Owners Propose Adding Third Round Of Draft

[superb1]

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/215489/Owners_Propose_Adding_Third_Round_Of_Draft

The NBA owners have proposed adding a third round to the NBA draft, according to sources.

The union has countered by offering a variety of changes to the draft that would help address the desire for owners to improve competitive balance.

"Under one proposal," writes Sheridan, "the 15 teams with the worst records would continue to pick 1st through 15th, but then would also have the 16th through 30th picks. The teams with the top 15 records would have the first 15 picks of the second round, then would have the 44th through 60th picks.

"Under another proposal, the teams with the eight worst records would get an additional first round pick, beginning with selection No. 22, and the teams with the eight best records would have no first-round picks but would select at the top of the second round (picks 31 through 38 ), then also would get the final eight picks of the second round."


If this does happen, adding a third round really does nothing, most of the 3rd round round prospect would be training camp fodder. I would prefer the first union proposal, with some amendments such as keeping the lottery for the worst record teams, not allowing winning record teams to be not allowed to acquire lottery picks but can acquire picks 16th to 30th through trades etc. make the lottery more exciting by having two lotteries (a 1 to 15 with a top 3 pick, then 16 to 30) something like that would work

[Dcarnys]

I'm fine with this AS LONG as it means they make the D-League an actual minor league and not an illusion of being a minor league.

[ohara831]

If you are a team which really struggled and have a Top 5 pick and then add a #16-#20 pick, that can be very helpful for rebuilding a team. Especially in a Draft like the one coming up where it will be very dep with good talent.

[Plowright]

This is quite a typical american idea, all american sports are just made to try to make the sport equal, if you are a good team you have everyone working against you trying to make you worse and bad teams better. I know this would be good for Charlotte, but dont you think it is unfair on the better teams? It makes making the right decisions less important

[dnbman]

This is quite a typical american idea, all american sports are just made to try to make the sport equal, if you are a good team you have everyone working against you trying to make you worse and bad teams better. I know this would be good for Charlotte, but dont you think it is unfair on the better teams? It makes making the right decisions less important

Yes and no. The best teams aren't the best teams just because they made the right decisions. Large markets play a heavy factor in acquiring and keeping talent. That's why the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks (when not shooting themselves in the foot), the Heat, and a few other teams can rebuild at any given moment.

If you want a league, you have to have competition. There's not much of a point if a few teams spend their way to championships and everybody else is also-rans year after year.

I do like the idea. I think it could lead to pockets of young talent staying together and building together.

[ohara831]

Yes and no. The best teams aren't the best teams just because they made the right decisions. Large markets play a heavy factor in acquiring and keeping talent. That's why the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks (when not shooting themselves in the foot), the Heat, and a few other teams can rebuild at any given moment.

If you want a league, you have to have competition. There's not much of a point if a few teams spend their way to championships and everybody else is also-rans year after year.

I do like the idea. I think it could lead to pockets of young talent staying together and building together.

Some teams build not thru the draft but simply because of location in attracting FA's. This draft scenario is what teams like Charlotte, Milwaukee, Indiana, etc.. need to get better talent. Then once they become good, they themselves can find a little FA love from someone wanting to play with a contender.

[SWedd523]

Taking that a step further, if competition wasn't a main determining factor behind a league, then most leagues wouldn't be any bigger than 5-8 teams.

There's a reason the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, Knicks, and Sixers have won 44 of a possible 65 titles. Five teams should not account for over 67% of titles won.

[ziggy]

Some teams build not thru the draft but simply because of location in attracting FA's. This draft scenario is what teams like Charlotte, Milwaukee, Indiana, etc.. need to get better talent. Then once they become good, they themselves can find a little FA love from someone wanting to play with a contender.

Ohara, as usual you are on the money. Something like this is definitely what the small markets need. I imagine the large markets will balk at this option.

[ohara831]

Ziggy, the teams not having a 1st may not be so sure to object. Given that the 1st rounders are the ones with guaranteed contracts, the teams who dont pick in the 1st get to pick 2x in the 2nd round. They might find some talent there, and those contracts wont be guaranteed. The teams who have 2 first rounders will have to guarantee both contracts, so there is a small downside to it. I think something like this might actually pass.

[Toocool]

Taking that a step further, if competition wasn't a main determining factor behind a league, then most leagues wouldn't be any bigger than 5-8 teams.

There's a reason the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, Knicks, and Sixers have won 44 of a possible 65 titles. Five teams should not account for over 67% of titles won.

44/65? That's a damning statistic that shows that something has to change.
Generally, it's always the big league markets dominating time after time, maybe this will help at least balance some things.

[Chef]

Some teams build not thru the draft but simply because of location in attracting FA's. This draft scenario is what teams like Charlotte, Milwaukee, Indiana, etc.. need to get better talent. Then once they become good, they themselves can find a little FA love from someone wanting to play with a contender.

punishing teams through the draft for being good is only going to encourage the stupid trend of overpaying mle type players and veteran role players on the downsides of their careers instead of relying on the draft to keep your teams young and strong. all of this while you are grandstanding as a league that we need to cut team payrolls. on top of that, the law of unintended consequences, this would induce even more tanking amongst the mediocre teams to get that extra pick. imagine a league where 10 teams each year start tanking before the all-star break.

also, the counter stat to your championship stat is how many times in the last 10-20 years have the wolves, clippers, grizzlies, etc drafted inside the top 8 picks without any improvement? bad teams are bad teams because they are run like our country is being run.

[superb1]

punishing teams through the draft for being good is only going to encourage the stupid trend of overpaying mle type players and veteran role players on the downsides of their careers instead of relying on the draft to keep your teams young and strong. all of this while you are grandstanding as a league that we need to cut team payrolls. on top of that, the law of unintended consequences, this would induce even more tanking amongst the mediocre teams to get that extra pick. imagine a league where 10 teams each year start tanking before the all-star break.

also, the counter stat to your championship stat is how many times in the last 10-20 years have the wolves, clippers, grizzlies, etc drafted inside the top 8 picks without any improvement? bad teams are bad teams because they are run like our country is being run.

I understand what you are saying, there are always going to be teams that fine loopholes in the system for their advantage.

I think if they were to give the bad teams the two first rounders, I say keep the lotto which was used to keep teams from tanking, even though not fool-proof. Then for the second half of the first round picks, use the half season records to determine those picks. Say a team is border line and have a chance to make the playoffs but believe they could tank to pick up a high draft pick instead of being a first round loser. Use the records at half season to determine their draft position for either the second half of the first round or even maybe the top half. So even if they go in tank mode, one of their picks wont be as high.

[SWedd523]

punishing teams through the draft for being good is only going to encourage the stupid trend of overpaying mle type players and veteran role players on the downsides of their careers instead of relying on the draft to keep your teams young and strong. all of this while you are grandstanding as a league that we need to cut team payrolls. on top of that, the law of unintended consequences, this would induce even more tanking amongst the mediocre teams to get that extra pick. imagine a league where 10 teams each year start tanking before the all-star break.

also, the counter stat to your championship stat is how many times in the last 10-20 years have the wolves, clippers, grizzlies, etc drafted inside the top 8 picks without any improvement? bad teams are bad teams because they are run like our country is being run.

While I agree that adding picks to the draft doesn't sound like the answer, the lottery is the safeguard against tanking. Maybe having a more even lottery system is a better method as it wouldn't matter if they finished first or fifth. But even doing that raises issues from teams that are simply and truly bad. Why should they be penalized for taking teams?


I don't think the draft is the issue with Championship teams. It's players leaving after their deals are done to move to bigger and better markets. Shaq, LeBron, Bosh, Melo, Amare, etc. Even if we had the same amount o cap space and same supporting cast, there is still no way those guys would ever choose Charlotte over a place like LA, NY, or FL. Drafting all the superstars in the world doesn't matter if they keep leaving year after year. Maybe strengthening the Bird Rights rule to allow teams to give their own players even more money is the way to go?


I think the biggest solution will be a hard cap. As much as I hate to say that. I think it'll keep teams like us from doling out bad contracts to mediocre players, will keep contract lengths down, and will keep a player turnover in effect until we get what we're looking for.

[spectre]

I don't know the ins & outs of other leagues, but what is different between the NBA, the NHL & the NBA?

The Hurricanes won the Stanley Cup a few years back. The Panthers played in the Super Bowl not so long ago and I distinctly remember a guy named Lucas who, while a FA, said (after the fact o'course) that he had told his agent he wanted to come to Carolina above every other team.

What are those other leagues doing to get parity that the NBA isn't?

I do agree with Chef; a big part of why teams don't progress is because of incompetence.

Just look at us for a prime example.

[SWedd523]

I don't know the ins & outs of other leagues, but what is different between the NBA ... & the NBA?

There isn't one ;)

[superb1]

I don't think the draft is the issue with Championship teams. It's players leaving after their deals are done to move to bigger and better markets. Shaq, LeBron, Bosh, Melo, Amare, etc. Even if we had the same amount o cap space and same supporting cast, there is still no way those guys would ever choose Charlotte over a place like LA, NY, or FL. Drafting all the superstars in the world doesn't matter if they keep leaving year after year. Maybe strengthening the Bird Rights rule to allow teams to give their own players even more money is the way to go?

maybe then they should allow teams to franchise players whom they drafted

[spectre]

There isn't one ;)

NFL smartass. :p

Why don't those guys care about the "bright lights/big city" but NBA players do? Don't the other leagues have a hard cap? Could that be the "solution"?

[SWedd523]

maybe then they should allow teams to franchise players whom they drafted

That's, in essence, what I'm trying to say by strengthening Bird Rights. I'm not a huge fan of the franchise rule the NFL uses because it can lead to disgruntled players not giving it their all. Stronger Birds rights, on the other hand, give the player the option of staying and making much more money versus leaving for a bigger market.


NFL smartass. :p

Why don't those guys care about the "bright lights/big city" but NBA players do? Don't the other leagues have a hard cap? Could that be the "solution"?

I think the NFL does better with contracts because A) revenues are much, much higher in that league and B) unguaranteed contracts help alleviate bad decisions in the FO. Furthermore, I don't think I can remember any big name FA's going to a small market off the top of my head. They all go to the big places too, namely New York, New England, Philly, Dallas, etc.

[dnbman]

I think the NFL does better with contracts because A) revenues are much, much higher in that league and B) unguaranteed contracts help alleviate bad decisions in the FO. Furthermore, I don't think I can remember any big name FA's going to a small market off the top of my head. They all go to the big places too, namely New York, New England, Philly, Dallas, etc.

Another point is that the NFL and NHL are much more dependent on teams to be successful. You can throw the top handful of guys in the NBA on any team, and that team will have a pretty good chance at making the playoffs. That can't be said for the NHL or NFL, where you have to have a lot of other guys play at a high level to be successful. Organizations then become much more important than locations, which is why a team like Baltimore can be a playoff team just about every year.

[Chef]

the solution i came up with in the shower (why i was thinking of this in the shower i have no idea) as presented by herman cain.

the solution has 4 parts

1. hard cap: all teams must stay at or under the cap after a 3 year transition period
2. revenue sharing of a set percentage of the league gross revenues.
3. each team can select 3 "franchise" free agent players to extend a first year "signing" bonus on top of the max contract they can afford and stay under the cap in any 6 year period. the signing bonus can be up to 20% of the total cap (50 mil cap = 10 mil 1 year signing bonus on top of contract) and DOES NOT count against the cap. this replaces "bird rights" and helps encourages stars to stay in smaller markets allowing small market dynasties to be formed. at the same time it punishes owners for mismanaging the cap because they still have to maintain the flexibility to offer big contracts to true franchise guys.
4. max guaranteed contract = 4 years with the last year including an early termination clause for non-performance "Eddie Curry clause" which counts at 175% of 3 year salary against the cap.

[adam187]

Taking that a step further, if competition wasn't a main determining factor behind a league, then most leagues wouldn't be any bigger than 5-8 teams.

There's a reason the Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, Knicks, and Sixers have won 44 of a possible 65 titles. Five teams should not account for over 67% of titles won.

HEY! Some of those Laker wins happened while they were in Minnesota didn't they? See, small markets CAN succeed.

(Sarcasm font)

[ammofan]

This all sounds like a really good idea. I would love to hear more about this....

[spectre]

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/215670/Sources_New_Amnesty_Protection_Wont_Count_Against_ Cap

Owners wanting an amnesty clause.

Think we'd amnesty Gana? I'm not so sure...we'd still have to pay him, so the only benefit is it not counting against our cap. Think we'll be flirting with the cap limit anytime soon?

[Chef]

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/215670/Sources_New_Amnesty_Protection_Wont_Count_Against_ Cap

Owners wanting an amnesty clause.

Think we'd amnesty Gana? I'm not so sure...we'd still have to pay him, so the only benefit is it not counting against our cap. Think we'll be flirting with the cap limit anytime soon?

nope. we want cap space next year and the year after. no need for space this year especially if it doesn't save mj any money anyway.

[SWedd523]

We currently have ten players under contract (not including rookies) for a total sum of $47.481 million.

Of those ten players, Boris, Najera, and Dante (QO) are expiring after this year, immediately freeing up ~$13mil.

Of the seven remaining, Maggette, Diop (PO), Carroll (PO), DJ (QO), and White (QO) expire two seasons from now, immediately freeing up a massive $29mil.



The only players on the roster we have locked up past these next two seasons are Tyrus and Hendo. We have a ton of flexibility after this coming season with all of our expiring deals so I honestly don't think we have any true targets for amnesty.

The only logical candidates are:

Maggette
Tyrus
Diop
Carroll

And there reasons for keeping all of those guys on the roster.

[Chef]

dream scenario:
no season this year all expirings off the books with no chances of a stupid trade by us
full season next year with full FA period and amnesty contract. we sign CP3 for the 2012 season and draft #9 or better if the lottery works out. orlando stubbornly keeps howard. we let all of our trash expire, amnesty tyrus and sign howard plus other vets and get to pick high in the 2013 draft.