Well at least Mark Cuban is not afraid to make his opinion known. The NBA could really would really benefit if there was more Mark Cubans around. I love Paul but I do wish Paul had a little of Mark Cuban in him.
Actually I totally agree with you on that statement, I may not agree with him all the time but I do appreciate that he voices his opinion(s).
Tanking would actually be more rewarding. Eliminate 4 more teams from the lottery, and for the East those are probably teams with fairly poor records.
The Bill Simmons idea is ingenious because the winners of the bottom 16 tourney make the playoffs AND win the lottery. Basically, under his system, the Blazers of the mid 80s and mid 90s would have been big winners.
It's really tempting to scrap conference elimination and have cross conference elimination. Top team in the West plays bottom team in the east first round. Only the best records compete whether east or west. I'm not opposed to The Simmons idea either. Something needs to change, starting with not having Western conf teams east of the Mississippi period
This idea is a little complicated but would be the perfect thing to eliminate tanking. The day before the season, have a panel of analysts submit predicted win-loss record and average them. Then average that with a sim-engine to output a final predicted record. We'll call this the Magic #. Every win past the Magic #, the team gets 0.5 subracted from that #. If they can't reach that number, their predicted won total and actual win total are averaged together. Lowest numbers get best lotto odds. Example: 76ers Predicted Record: 20-62 (Magic # 20) 76ers Final Record: 19-63 76ers Final Magic #: 19.5 ---------------------------------------------------------------- KnicksPredictedRecord: 24-58 (Magic# 24) Knicks Final Record: 32-50 (8 Over) Knicks Final Magic #: 18 (24 - 8/2) ---------------------------------------------------------------- T'Wolves Pred. Record: 27-55 (Magic # 27) T'Wolves Final Record: 43-39 (16 Over) T'Wolves Final Magic #: 19 (27-16/2) Lotto Odds: 1. Knicks 2. Timberwolves 3. 76ers Would reward bad teams for winning more games. If they get less then itd keep it somewhat even by averaging the numbers, but overachieving would be rewarded more then underachieving, and would eliminate the motive for tanking.
I actually think the playoffs should have less teams / games. I like the NFL model of 6 teams per conference, with the top 2 getting byes. Also, lose the conferences and seed the top 12 teams.
I agree, the regular season in the NBA is like one big long pre-season. You only get eliminated if you totally suck, and you play for what? 1 home court advantage game. I like the idea of less games, with each game being more meaningful.
That would never happen. The amount of revenue earned from the 7 game series would stop any idea of yours from happening. Now if you add more playoff/elimination games, they would consider it.
Too much lost revenue, will never happen. They will never play fewer playoff games but they might play more
I think it would still be better though. The NFL makes a lot of money only playing 16 games. Each game is a huge event because there are less games. You could still televise the same number of games nationally, more teams would get exposure.
I would not mind more playoff games, IF, the number of regular season games was reduced so the total number of games played was the same, or less. The reason to watch/attend many of the regular season games is to see a certain player or two. The regular season is tooooo looong with a lot of meaningless games. The reason to watch/attend the playoff games is to see a much high level of BB. Each playoff game becomes more important than the last. Expanding the playoffs probably would increase ratings and attendance, which would increase revenues.
Cuban not feeling confident after losing deandre starting to shoot for contingencies for when mavs come up 10th.
This is actually an excellent point, in the NFL you get a bye week if you have a good record. If there were fewer playoff teams the NBA could institute that into the playoffs in the NBA too, this would be extra incentive for teams to play hard and reward those teams.
You want incentives for playing throughout the season? How about increased home court advantage for larger seeding disparities. Seeded 1-3 spots higher, 4 home games; 4-6 spots higher, 5 home games; 7-9 spots higher, 6 home games; 10 or more spots higher, you host the entire series. The potential for extra gate revenue will cause owners to push their coaches to strive for those higher seeds.
And I don't think home court advantage in the playoffs really means all that much. Better teams get more home games, which is you see the win/loss descrepency. And during the regular season, there's the issue of travel and motivation. In all my years watching the Blazers in the playoffs, I've never felt they did better at home.
Eliminating conferences would be brutal on travel. Players and coaches really hate shitty travel days. I'm sure hcp does too, but who gives a fuck about him.
How about a playoff to earn more balls, with the worst 3 possible teams still getting the best chance to get the top pick? Example: Worst team gets 10% chance 2nd worst 6% 3rd worst 3% Bottom 14 have a playoff to add an additional 8% for winner and 4% for second place. The rest get the rest of the % according to record.
