Change Ideas

by Jeff Clark on Jan 21, 2009 8:47 AM EST in Boston Celtics News & Links

Steve Aschburner of SI has an article on changes to the NBA he'd like to see. The intro is long, rambling, and barely makes sense, and many of the ideas are silly or just plain bad. But I did like two of them in particular. Here's one that thankfully doesn't apply to us much anymore. However, as someone who has tracked the lottery very closely over the years, I must approve:

The draft lottery. No more allotting Ping-Pong balls in inverse order of record. Let's tier it: the worst 10 teams, the middle 10 teams and the top 10, with teams on each tier getting the same number of chances. That removes much of the advantage in tanking -- the fifth-worst team would feel no pressure to lose more frequently -- and the break between Nos. 10 and 11 would be close enough to playoff qualifying that a few more balls wouldn't matter either.

Next, I've already talked about this, and the idea isn't new, but it is past time to implement this:

D-League affiliations. Give every NBA Development League team a one-to-one affiliation with an NBA team. The league needs a farm system. It needs to generate interest in up-and-coming players and it needs to directly influence their development through systematically consistent coaching methods. The Knicks' farm team, for example, would play an up-tempo game to prep players for Mike D'Antoni's style. In fact, D'Antoni and team president Donnie Walsh would appoint the coaches of their D-League club, and those coaches eventually would be ready and able for promotions to the NBA sideline.

What other change ideas would you suggest for the NBA?

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Ya some of the ideas were definitely stupid but I liked this one too:

“Suspension rules. If a player is suspended, he must sit out his team’s next home game. It’s not fair, in a league that markets marquee names, to punish fans in Portland who were hoping to see Wade or Paul, and vice versa East to West. This would have the added benefit of equalizing home-court advantage to a degree.”

It’s an interesting idea I think, not without its problems though. One problem could be in the playoffs (never know if there will be another home game), another problem could be if a player who was to be suspended durring the next home game gets injured on a road trip. What happens then? I thought the idea was interesting though.

by bdm860 on Jan 21, 2009 9:04 AM EST reply actions

I have yet to hear an idea about the lottery that actual gets rid of the tanking problem

That’s because it’s not going to happen. As long as their is a better chance to get a better pick the worse your record is, their will always be the risk of a team trying to tank down the stretch. Even in this scenario, as the records currently are, the Knicks would have the worst record in the 2nd tier and the Bobcats would have the best record in the 1st tier. You’re not gonna tell me that the Knicks, (and any of the other eastern teams out of the playoff hunt wouldn’t be clamoring for that 10th worst record and an equal chance at the #1 pick.

The way it is right now works fine. You’re given the best chance the worse your record is, but you’re not guaranteed the best pick. And history has shown that the worst record rarely gets the #1 pick, so it’s really not worth it to tank anyway.

by CelticsWhat35 on Jan 21, 2009 9:25 AM EST reply actions

I refuse to believe there’s a tanking problem. Regardless of whether the team in the long run will benefit from losing, players just aren’t going to purposely lose games. Why would they? Most importantly, it hurts their value on the open market, and there’s no telling whether they’ll even be there next year.

The reason bad teams lose games is because they’re not as good as other teams! We as fans and the media just percieve them as tanking because we see the long-term benefit of those losses, but again, I just can’t see players (and coaches for that matter) purposely throwing games.

by Rocci1212 on Jan 21, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions

There’s no tanking per se, but the coaching staff can easily diminish the chances of winning games by which players he decides to put on the floor.

I have a problem though with the believe that just because a team decides to not play their best players towards the end of the season that it’s automatically assessed as if they were tanking. There are too many factors that benefits the team by resting those players wether their win or not. There are motivations aside from simply getting a better chance with the ping pong balls.

by BudweiserCeltic on Jan 21, 2009 10:26 AM EST up reply actions

What about

Weighting the balls to take into account record from before the All-Star break? Maybe half the balls are allocated based on first-half record and half are allocated on overall record. Maybe a different ratio.

It doesn’t completely eliminate tanking, but it makes the effect less bad. Also, teams that have playoff talent but slide into the lottery due to a mid-season injury are less likely to luck into a high pick.

by LooseCannon on Jan 21, 2009 6:09 PM EST up reply actions

Lottery thought

My idea would be to keep the pingpong balls as is in number from most to least 1-13, but right before the draft they flip a coin. Heads the draft order is 1-13, tails 13-1. The 13 worst teams still get the lottery advantage, only no team knows whether it is best to finish with the worst record, or the 13th worst record! Tanking would then be pointless, cause by losing more you might end up with a worse pick!

by OhioGreen on Jan 21, 2009 9:51 AM EST reply actions

Comments on Changes

I like the D-League affiliation proposal, and believe that the draft lottery could use some tweaking to make tanking less of a problem. However, the change I’d like to see most would be to widen the Court be 1 or 2 feet. How many times does the game stop when a player with size 15 feet steps on the sideline? Opening up the side-three-point lanes would significantly help the flow of the game in more ways than one. The would also change play in the lane.

by BCelts on Jan 21, 2009 9:56 AM EST reply actions

i have a better idea

i have a better idea – just don’t allow David Stern to touch (weight) the ping pong balls any more

I like Ohio Greens thought – but 1-13 seems a bit extreme … 1-5 would be better

by ForexPirate on Jan 21, 2009 10:19 AM EST reply actions

Yay to D-League affiliations!

I’ve been advocating this idea since the CBA was a viable “farm-league” solution for the NBA … Let’s treat it more like the NHL-AHL affiliation (as long as the Celtics’ D-League team gets to play in Worcester!).

by Alessandro on Jan 21, 2009 10:36 AM EST reply actions

6th man on court interpetation

Let’s have a change in the rule or its interpetation that was foisted upon us in that game where the basket was ALLOWED when our opponent had 6 men on the floor. They got two points and all we got was a “T”. That should be reviewable by the refs, T to the offending team and ball out to the victimized team.

by csfansince60s on Jan 21, 2009 11:07 AM EST reply actions

Here is what would make the game much better

fire stern and banish him to the wwe so he would fell at home. make the refs stop giving the star treatment to certain players. call lebron for his 3 steps he takes every other time he drives the lane. stop the phantom fouls called on whomever is guarding kobe when he takes a jumper. stop letting shaq elbow and push people out of the way when he gets down low(that not basketball). the league could wait until a guy plays his first game before they crown him the greatest of all time(see when shaq came into the league/lebron). Home court shouldn’t meant that its benefit of the doubt time for the home team for the officials. if they did this, they would attract more fans and the ones they do have would love watching even more.

by angryguy77 on Jan 21, 2009 11:11 AM EST reply actions

I'm With You, angryguy 77

1. Let’s fire most of the officials and hire better ones.
2. Let’s have instant replay. I don’t care if the games take longer.
3. Abolish the stupid defensive 3 second rules. Let them play zone.
4. Allow hand checking. Let the players play.
5. Abolish that idiotic 4 ft. circle. A charge is a charge.

As I said in another post, it has become a league of panzies and soccer floppers dominated by the officials, not the players.

by Brickowski on Jan 21, 2009 6:38 PM EST up reply actions

ditto

I’m with you both on those ideas except the hand-checking. Defense should be about good foot movement—-handchecking turns into grabbing and holding.
The biggest improvement would be requiring the refs to call the game as it’s stated in the rulebook: no more palming, no more extra steps, maintaining the pivot foot, actually count offensive 3 seconds, call more fouls in the post to reduce the pushing and shoving, etc. Hold the refs accountable after each game for each ‘proper’ call they missed and have their pay docked accordingly. Until ref’s pay is linked to their performance, they have no incentive to change from the equivalent of the WWE refs.

As far as the draft goes, leave it as is. The worst team typically doesn’t win so tanking hasn’t turned out to reward anyone yet.

by slamtheking on Jan 22, 2009 7:37 AM EST up reply actions