PDA

View Full Version : Why doesn't the "Stepien Rule" apply to LA?



Manimal
04-07-2013, 12:06 PM
For those asking, "What is the Stepien rule?"
Definition: The NBA prohibits teams from trading first-rounddraft picks in successive seasons.

Why?

The rule was put in place in response to Ted Stepien's disastrous run as owner and de facto general manager of the Cleveland Cavaliers.
During Stepien's reign, the Cavaliers made a practice of trading future draft picks for marginal veteran players. His most notable deal sent a 1982 first-round pick to the Los Angeles Lakers in exchange for Dan Ford and the 22nd overall pick in 1980. That 1982 pick wound up being the first overall selection, which the Lakers used to select future hall-of-famer James Worthy.

Some other notable players who were selected with picks Stepien traded away:

•Sam Perkins (1984, 4th overall)
•Derek Harper (1983, 11th overall)
•Roy Tarpley (1986, 7th overall)
•Detlef Schrempf (1985, 8th overall)
•Dennis Rodman (1986, 27th overall)

How does it work?
Examples:
The Ted Stepien rule prohibits the Knicks from trading their 2011 first-round draft pick, because their 2012 pick was traded to the Houston Rockets as part of the Tracy McGrady deal.


The LA Lakers
2008 - Pick traded to Memphis as part of Gasol trade.
2009 - Pick traded to Knicks for cash and a future second rounder
2010 - Pick traded to Memphis as part of Gasol trade
2011 - Pick traded to Brooklyn as part of Vujacic trade
2012 - Pick traded to Cleveland as part of Sessions trade
2013 - Pick traded to Phoenix as part of Nash trade

The LA Clippers
2011 - Pick traded to Cleveland as part of Baron Davis trade
2012 - Pick traded to Cleveland (onto Boston) as part of Bledsoe trade

How come the LA franchises can blatantly violate the rule? The Lakers especially.

lamzoka
04-07-2013, 12:41 PM
Because they select the players first then trade them.

They not trading "picks"

For example Toney Douglass was picked by the Lakers, then traded to the Knicks on draft night.

heyman321
04-07-2013, 12:45 PM
cause the league is in on a conspiracy to make Lebron the best player in the league. It's all a lie I tells ya!

Vinylman
04-07-2013, 12:48 PM
For those asking, "What is the Stepien rule?"
Definition: The NBA prohibits teams from trading first-rounddraft picks in successive seasons.

Why?

The rule was put in place in response to Ted Stepien's disastrous run as owner and de facto general manager of the Cleveland Cavaliers.
During Stepien's reign, the Cavaliers made a practice of trading future draft picks for marginal veteran players. His most notable deal sent a 1982 first-round pick to the Los Angeles Lakers in exchange for Dan Ford and the 22nd overall pick in 1980. That 1982 pick wound up being the first overall selection, which the Lakers used to select future hall-of-famer James Worthy.

Some other notable players who were selected with picks Stepien traded away:

•Sam Perkins (1984, 4th overall)
•Derek Harper (1983, 11th overall)
•Roy Tarpley (1986, 7th overall)
•Detlef Schrempf (1985, 8th overall)
•Dennis Rodman (1986, 27th overall)

How does it work?
Examples:
The Ted Stepien rule prohibits the Knicks from trading their 2011 first-round draft pick, because their 2012 pick was traded to the Houston Rockets as part of the Tracy McGrady deal.


The LA Lakers
2008 - Pick traded to Memphis as part of Gasol trade.
2009 - Pick traded to Knicks for cash and a future second rounder
2010 - Pick traded to Memphis as part of Gasol trade
2011 - Pick traded to Brooklyn as part of Vujacic trade
2012 - Pick traded to Cleveland as part of Sessions trade
2013 - Pick traded to Phoenix as part of Nash trade

The LA Clippers
2011 - Pick traded to Cleveland as part of Baron Davis trade
2012 - Pick traded to Cleveland (onto Boston) as part of Bledsoe trade

How come the LA franchises can blatantly violate the rule? The Lakers especially.

You obviously don't understand the rule.... it has nothing to do with trading consecutive years of first round picks.

It means you can't trade "future" 1st rounders in consecutive years. At no time in those years you used as examples did the Lakers actually have 2 consecutive #1's traded AT THE SAME TIME

Mr_Jones
04-07-2013, 12:56 PM
He's angry at something he doesn't even understand. Makes sense.

Manimal
04-07-2013, 01:08 PM
He's angry at something he doesn't even understand. Makes sense.

Again not angry. Don't care if LA wants to trade away all it's future first rounders.

And the future thing doesn't explain LA Clippers, who traded for Bledsoe on draft night 2010 and then Baron Davis during the 2011 season. So they traded away back to back "future draft picks.

Chronz
04-07-2013, 01:11 PM
maybe it's not their pick

Vinylman
04-07-2013, 01:31 PM
Again not angry. Don't care if LA wants to trade away all it's future first rounders.

And the future thing doesn't explain LA Clippers, who traded for Bledsoe on draft night 2010 and then Baron Davis during the 2011 season. So they traded away back to back "future draft picks.

again, the bolded shows you don't get it...

The L.A. Clippers acquired the draft rights to 18th pick Eric Bledsoe from Oklahoma City in exchange for a future conditional first-round pick. The year of that pick was not defined and the pick was "conditional" and thus was not considered consecutive

mikekhelxD
04-07-2013, 01:53 PM
One major detail about the rule that the OP seemed to leave behind is that the rule only, I repeat, ONLY applies to FUTURE first round picks. The label "future" I believe expires during draft night since it is considered current, not future. So let's say the Lakers have both 2013 and 2014 future first round picks, they can't trade both of them. However, once the 2013-2014 season starts, or during the 2013 draft night, the then 2013 future first round draft pick now becomes "current." So, they won't have problems trading away their 2013 and 2014 pick. The rule will only apply from 2014, 2015, etc "future" first round picks.

ThaDubs
04-07-2013, 02:46 PM
:facepalm:

bholly
04-07-2013, 05:54 PM
Again not angry. Don't care if LA wants to trade away all it's future first rounders.

And the future thing doesn't explain LA Clippers, who traded for Bledsoe on draft night 2010 and then Baron Davis during the 2011 season. So they traded away back to back "future draft picks.

The rule is essentially this: you can't get into a situation where it's possible that you could have consecutive future drafts without a first round pick.

When the Clippers traded Baron Davis in Feb 2011 they still had Minny's pick (which was protected for 2011 and unprotected for 2012), and they still had their own 2013, so there was no possibility that they would end up with no pick in consecutive future drafts.

When they sent Minny's unprotected 2012 first to NOH in December 2011, that left them without a 2012 pick, but again they still had their 2013 so there was no possibility that they would end up without a first rounder in consecutive future drafts. It obviously made no difference that they didn't have a pick in 2011, because that wasn't a future draft anymore.

At no point did they violate the rule.


again, the bolded shows you don't get it...

The L.A. Clippers acquired the draft rights to 18th pick Eric Bledsoe from Oklahoma City in exchange for a future conditional first-round pick. The year of that pick was not defined and the pick was "conditional" and thus was not considered consecutive

That's not quite right. The rule prevents you from even getting into situations where you might end up without consecutive picks, not just where it's guaranteed.
So, for example, say a team gives up a pick now that's protected in 2013, 2014, and unprotected in 2015. The rule prevents them from trading any pick earlier than 2017 - because if they wanted to trade, say, their 2016 pick, then it's possible they could end up without a first rounder in both 2015 and 2016, which violates the rule.

That's why a lot of pick transactions have wording in them that says things like this, which is the first rounder Philly owes Orlando:

2016 first round draft pick to Orlando
Philadelphia's own 2016 1st round pick to Orlando two years after Philadelphia satisfies their obligation to convey a 1st round pick to Miami (Top-14 protected in the 2016 NBA Draft, top-11 protected in 2017 and top-8 protected in the 2018 NBA Draft.). If Philadelphia does not send Orlando a first round pick by the 2018 NBA Draft, they Philadelphia shall convey their own 2018 and 2019 second round picks to Orlando. [Denver - L.A. Lakers - Orlando - Philadelphia, 8/10/2012]

Manimal
04-08-2013, 09:17 AM
The rule is essentially this: you can't get into a situation where it's possible that you could have consecutive future drafts without a first round pick.

When the Clippers traded Baron Davis in Feb 2011 they still had Minny's pick (which was protected for 2011 and unprotected for 2012), and they still had their own 2013, so there was no possibility that they would end up with no pick in consecutive future drafts.

When they sent Minny's unprotected 2012 first to NOH in December 2011, that left them without a 2012 pick, but again they still had their 2013 so there was no possibility that they would end up without a first rounder in consecutive future drafts. It obviously made no difference that they didn't have a pick in 2011, because that wasn't a future draft anymore.

At no point did they violate the rule.


Thanks, that explains it.

Vinylman
04-08-2013, 12:44 PM
That's not quite right. The rule prevents you from even getting into situations where you might end up without consecutive picks, not just where it's guaranteed.
So, for example, say a team gives up a pick now that's protected in 2013, 2014, and unprotected in 2015. The rule prevents them from trading any pick earlier than 2017 - because if they wanted to trade, say, their 2016 pick, then it's possible they could end up without a first rounder in both 2015 and 2016, which violates the rule.

That's why a lot of pick transactions have wording in them that says things like this, which is the first rounder Philly owes Orlando:

Wrong... it is exactly right since I was responding to a specific incident in the OP's original post... your comment is also right but has ZERO to do with what I posted about

bholly
04-08-2013, 07:21 PM
Okay - I sort of see what you were saying - that it's about when the picks are for, not when you trade them, that matters, so manimal's "they traded Bledsoe pick in 2010 and Davis pick in 2011 so that's a violation" is wrong. Is that what your post was saying?

That's cool, but I still think the way you worded that last sentence is wrong, or at least misleading to people reading it. The reason the trades were okay is because they had the guaranteed Minny 1st, not because the Bledsoe pick was conditional, which your post implies.

Just to be clearer, the pick from the Bledsoe trade was a 2012 first rounder, top-10 protected in 2012,2013,2014,2015 and unprotected in 2016.
The pick from the Baron Davis trade was an unprotected 2011 first rounder.
If it weren't for the Minny pick, that would've meant from Feb 24 2011 (Davis trade) until Jun 23 2011 (draft) they were in a situation where they could end up without a 2011 pick or a 2012 pick - and that's a violation of the Stepien rule.
It was just the Minny pick - which guaranteed them either a 2011 or 2012 first rounder - that allowed them to make those trade.

I realize now that you were responding to another of his mistakes - and if I recall correctly you're one one of the very few around here that really understands this stuff - but I still think that bolded sentence wasn't quite right.

JasonJohnHorn
04-09-2013, 12:28 AM
The rule does stipulate that you have to have at least one pick in the first round every other year (doesn't matter if it's yours or one you traded for, like a lottery team can trade their pick to a contender for a vet so long as they swap first rounders, then the lottery team still has a first round pick), though you are allowed to trade that pick once you have drafted a player. So you can work out a trade with another team, pick the guy they want, and then trade him to them.


I do not know all the trades and how they went down, but it does look like the Lakers have broken the rule. BBR has the draft history for every team, and even when the player is drafted by the team and trade that day, they still credit the team that drafted him, and it seems that the Lakers have not been credited with drafting a first round pick in three years: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/draft.html

It does seem odd.

bholly
04-09-2013, 12:31 AM
Did you even read the thread? That's not what the rule says. It only has to do with FUTURE draft picks. You can trade your first rounder away every single year if you want, you can just never be in a position where you might end up with consecutive FUTURE drafts without a first round pick.