Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 241
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    NBA is the best product in sports. Having more skilled players isn't something I view as a problem. I'm not a fan of the parity in the NFL. In basketball, the best organizations get the best results. It creates the best storylines and the most drama. Dynasties are good for sports.
    Yes and no. The issues with the NBA model is a few teams are destinations even if they are horribly run for decades, and the smaller market teams are always going to be left.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    And those nut shots. Donít forget those nut shots.
    CP3 is the king of the nut shot.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    CP3 is the king of the nut shot.
    I love how Green said he couldnít help it; it was a natural move for him......until it wasnít. Still wondering if it was GS threatening to trade him if he didnít act right or if it was the NBA threatening to suspend him 10 games for every new kick.

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Mile High
    Posts
    17,993
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Yes and no. The issues with the NBA model is a few teams are destinations even if they are horribly run for decades, and the smaller market teams are always going to be left.
    I disagree about the horribly run organizations. The Knicks have managed to do a great job of attracting no one to play for them for decades. Small markets maybe but san antonio has been as consistent as they come.
    <><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
    <><><><><><><>
    <><><><>

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    39
    Some of these rules changes are ridiculous proposals like changing the configuration of the court or making certain shots count for more points. Only way to fix offensive dominance is to loosen defensive restrictions.

    Hand checking and abnormal contact/offensive shooters jumping into defenders is a couple easy ones. Itís happens countless times a game where a defender plays a lockdown possession only to be bailed out at the last second because the shooter can launch his body straight into the defender.

    You also need to have better contract structures. I thought when they started the max contract they were on the right path and created certain exceptions like mid level, etc. but then they just kind of left it at that.

    A max player maximum should be set in places. Thereís no reason why a team like the nets who started with Durant and Kyrie should have been able to add harden (this can be said if a few teams over the last 10 years) and then continue to add players like griffin and Aldridge. I feel like there should be a threshold of players who have, have had or have had close to a max contract that you should be able to roster like 2. Once youíve hit that threshold another max level player can not be added to your roster until heís played out a two year non max level contract or has reached a certain age. I mean thereís kinks to be worked out but I feel something along that line needs to be implemented because it kinda stops super teams and forces max players to have to sign where max spots are available thus attempting to create parity around the league. Other options would be to have contract slots. Like you can only have two players that can make between 30-40 mil, 3 players that can make xyz, then another 3-4 players thatís can make a lower xyz, etc.

    Players being given ridiculous contracts they donít deserve has also set the league back if certain calibers of players with certain qualifications can make only a certain amount of money it stops the amount of times maybe someone like a smaller market team will have to overpay for multiple players just to come there. Itís happened many times over the last few years. Hell I see now reason why jrue holiday is essentially going to be making 40 mil a year. Heís a good player, allstar caliber at times but not 40 million dollars a year worth. Heís what I like to refer to as your classic Allstar role player, really good, flashes Allstar part of the time but thereís still 10-15 other guards better than him in the league.

    Whatever the ins and outs of the idea a main one needs to be limiting of and contract structure for all teams.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Yes and no. The issues with the NBA model is a few teams are destinations even if they are horribly run for decades, and the smaller market teams are always going to be left.
    All the top players from the buyout market went to large market teams, who also happen to be the top title contenders, who also happen to attract all the free agents any way. The rich getting richer is bad for the league. Maybe it isn't bad for the NBA ratings. I say this is as Miami Heat fan, and the Heat are considered on the larger markets.

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,745
    Quote Originally Posted by Wxlves View Post
    Some of these rules changes are ridiculous proposals like changing the configuration of the court or making certain shots count for more points. Only way to fix offensive dominance is to loosen defensive restrictions.

    Hand checking and abnormal contact/offensive shooters jumping into defenders is a couple easy ones. Itís happens countless times a game where a defender plays a lockdown possession only to be bailed out at the last second because the shooter can launch his body straight into the defender.

    You also need to have better contract structures. I thought when they started the max contract they were on the right path and created certain exceptions like mid level, etc. but then they just kind of left it at that.

    A max player maximum should be set in places. Thereís no reason why a team like the nets who started with Durant and Kyrie should have been able to add harden (this can be said if a few teams over the last 10 years) and then continue to add players like griffin and Aldridge. I feel like there should be a threshold of players who have, have had or have had close to a max contract that you should be able to roster like 2. Once youíve hit that threshold another max level player can not be added to your roster until heís played out a two year non max level contract or has reached a certain age. I mean thereís kinks to be worked out but I feel something along that line needs to be implemented because it kinda stops super teams and forces max players to have to sign where max spots are available thus attempting to create parity around the league. Other options would be to have contract slots. Like you can only have two players that can make between 30-40 mil, 3 players that can make xyz, then another 3-4 players thatís can make a lower xyz, etc.

    Players being given ridiculous contracts they donít deserve has also set the league back if certain calibers of players with certain qualifications can make only a certain amount of money it stops the amount of times maybe someone like a smaller market team will have to overpay for multiple players just to come there. Itís happened many times over the last few years. Hell I see now reason why jrue holiday is essentially going to be making 40 mil a year. Heís a good player, allstar caliber at times but not 40 million dollars a year worth. Heís what I like to refer to as your classic Allstar role player, really good, flashes Allstar part of the time but thereís still 10-15 other guards better than him in the league.

    Whatever the ins and outs of the idea a main one needs to be limiting of and contract structure for all teams.
    I agree the contract structure hurts the league. It encourages super teams even more and removes money from the equation for the best free agents. That being said, I think we all also recognize that it isn't changing anytime soon. The only people who are hurt from it are a handful of true superstars, but those guys are still making insane money and they all have massive sponsorship deals off the court that compensate them really well too. And by artificially capping the top earners, a bunch of mid tier guys get a bunch of money, so it benefits more guys financially to keep the max deal. That will be hard to pass through the union.

    To me, I don't want to add defensive restrictions just to make the game more competitive if that's what we want to call it. I'm not an "analytics ruined X sport" guy, but I think you have to acknowledge that analytics are driving decisions across all sports. You need to understand why teams make the decisions they make. And at the end of the day, teams shoot 3s, layups and free throws because they are efficient. So change the efficiency. Widen the court a bit to make 3s uniform. While you're at it, move the 3 pt line back to hurt 3 pt efficiency. Police moving screens more to make the game less pick and roll dependant, thus creating a few less open 3s. Don't call fouls when the offensive player initiates the contact (less free throws). To me, that stuff is a good start. Make 3s harder to make so the efficiency of shooting a 3 isn't super different than the efficiency of a good post player.

    I think thats the important part to me. I'd love if the analytics be changed back to the point that encouraged diversity of play style. Right now, there's mostly only one way to play the game. Sure teams like Denver, Philly and Milwaukee can push the envelop a bit on having their stars not neccessarily jaut he perimeter shooters, but teams are still focused on surrounding theie non shooter stars with as many shooters as physically possible. I'd love an option where a team legit could build a post heavy offense that could be as efficient as a good outside shooting team. I don't want to flip it too far where teams only try to build post heavy teams, but I think tinkering with the numbers to the point where there's a feasible path for elite teama of any build style to be good is best for the league.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    39,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Yes and no. The issues with the NBA model is a few teams are destinations even if they are horribly run for decades, and the smaller market teams are always going to be left.
    Yep, it sucks how players reportedly have the Knicks as an acceptable destination compared to long standing well run small market teams like Utah or Portland.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,577
    1. Allow hand checking
    2. Stop the ridiculous 3 point and 1ís (Harden)
    3. Stop the Harden travel 3 pointer
    4. Get rid of buyouts. Straight waiver system. If the playerís contract is not picked up outright they must sit on the sidelines until the following year
    5. Increase the cap hold figures and empty roster slots to prevent roster dumping and signing 3 max players
    6. Increase minimum salaries
    7. Decrease exceptions for teams over the cap and over the luxury tax
    8. Reduce cap hits to players who stay x number of years with their drafting team. Increase the max contract to retain current players
    9. Switch the order of the draft and FA
    10. Expand roster size. Allow more 2 way players on each roster.
    11. Allow unused cap space to be carried over from year to year.
    12. Lower the lux tax threshold year by year for repeaters

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by rhino17 View Post
    I disagree about the horribly run organizations. The Knicks have managed to do a great job of attracting no one to play for them for decades. Small markets maybe but san antonio has been as consistent as they come.
    Are you saying you think LA/NY don't have appeal above and beyond the quality of the organization?

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Cuban Linx View Post
    All the top players from the buyout market went to large market teams, who also happen to be the top title contenders, who also happen to attract all the free agents any way. The rich getting richer is bad for the league. Maybe it isn't bad for the NBA ratings. I say this is as Miami Heat fan, and the Heat are considered on the larger markets.
    I think there should maybe be some cost to picking up a player out on a buyout deal ... maybe cost you a 2nd round pick or something small.

    Hard cap completely changes the league for sure.

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Yep, it sucks how players reportedly have the Knicks as an acceptable destination compared to long standing well run small market teams like Utah or Portland.
    And the Clippers and Nets get some shine too despite being poorly run for long stretches too.

    "Wait, I get $40 a year AND get to live in LA/NY and get the heck out of Utah/Ohio/Wisconsin/etc? Where do I sign?"

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I agree the contract structure hurts the league. It encourages super teams even more and removes money from the equation for the best free agents. That being said, I think we all also recognize that it isn't changing anytime soon. The only people who are hurt from it are a handful of true superstars, but those guys are still making insane money and they all have massive sponsorship deals off the court that compensate them really well too. And by artificially capping the top earners, a bunch of mid tier guys get a bunch of money, so it benefits more guys financially to keep the max deal. That will be hard to pass through the union.

    To me, I don't want to add defensive restrictions just to make the game more competitive if that's what we want to call it. I'm not an "analytics ruined X sport" guy, but I think you have to acknowledge that analytics are driving decisions across all sports. You need to understand why teams make the decisions they make. And at the end of the day, teams shoot 3s, layups and free throws because they are efficient. So change the efficiency. Widen the court a bit to make 3s uniform. While you're at it, move the 3 pt line back to hurt 3 pt efficiency. Police moving screens more to make the game less pick and roll dependant, thus creating a few less open 3s. Don't call fouls when the offensive player initiates the contact (less free throws). To me, that stuff is a good start. Make 3s harder to make so the efficiency of shooting a 3 isn't super different than the efficiency of a good post player.

    I think thats the important part to me. I'd love if the analytics be changed back to the point that encouraged diversity of play style. Right now, there's mostly only one way to play the game. Sure teams like Denver, Philly and Milwaukee can push the envelop a bit on having their stars not neccessarily jaut he perimeter shooters, but teams are still focused on surrounding theie non shooter stars with as many shooters as physically possible. I'd love an option where a team legit could build a post heavy offense that could be as efficient as a good outside shooting team. I don't want to flip it too far where teams only try to build post heavy teams, but I think tinkering with the numbers to the point where there's a feasible path for elite teama of any build style to be good is best for the league.
    Make the wing defense a little easier (travel/offense created impact) and make taking the 3 a little harder (same distance all the way around) make the buyout cost a little more (2nd round pick) then wait a couple/few seasons to see how the changes play out.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    37,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    1. Allow hand checking
    2. Stop the ridiculous 3 point and 1ís (Harden)
    3. Stop the Harden travel 3 pointer
    4. Get rid of buyouts. Straight waiver system. If the playerís contract is not picked up outright they must sit on the sidelines until the following year
    5. Increase the cap hold figures and empty roster slots to prevent roster dumping and signing 3 max players
    6. Increase minimum salaries
    7. Decrease exceptions for teams over the cap and over the luxury tax
    8. Reduce cap hits to players who stay x number of years with their drafting team. Increase the max contract to retain current players
    9. Switch the order of the draft and FA
    10. Expand roster size. Allow more 2 way players on each roster.
    11. Allow unused cap space to be carried over from year to year.
    12. Lower the lux tax threshold year by year for repeaters
    No for me on #1, #11, #12, and I wonder about more detail on #9.

    1. Hand checking game sucked, why it was banned.
    11. A new reason to tank.
    12. Rich teams don't really care which just makes things less even. Hard cap instead.

    Otherwise I'm in.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    7,656
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    And the Clippers and Nets get some shine too despite being poorly run for long stretches too.

    "Wait, I get $40 a year AND get to live in LA/NY and get the heck out of Utah/Ohio/Wisconsin/etc? Where do I sign?"
    What I like is seeing these endorsement deals where players will get more money to sign with a bigger market. That should probably not be allowed. And before you ask, just have the NBA contract have terms in it that make the NBA contract null and void if anything in an outside contract gives one or more team(s) an advantage to sign that player.

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •