AROUND the NBA:

[michaeltex]

It's probably a pretty hard thing to define, as a whole, though we all know it when we see it. 

Still, it should be relatively simple to identify a few, specific "don'ts" that could be clearly policed. Will that actually make a noticeable impact on what the league perceives to be "the problem?" No idea, but probably not.

To me, they need to reduce salaries paid directly to players, especially the Max and SuperMax contracts. Then amp up the reward system for where a team finishes and how far it goes in the playoffs. Currently there is $36M allocated for finish and playoff bonuses. Significant, but not really meaningful for starter-level players. If OKC repeats winning the championship they only net $12.8M, which is $854k per player, assuming 15 players. Less if you include 2-ways, coaches and staff. Significant to end-of-bench players, but not so much to the top 7-8 who really determine how the team performs.

2026 NBA Playoff Pool

                                                    Team Share
Best Record in NBA                     $896,000
Best Record in Conference          $784,000 each
2nd Best Record in Conference   $628,000 each
3rd Best Record in Conference    $471,000 each
4th Best Record in Conference     $384,000 each
5th Best Record in Conference     $297,000 each
6th Best Record in Conference     $210,000 each
Teams in First Round                    $481,000 each
Teams in Conference Semifinals  $586,000 each
Teams in Conference Finals         $980,000 each
Losing Team in NBA Finals           $3,921,000
Winning Team in NBA Finals         $9,078,000

Total Playoff Pool                        $35,740,000

Numbers are rounded to the nearest $1,000.
Table: Lev AkabasSource: NBA00

I also have thoughts on lowering the cap/aprons to reduce hoarding of talent or limit their ability to sign new talent, like FRPs. Also make the cap compliance deadline just after the TDL, not at the end of the contract year, then you can't run high all season and dive under after the playoffs.

I know these are unreasonable, mostly affect players and would likely never get by CBA negotiations It's got to hit them in the bank account to get their attention and tanking would be messing with their money and pissing off the talent is NOT what most teams want to do. 

OK, done for now, just was on my mind driving in to work today.

[dirkfansince1998]

Just so many problems with this.

- We have an endless list of traded picks so making this move now is going to hurt/benefit some teams more than others.
- If small markets cannot rebuild through the draft like they used to do they are in an even worse position compared to the big markets.
- In a way the proposal just changes the target zone for tanking. Don't want to finish with a bottom three record. More valuable to be in the ~5-10 range

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

I LOVE this new Lottery proposal. I'm sick of teams deciding to just give up for years, which kills competitive advantages. Look at teams like the Suns. If they had their pick, they would've given up. But because the incentive to lose was removed, they spent much of the season in the top 6 in the West.

Plus, this is pure chaos and I'm here for it!!!

[Chicagojk]

Everything I have read makes me believe AD is. Good person. Although not only does he need to prove he can stay healthy but he also needs to show he has the hunger to be great. Outside of his first game in Dallas, he showed very little hunger imo. He still may have years of him being an excellent player, but he needs to show it..

https://x.com/all_things_mavs/status/204...94942?s=61

[Chicagojk]

tanking will be less next year.  It is a reported poor draft.   Although, I don't think these fixes changes much.   Teams will still look for ways to game the system.    How many 100's of millions of dollars would these teams pay this year for a top 3 pick?   I would guess almost all of them.    It is so hopeless in the NBA when you don't have a star.

taking money or cap room away would probably help more.  Relegation would fix it..although that obviously is not happening.    It just seems like trying to create a self created problem only to create more problems.    

Personally I would be in favor of returning all pick swaps that occur over the next 4 years.  I could be behind that rule

[F Gump]

Silver has it all backwards. You can't keep teams from wanting to enhance their chances to get a top-3 or so pick when the draft has some really good players. And you really WANT the worst teams to get the good players, so they can be relevant again.

The target is to make the teams try, so that the ones getting the best picks are the ones who were truly the worst. Not the ones who are talented, but decided to play to lose. Indy, Utah, and Memphis were poster children for that.

If I'm "fixing" the problem, here are the rules I implement to prod teams to play with integrity:
1 Teams can't get lottery-drawn in back-to-back years. And the higher the draw the first time, the longer you "sit out" the chance to move up. Pick 1? You are ineligible for a top-4 draw for the next 3 years. Pick 2 makes you sit out for 2 years. Pick 3/4 makes you sit for 1 year. This gives all the bad teams a chance to feed at the "Top of the Draft" table. And it discourages the teams who want to tank year after year from doing so. Tank one year, and be done.
2 If a team is blatantly "tanking" they are moved outside the top 10 and they get disqualified from being drawn in the top 4.
3 Tanking is defined by the "Team Dollar Minutes" they put on the floor. What is the combined payroll of the players you are playing, per minute? (It would be a very easy calculation.) This would target the absurdity where teams have been trotting out 3 2-ways and 2 10-days, or variations of that, as their main lineup (as a way to tank). That's putting such an inferior product on the floor that they need to be slammed. No exceptions for injuries - let's penalize the season-ending surgery for a hangnail for a good player on a team chasing a bad record, and also penalize teams who have their good players only showing up 2/3 of the games which sucks for fans who want to see the stars play. There would be a lot of ways to weigh this (is it all season, the last third of the season, does it matter for teams who are winning, and so on). But play your best players, because PLAYERS are going to play their best.
4 "Team Dollar Minutes" must exceed a certain threshold for teams who are receiving revenue sharing (because teams putting a bad product on the floor are not drawing fans) or else they lose some (or all) of that revenue sharing. But that penalty is waived for teams who make the play-in or better.
5 I'm in favor of disqualifying last year's top teams from being in the lottery the very next season. Don't tell me Indy is REALLY as bad as their record. If you won X games, or if you got to X level in the playoffs. Even if you have injuries. If someone retired, you better find a way to replace him. Credit to BOS for showing that losing a top player isn't a reason to trash your season.

[Scott41theMavs]

I also have thoughts on lowering the cap/aprons to reduce hoarding of talent or limit their ability to sign new talent, like FRPs. 

From a team fan standpoint, I would push back with great vehemence and violence on this. You drafted 'em, you should have every chance to keep 'em. The rules as is are even putting a major crunch on a team like OKC. I know we don't want to see them dominate for years to come, but it's not their fault that the Clipps and other pigeons allowed themselves to be victimized, and they're a small market team. The rules force teams to be smart, to be very careful with whom they give supermaxes and not-so-super-maxes to. Nico had the right idea in terms of "you don't commit supermax money to someone who isn't worthy of it;" he was just droolingly moronic in classifying the guy who was the league-wide poster child for deserving the supermax in that category. Teams have to be smart and creative in how they manage their assets, and that's a good thing.

[mvossman]

Everything I have read makes me believe AD is. Good person.  Although not only does he need to prove he can stay healthy but he also needs to show he has the hunger to be great.  Outside of his first game in Dallas, he showed very little hunger imo.  He still may have years of him being an excellent player, but he needs to show it..

https://x.com/all_things_mavs/status/204...94942?s=61

AD is a 33 year old big with a long injury history.  There have not been many (any?) guys with that profile who had many years left of being an excellent player.

[Mavs2021]

AD is a 33 year old big with a long injury history.  There have not been many (any?) guys with that profile who had many years left of being an excellent player.

He was finished the moment he signed that extension. Lazy bum. He´s gonna finish his career on that contract, unless there is another Nicont lurking in some organisation.

[KillerLeft]

I'll say this about AD's mindset, and it should be the final indicator for anyone still wondering whether Dallas did the right thing: We're hearing rumbles that he's not sure he wants to stay in WAS, and it's being reported like he's not sure they'll be competitive enough soon enough. However, anyone who has followed the sport for at least 10 years SHOULD be able to see right through that (though many don't seem to, oddly). His leaks about not being totally sold on the near future of the franchise stem 100% from their management's lack of interest in giving him the deal he's looking for THIS SUMMER. Period.

If he were still in Dallas, he and his team would be attempting a slightly different version of the same strategy, and at the end of the day, fan of his game that I am, I don't think that's what you need around here to get the Cooper Flagg era started off on good footing.

The more of these aging stars I see fade out, the more fortunate I feel to have witnessed the Dirk Nowitski career from start to finish. Most of these guys go out in pretty ugly ways.

[Mavs2021]

I'll say this about AD's mindset, and it should be the final indicator for anyone still wondering whether Dallas did the right thing: We're hearing rumbles that he's not sure he wants to stay in WAS, and it's being reported like he's not sure they'll be competitive enough soon enough. However, anyone who has followed the sport for at least 10 years SHOULD be able to see right through that (though many don't seem to, oddly). His leaks about not being totally sold on the near future of the franchise stem 100% from their management's lack of interest in giving him the deal he's looking for THIS SUMMER. Period.

....not that Washington gave up much, but they are delusional, if they think AD will decide to show up for work. He already successfully sat out six months. He´ll now get fat playing golf, boozing and filming his show. Then he´ll half-heartedly jog around for 25-30 games until the 2027 ASB. At that point Washington will shut him down for another tank. Then he has another year left. At the start of the 2027/2028 season he´ll suddenly be healthy (if he still can) play hard (if he still can) for a month. At which point he´ll demand another new big contract or a trade.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

The more of these aging stars I see fade out, the more fortunate I feel to have witnessed the Dirk Nowitski career from start to finish. Most of these guys go out in pretty ugly ways.

Dropping Dirk's name is like chumming for 'likes'...







...and I'm here for it.