he dressed just to fill out seats like that one game in Cleveland. I think the Nash deal was probably the worst trade the Lakers ever made especially given that they may be losing their draft pick this year which might be a high pick. At the time that deal happened, I was more concerned about who was going to play the 20 or so minutes Nash had to sit because the Lakers had no back-up point guard at the time. I didn't think he'd miss that many games, but that's the risk when you trade for a 38 year old point guard who was held together by magical powers in Phoenix.
mco543 Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 At some point we need a 30 for 30 on the voodoo shit going on in the Phoenix Suns' trainer's room.
Greggulator Posted October 24, 2014 Posted October 24, 2014 Nash is one of my all-time favorite players. Those 7 Seconds Or Less teams really evolved the NBA in terms of pace and the like. What a fun player to watch.
goodhelmet Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 It's amazing to think of that summer when the Lake picked up Nash and Howard. Old guys like jdw were talking about how this was the beginning of the next Lakers dynasty. The rest of the league was put on notice and then.... collapse... glorious collapse. I feel bad for Nash who I like as a player but not for the Lakers. 2
RandomAct Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 I still love the idea that the NBA league office was practically dick in hand before the season started over the idea of a Laker/Heat final.
Ace Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 I thought it would be a return to the Malone/Payton season.
Niners Fan in CT Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 The Lakers would kill for a Malone/Payton season.
Charlie M. Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 Nash was inevitably going to collapse physically. Happy to see it happened on the Lakers dime and screwed them over. 2
AlfredoE Posted October 25, 2014 Posted October 25, 2014 It's amazing to think of that summer when the Lake picked up Nash and Howard. Old guys like jdw were talking about how this was the beginning of the next Lakers dynasty. The rest of the league was put on notice and then.... collapse... glorious collapse. I feel bad for Nash who I like as a player but not for the Lakers. I actually didn't feel that way. Don't get me wrong, I was excited, but I constantly brought up that as great as adding those two would be, Nash needed a quality backup and the Lakers didn't have one. The team was similarly built like the year they brought in Payton & Malone. Very unbalanced with a thin roster. Made worse with a horrible fit at coach in Mike Brown that eventually led to the dumb decision of hiring Mike D'Antoni who every big on the roster hated and he clashed with. jdw is a surprisingly overly optimistic Lakers fan which is quite shocking.
Recommended Posts