- Joined:
- Jun 9, 2011
- Posts:
- 14,912
- Liked Posts:
- 7,762
- Location:
- Chicago
My favorite teams
I'm a fan of parity. When you look at the NFL or NHL, it seems like in any given year, any team could win it all. That's what I would like for the NBA. So these are some changes that I would make:
Contract Teams
Each year in the NBA, there are 2-5 teams that suck very, very much. Some of these teams are the same teams for many years. Their only hope is to draft a future HOF player and hope he doesn't leave. But they always seem to leave one way or another [LBJ, KG, CP3, DWill, etc.] After the player leaves, the team usually goes back to being garbage until they can finally draft another stud player. These teams just drag down the competition imo. I mean seriously. An elite team could play up to a total of over 20 games against teams that suck. Who wants to watch that?
I would contract 2-4 teams. The players on the contracted teams would become free agents, but hold onto the contracts that they currently own. The remaining teams could claim them. First priority would go to the worst teams in the league. If the worst team doesn't have the cap room to pick up the contract, the next team is up.
So for example, if the T-Wolves got contracted, Kevin Love and his 3-year deal worth around 46 million dollars would be available to claim by the Magic. Let's say the Bucks want Anthony Davis instead though [since the Pelicans also got contracted] because he has a cheaper deal.. so they claim him, and the Jazz are up to see if they want Love. They do, and they claim him. Philly would then be up and so on.
In this scenario, competition would increase a lot, imo. The worst team in the league would probably have around 35 wins.
Get Rid Of The Lottery
With 4 less teams and improved rosters, teams would be less inclined to tank since they have a better shot at actually making the playoffs.
So the worst team that gets the #1 overall pick was probably the true worst team in the league. Let's go back to the Jazz that just recently acquired Kevin Love in my hypothetical situation above. Say they still have a relatively down year and win only 33 games and win the first pick. They draft Jabari Parker, and let's say he winds up being the next LBJ. The Jazz went from being the laughing stock of the NBA to title contenders in only a couple of years. They wouldn't even need to worry about picking top 5 for the next 10+ years. Now, it's the next bad team up to try and change their fortunes.
Set A Hard Cap, But Raise The Limit
A hard cap is pretty much the easiest way to create parity. If there is a set amount of salary cap space that a team can use and cannot go over, players are more likely to become free agents and go to teams that can afford them. So if a guy is in a contract year with a great team and plays well enough to deserve a max contract.. he has to decide if he wants to take a massive pay cut to stay with his great team, or he can go to a bad team for a lot more money and turn them into potential title contenders.
But remember, these bad teams are no longer TERRIBLE because of the contracted teams. So a great player can turn a 35 win team into a 50+ win team easily. If this 35 win team also happens to have a top 3 pick, and they draft a stud, this 35 win team could become a 60+ win team overnight.
The current soft cap is set at 58 million. But teams can obviously go over with bird rights and stuff. I'd set the hard cap at 67 million. Yes, it would get rid of super teams like Miami because a team wouldn't be able to afford 3 superstars and fill out the rest of the roster unless the 3 superstars decided to make 10 million a year.
But it would be enough to have 2 superstars on a team, if they wanted to take a little pay cut to help have more solid role players.
Get Rid Of Guaranteed Contracts
I don't know about you guys, but I'm sick of players signing huge deals and seemingly just give up or get injured and just waste the team's money. Bad contracts can cripple a franchise for several years and it's a shame that teams can't do anything about it.
I'd make contracts only partially guaranteed. So for example, if a player signed a max contract worth 5-years 100 million, only 40 million of that would be guaranteed. So after the guaranteed money is paid off, the team could release the player and free up cap space for another player that's actually worth it.
Change the Playoff Format
It wouldn't be much of a change. It would till be 8 teams per conference. However, I'd get rid of 7 game series for the first three rounds. No team has ever come back from being down 0-3. So it's kind of pointless to play that 4th game. Team that go up 3-1 almost always win the series. So again, it's just a drag to finish out the series. I would make the first 3 rounds a best out of 5 series. The best team would still usually win, but it'll also create more upsets. There have been a lot of teams that led the series 3-2 and wound up losing. A lot of the teams that were leading the series 3-2 were also underdogs. Imo, i think upsets are exciting and would like to see more of them in the NBA. The most recent example I can think of would be Boston leading Miami 3-2 in the 2012 post-season. idk about you guys, but it would have been crazy to see Miami not win the finals two years in a row.
Replay Reviews
There will be a replay ref to review every play that can go either way. This will happen quickly since that would be that refs only job. He'll be sitting by the screen and after a controversial play, he'll review it immediately and call it out the refs on the court. If it takes more than 15 seconds, the refs on the floor just make the call. In the last 2 minutes of the game, the rules would be like they are now. Review for as long as you want until the call is right.
-----------
I know, some pretty drastic changes. Most that will never happen.. I have a feeling most of you guys won't agree with me hahaha. But that is my ideal NBA.
Contract Teams
Each year in the NBA, there are 2-5 teams that suck very, very much. Some of these teams are the same teams for many years. Their only hope is to draft a future HOF player and hope he doesn't leave. But they always seem to leave one way or another [LBJ, KG, CP3, DWill, etc.] After the player leaves, the team usually goes back to being garbage until they can finally draft another stud player. These teams just drag down the competition imo. I mean seriously. An elite team could play up to a total of over 20 games against teams that suck. Who wants to watch that?
I would contract 2-4 teams. The players on the contracted teams would become free agents, but hold onto the contracts that they currently own. The remaining teams could claim them. First priority would go to the worst teams in the league. If the worst team doesn't have the cap room to pick up the contract, the next team is up.
So for example, if the T-Wolves got contracted, Kevin Love and his 3-year deal worth around 46 million dollars would be available to claim by the Magic. Let's say the Bucks want Anthony Davis instead though [since the Pelicans also got contracted] because he has a cheaper deal.. so they claim him, and the Jazz are up to see if they want Love. They do, and they claim him. Philly would then be up and so on.
In this scenario, competition would increase a lot, imo. The worst team in the league would probably have around 35 wins.
Get Rid Of The Lottery
With 4 less teams and improved rosters, teams would be less inclined to tank since they have a better shot at actually making the playoffs.
So the worst team that gets the #1 overall pick was probably the true worst team in the league. Let's go back to the Jazz that just recently acquired Kevin Love in my hypothetical situation above. Say they still have a relatively down year and win only 33 games and win the first pick. They draft Jabari Parker, and let's say he winds up being the next LBJ. The Jazz went from being the laughing stock of the NBA to title contenders in only a couple of years. They wouldn't even need to worry about picking top 5 for the next 10+ years. Now, it's the next bad team up to try and change their fortunes.
Set A Hard Cap, But Raise The Limit
A hard cap is pretty much the easiest way to create parity. If there is a set amount of salary cap space that a team can use and cannot go over, players are more likely to become free agents and go to teams that can afford them. So if a guy is in a contract year with a great team and plays well enough to deserve a max contract.. he has to decide if he wants to take a massive pay cut to stay with his great team, or he can go to a bad team for a lot more money and turn them into potential title contenders.
But remember, these bad teams are no longer TERRIBLE because of the contracted teams. So a great player can turn a 35 win team into a 50+ win team easily. If this 35 win team also happens to have a top 3 pick, and they draft a stud, this 35 win team could become a 60+ win team overnight.
The current soft cap is set at 58 million. But teams can obviously go over with bird rights and stuff. I'd set the hard cap at 67 million. Yes, it would get rid of super teams like Miami because a team wouldn't be able to afford 3 superstars and fill out the rest of the roster unless the 3 superstars decided to make 10 million a year.
But it would be enough to have 2 superstars on a team, if they wanted to take a little pay cut to help have more solid role players.
Get Rid Of Guaranteed Contracts
I don't know about you guys, but I'm sick of players signing huge deals and seemingly just give up or get injured and just waste the team's money. Bad contracts can cripple a franchise for several years and it's a shame that teams can't do anything about it.
I'd make contracts only partially guaranteed. So for example, if a player signed a max contract worth 5-years 100 million, only 40 million of that would be guaranteed. So after the guaranteed money is paid off, the team could release the player and free up cap space for another player that's actually worth it.
Change the Playoff Format
It wouldn't be much of a change. It would till be 8 teams per conference. However, I'd get rid of 7 game series for the first three rounds. No team has ever come back from being down 0-3. So it's kind of pointless to play that 4th game. Team that go up 3-1 almost always win the series. So again, it's just a drag to finish out the series. I would make the first 3 rounds a best out of 5 series. The best team would still usually win, but it'll also create more upsets. There have been a lot of teams that led the series 3-2 and wound up losing. A lot of the teams that were leading the series 3-2 were also underdogs. Imo, i think upsets are exciting and would like to see more of them in the NBA. The most recent example I can think of would be Boston leading Miami 3-2 in the 2012 post-season. idk about you guys, but it would have been crazy to see Miami not win the finals two years in a row.
Replay Reviews
There will be a replay ref to review every play that can go either way. This will happen quickly since that would be that refs only job. He'll be sitting by the screen and after a controversial play, he'll review it immediately and call it out the refs on the court. If it takes more than 15 seconds, the refs on the floor just make the call. In the last 2 minutes of the game, the rules would be like they are now. Review for as long as you want until the call is right.
-----------
I know, some pretty drastic changes. Most that will never happen.. I have a feeling most of you guys won't agree with me hahaha. But that is my ideal NBA.
Last edited:
