PDA

View Full Version : Should the NBA free agency happen before the draft?



FlashBolt
06-26-2018, 09:55 PM
Rockets are pushing for it and it makes a lot more sense. What do you guys think?

warfelg
06-26-2018, 10:01 PM
Yes. 100%.

Top of the draft wouldn't change. The effect would come at 15-40, where teams would jockey to get players that fit their needs at that point.

TrueFan420
06-26-2018, 10:10 PM
Yes

Scoots
06-26-2018, 11:34 PM
No. Teams have more control over free agency than they do over who they can get in the draft.

More-Than-Most
06-26-2018, 11:50 PM
No. Teams have more control over free agency than they do over who they can get in the draft.

with stars wanting to play with stars it is honestly better for the majority of teams to have the draft after free agency... If a team misses out they know they can fill that spot now with the draft.

KnickNyKnick
06-27-2018, 12:21 AM
i like the change. wouldn't mind it either way.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 07:12 AM
I have been saying this for years... it is *** backwards...

the biggest thing it would impact is S&T because teams could get to use the pick in the same year and would have a reasonable expectation of who they would get in the draft.

warfelg
06-27-2018, 08:04 AM
I have been saying this for years... it is *** backwards...

the biggest thing it would impact is S&T because teams could get to use the pick in the same year and would have a reasonable expectation of who they would get in the draft.

I didn't even think of that. That's yet another great reason.

I'm thinking a few years ago. The Cavs knowing they signed Lebron before picking #1, and able to send that to Minnesota, instead of taking Wiggins assuming that some team would want him.

I'm thinking it from the standpoint of a team missing out on a big FA possibly taking a salary dump and a trade up in the draft. Like if LeBron walked, wouldn't it have been nice for Cleveland to know ahead of time. Maybe they take the risk on MPJ at that point. Maybe they try to package 8+Love for 4+Parsons or something like that. Maybe they try to make the move with Dallas.

Maybe at that point Philly had landed a PG/LBJ and they don't take the Smith+2021 Miami pick because he doesn't fit the new timeline, so they resist the trade because Bridges is a better fit. Or maybe they trade it outright for a vet player.

Only sport where you draft without knowing the FA plans.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 08:15 AM
I didn't even think of that. That's yet another great reason.

I'm thinking a few years ago. The Cavs knowing they signed Lebron before picking #1, and able to send that to Minnesota, instead of taking Wiggins assuming that some team would want him.

I'm thinking it from the standpoint of a team missing out on a big FA possibly taking a salary dump and a trade up in the draft. Like if LeBron walked, wouldn't it have been nice for Cleveland to know ahead of time. Maybe they take the risk on MPJ at that point. Maybe they try to package 8+Love for 4+Parsons or something like that. Maybe they try to make the move with Dallas.

Maybe at that point Philly had landed a PG/LBJ and they don't take the Smith+2021 Miami pick because he doesn't fit the new timeline, so they resist the trade because Bridges is a better fit. Or maybe they trade it outright for a vet player.

Only sport where you draft without knowing the FA plans.

The other issues you listed are great reasons why it should be changed...

The problem is that the NBA is a well orchestrated Hype Machine... you got the finals and then normally no more than 10 days later you have the draft... then its around 10 days to FA... then Summer league...

They don't want to have dead periods which is usually only for around 3-4 weeks before camp starts... I am sure if they could figure out a way to do it they would slot something else in there.

I don't see anything changing unless the teams really push it hard.

warfelg
06-27-2018, 08:22 AM
The other issues you listed are great reasons why it should be changed...

The problem is that the NBA is a well orchestrated Hype Machine... you got the finals and then normally no more than 10 days later you have the draft... then its around 10 days to FA... then Summer league...

They don't want to have dead periods which is usually only for around 3-4 weeks before camp starts... I am sure if they could figure out a way to do it they would slot something else in there.

I don't see anything changing unless the teams really push it hard.

Mid-June: End of Finals
June 25th: Legal Tampering Opens
July 1st: Legal Signing Starts
Monday closest to July 15th: Draft
July 25th-28th: SLC Summer League
August 7th-11th: Vegas Summer League
Late September: Training Camps Open

That calendar has the 'break' in NBA news sliding right over the start of NFL/NCAA, Ryder Cup, Olympics, Baseball season closing.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 08:24 AM
Mid-June: End of Finals
June 25th: Legal Tampering Opens
July 1st: Legal Signing Starts
Monday closest to July 15th: Draft
July 25th-28th: SLC Summer League
August 7th-11th: Vegas Summer League
Late September: Training Camps Open

That calendar has the 'break' in NBA news sliding right over the start of NFL/NCAA, Ryder Cup, Olympics, Baseball season closing.

I like it :)

Scoots
06-27-2018, 10:27 AM
The problem with changing the order is that the NBA draft is the single biggest franchise changer in professional sports. Teams that have drafted to fit their roster have blown the draft a lot, better to take the best player available then build the roster around them. If your team spends $200M signing a veteran player then in the draft the next transformational talent is available to your team but they play the same position as that $200M player so your team passes on them and takes the next Michael Olowokandi instead.

There are merits to swapping it around sure, but there are merits to keeping it the way it is now too.

warfelg
06-27-2018, 10:47 AM
The problem with changing the order is that the NBA draft is the single biggest franchise changer in professional sports. Teams that have drafted to fit their roster have blown the draft a lot, better to take the best player available then build the roster around them. If your team spends $200M signing a veteran player then in the draft the next transformational talent is available to your team but they play the same position as that $200M player so your team passes on them and takes the next Michael Olowokandi instead.

There are merits to swapping it around sure, but there are merits to keeping it the way it is now too.

Ok?

It's not going to change that much at the top of the draft. It's the later parts. Imagine the Warriors going into the draft knowing that they brought JaVale and Bell back, but didn't have any other bigs. Knowing they needed to target a big might help them. As opposed to just taking the best player available and maybe taking a 2/3 instead.

The teams at the top of the draft (typically) are not in the position to sign the max contract player AND draft a guy at the same position.

Hawkeye15
06-27-2018, 10:50 AM
I have been saying this for years... it is *** backwards...

the biggest thing it would impact is S&T because teams could get to use the pick in the same year and would have a reasonable expectation of who they would get in the draft.

I was leaning yes, but not it's a for sure yes. Didn't even think of that.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 10:55 AM
The problem with changing the order is that the NBA draft is the single biggest franchise changer in professional sports. Teams that have drafted to fit their roster have blown the draft a lot, better to take the best player available then build the roster around them. If your team spends $200M signing a veteran player then in the draft the next transformational talent is available to your team but they play the same position as that $200M player so your team passes on them and takes the next Michael Olowokandi instead.

There are merits to swapping it around sure, but there are merits to keeping it the way it is now too.

As a guy who argues that teams succeed or fail based on their management team this shouldn't be an issue. Again... the benefits far outweigh the negatives...

this would already have happened if it wasn't for the NBA's marketing strategy.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 11:00 AM
Ok?

It's not going to change that much at the top of the draft. It's the later parts. Imagine the Warriors going into the draft knowing that they brought JaVale and Bell back, but didn't have any other bigs. Knowing they needed to target a big might help them. As opposed to just taking the best player available and maybe taking a 2/3 instead.

The teams at the top of the draft (typically) are not in the position to sign the max contract player AND draft a guy at the same position.

On top of all that look at a situation with teams with cap... if FA is settled and they know they are going to have a ton of space left over they could take on a bad contract and a pick.


Scenario this year... Lakers completely strike out... they take on the Faried's deal and get Michael Porter in the process...


now if the Lakers strike out they are usually stuck with someone on a 1 year deal... see KCP last year... because there isn't an urgency for teams to get under the cap after FA is done because all the players have been scooped up.

Scoots
06-27-2018, 11:03 AM
Ok?

It's not going to change that much at the top of the draft. It's the later parts. Imagine the Warriors going into the draft knowing that they brought JaVale and Bell back, but didn't have any other bigs. Knowing they needed to target a big might help them. As opposed to just taking the best player available and maybe taking a 2/3 instead.

The teams at the top of the draft (typically) are not in the position to sign the max contract player AND draft a guy at the same position.

But you can't know who is going to be available for your draft pick, but you can make pretty good plans on what you can do in free agency. Teams are talking to agents about free agency before the draft putting together possible plans depending on what actually happens in the draft.

I can see the merit of switching it, I just can see the merit of keeping it the way it is too.

warfelg
06-27-2018, 11:12 AM
But you can't know who is going to be available for your draft pick, but you can make pretty good plans on what you can do in free agency. Teams are talking to agents about free agency before the draft putting together possible plans depending on what actually happens in the draft.

I can see the merit of switching it, I just can see the merit of keeping it the way it is too.

I think of it this way:
If it were the other way around would there be any drive to change it? No. That's what tells me it needs to switch.

The NFL in the lockout year had the draft before FA, and it was marked as one of the worst drafts ever. There were FA QB's to be had, but QB needy teams made stupid trades to get that QB. Some of the better positioned teams right now took advantage of that.

You don't think that happens now in the NBA? Because it does. That Suns trade with the Sixers reeked of desperation to get win now players through the draft in that way. If the FA period already happened and the Suns got a guy like that already, or the Sixers got a name FA? Neither team is making that trade.

To me the argument of Draft before FA is: "That's just the way it's done."

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 12:53 PM
It makes absolute sense and it also makes teams better. If you take a look at some of the teams looking to make a deal, do the Cavs select Sexton if LeBron bolts? Teams just have more preparation and a solid direction of how they want to approach the season. It makes no sense for them to draft a player who wouldn't fit their system if they get the free agents they need. The problem with the draft happening before the free agency is that you really don't know what you're getting from the player on draft day but on free agency, you pretty much know who you're getting.

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 12:56 PM
Going to play devil's advocate, because I think it should be changed, or at least it wouldn't be a disaster if they did.

The draft is a LONG process, essentially starting in April. April to June is spent on draft prospects, and then June is spent on free agency. If the order is changed, then April to May is draft, June on free agents, then July back to draft. Logistically it doesn't make sense. Your staff has to drop everything they were doing, only to come back to it a month later.

Also, once the draft happens it's over. Contract negotiations for rookies are trivial because of the CBA. Free agency drags on and on. So your team is pulling double duty, evaluating draft prospects and free agents at the same time. It's ordered the way it is because the draft has a definite end date.

It's also unfair to incoming rookies, who make plans based on feedback from teams. Some kid hires an agent based on a top 20 promise, only for the team to say, "sorry, but we got Kawhi". He gave up going back to school.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 12:57 PM
It makes absolute sense and it also makes teams better. If you take a look at some of the teams looking to make a deal, do the Cavs select Sexton if LeBron bolts? Teams just have more preparation and a solid direction of how they want to approach the season. It makes no sense for them to draft a player who wouldn't fit their system if they get the free agents they need. The problem with the draft happening before the free agency is that you really don't know what you're getting from the player on draft day but on free agency, you pretty much know who you're getting.

yep... your argument is the absolute correct counter to Scoots... Cleveland tried to fill a need in the draft... they probably don't take him if Lebron leaves.

Vinylman
06-27-2018, 01:05 PM
Going to play devil's advocate, because I think it should be changed, or at least it wouldn't be a disaster if they did.

The draft is a LONG process, essentially starting in April. April to June is spent on draft prospects, and then June is spent on free agency. If the order is changed, then April to May is draft, June on free agents, then July back to draft. Logistically it doesn't make sense. Your staff has to drop everything they were doing, only to come back to it a month later.

Also, once the draft happens it's over. Contract negotiations for rookies are trivial because of the CBA. Free agency drags on and on. So your team is pulling double duty, evaluating draft prospects and free agents at the same time. It's ordered the way it is because the draft has a definite end date.

It's also unfair to incoming rookies, who make plans based on feedback from teams. Some kid hires an agent based on a top 20 promise, only for the team to say, "sorry, but we got Kawhi". He gave up going back to school.

except it has worked perfectly for the NFL in the opposite order

last game jan 8
draft combine march 2-5
free agency 3/14
draft April 26-28

NCAA last game 4-2
draft combine 6-2
free agency 6-18
draft 7/5

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 01:08 PM
Going to play devil's advocate, because I think it should be changed, or at least it wouldn't be a disaster if they did.

The draft is a LONG process, essentially starting in April. April to June is spent on draft prospects, and then June is spent on free agency. If the order is changed, then April to May is draft, June on free agents, then July back to draft. Logistically it doesn't make sense. Your staff has to drop everything they were doing, only to come back to it a month later.

Also, once the draft happens it's over. Contract negotiations for rookies are trivial because of the CBA. Free agency drags on and on. So your team is pulling double duty, evaluating draft prospects and free agents at the same time. It's ordered the way it is because the draft has a definite end date.

It's also unfair to incoming rookies, who make plans based on feedback from teams. Some kid hires an agent based on a top 20 promise, only for the team to say, "sorry, but we got Kawhi". He gave up going back to school.

It doesn't have to happen like that. They can make it align with free agency. Something has to be done because Rockets argued very valid points in that teams aren't sure which direction to go because ultimately, their direction is based on free agency. The draft doesn't really pinpoint the next stage of their team. A high caliber free agency will almost always outweigh the impact of a draft selection.

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 01:22 PM
except it has worked perfectly for the NFL in the opposite order

last game jan 8
draft combine march 2-5
free agency 3/14
draft April 26-28

NCAA last game 4-2
draft combine 6-2
free agency 6-18
draft 7/5

And the NBA setup works too. It's not broken. Anything change is a tradeoff, not outright better or worse.

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 01:23 PM
And the NBA setup works too. It's not broken. Anything change is a tradeoff, not outright better or worse.

According to whom? Logically, it makes much more sense.

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 01:35 PM
According to whom? Logically, it makes much more sense.

Do you really think it's outright better? That changing it wouldn't drastically increase workloads on scouts and coaches? That rookies aren't going to be SOL? There's a tradeoff there, even if you think it's worth it.

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 02:43 PM
Do you really think it's outright better? That changing it wouldn't drastically increase workloads on scouts and coaches? That rookies aren't going to be SOL? There's a tradeoff there, even if you think it's worth it.

The objective of the NBA is to compete. That's the business part of it. I think you're overestimating the workload on scouts/coaches considering most of them do a poor job as it is. These rookies get paid handsomely to compete in the NBA. Fair or not fair, that's business. Why should teams draft a player they don't know would be a part of their future and then lose that trade value and limit their team to having a lower quality asset?

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 02:56 PM
The objective of the NBA is to compete. That's the business part of it. I think you're overestimating the workload on scouts/coaches considering most of them do a poor job as it is. These rookies get paid handsomely to compete in the NBA. Fair or not fair, that's business. Why should teams draft a player they don't know would be a part of their future and then lose that trade value and limit their team to having a lower quality asset?
If you go WAY back to my first post, I said I'm for changing it. I'm just point out the side effects of such a change that no one seems to be considering.

And if you think scouts do a bad job NOW, you want to double their workload?

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 02:59 PM
If you go WAY back to my first post, I said I'm for changing it. I'm just point out the side effects of such a change that no one seems to be considering.

And if you think scouts do a bad job NOW, you want to double their workload?

You said not outright better or worse. If you're it for changing, then why would you conclude as such? Not outright better or worse would mean it's practically the same in terms of pros/cons. I think the fact there is even traction regarding this is good for the league in revising the schedule.

Has it considered to you that management has done a bad job because they are stuck either drafting or rebuilding via free agency and then they are in a tug-of-war about which direction to go? At least if they know they can't get any free agents, they can prepare accordingly. Forcing them to pick a player who may not be in their system once free agency happens is not exactly a good way to plan things out. There's less certainty in that.

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 03:04 PM
You said not outright better or worse. If you're it for changing, then why would you conclude as such? Not outright better or worse would mean it's practically the same in terms of pros/cons. I think the fact there is even traction regarding this is good for the league in revising the schedule.

Has it considered to you that management has done a bad job because they are stuck either drafting or rebuilding via free agency and then they are in a tug-of-war about which direction to go? At least if they know they can't get any free agents, they can prepare accordingly. Forcing them to pick a player who may not be in their system once free agency happens is not exactly a good way to plan things out. There's less certainty in that.

Do you know what "playing devil's advocate" means? I'm arguing a position I don't necessrily agree with, to get people to think about it.

FlashBolt
06-27-2018, 03:06 PM
Do you know what "playing devil's advocate" means? I'm arguing a position I don't necessrily agree with, to get people to think about it.

I do know what it means. But I'm curious as to how you are in for changing it but also said that:

"Anything change is a tradeoff, not outright better or worse."

So if it's not better or worse, why are you in for changing it? It's not really devil's advocate if you're saying it's the same thing, you know?

IndyRealist
06-27-2018, 03:10 PM
I do know what it means. But I'm curious as to how you are in for changing it but also said that:

"Anything change is a tradeoff, not outright better or worse."

So if it's not better or worse, why are you in for changing it? It's not really devil's advocate if you're saying it's the same thing, you know?

It's not outright better. There is a cost to changing it. Cost to players, cost to personnel.

Scoots
06-27-2018, 04:56 PM
It seems to me that the way it is now may be a little better for bad teams and a little worse for good teams. Since we supposedly want rules that encourage parity then it shouldn't change right?

The teams for it are all teams who are well developed, and the arguments for it are that teams hoard for superstars. That's not true of any of the teams in the bottom half of the league.

Vinylman
06-28-2018, 07:30 AM
It seems to me that the way it is now may be a little better for bad teams and a little worse for good teams. Since we supposedly want rules that encourage parity then it shouldn't change right?

The teams for it are all teams who are well developed, and the arguments for it are that teams hoard for superstars. That's not true of any of the teams in the bottom half of the league.

This is your take?

Wow...

Scoots
06-28-2018, 11:06 AM
This is your take?

Wow...

I don't know what your point is. Bad teams like it this way, good teams want it to change. Isn't that reason enough to keep it the way it is?

warfelg
06-28-2018, 11:08 AM
I don't know what your point is. Bad teams like it this way, good teams want it to change. Isn't that reason enough to keep it the way it is?

Not really....

Vinylman
06-28-2018, 12:35 PM
I don't know what your point is. Bad teams like it this way, good teams want it to change. Isn't that reason enough to keep it the way it is?

disagree... it has nothing to do with that...

there is less guess work by changing it...

I mean teams don't even know until this Friday if guys are gonna opt in or out and the draft has already happened.

The more "knowns" teams have in hand the better they can plan. The easiest thing to predict in this scenario is players draft order.... go look at the mocks from 3 months ago they are practically lock step with what actually happened.


You got a road map on this FA ****? good ****ing luck