Washington's fire sale (Tankin' it)

Talk about anything general in the NBA here.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32


All Star
Posts: 1128
» Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:24 pm
Looks like the Wiz are going into full tank mode for the rest of the year in attempt to get Arenas' replacement, John Wall. It's a pretty common thing in the NBA to tank and try and get the highest amount of ping pong balls. I've heard numerous ideas over the years of ways to try and prevent teams from doing this. But there just doesn't seen to be a way for this to happen. Unless.....

Each non-playoff team gets an even amount of ping pong balls in a lottery for a chance to win the top amount of ping pong balls for the draft lottery... Far fetched indeed, but just a wild idea.....And perhaps would be unfair to the "worst team in the NBA" in any given season

Anyway, I won't be surprised to see other teams follow suit pretty soon and make a strong bid to win John Wall Sweepstakes!
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 21901
» Thu Feb 18, 2010 11:55 pm
The team with the worst record has rarely got the #1 pick anyway, so these teams trading away all their talent are just idiots with that idea
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Fri Feb 19, 2010 12:42 am
I've got an even easier answer to this problem: don't guarantee any contracts, just bonuses, kinda like the NFL.

That way, players have to do everything they can on the court, because, if not, their jobs are at risk. That alone leads to more intensity on those teams, which equals to more wins.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 21901
» Fri Feb 19, 2010 2:40 am
TMC wrote:I've got an even easier answer to this problem: don't guarantee any contracts, just bonuses, kinda like the NFL.

That way, players have to do everything they can on the court, because, if not, their jobs are at risk. That alone leads to more intensity on those teams, which equals to more wins.



That looks like the best way to have it. It will be interesting what the new CBA will be

Moderator
Posts: 5355
» Fri Feb 19, 2010 7:00 am
TMC wrote:I've got an even easier answer to this problem: don't guarantee any contracts, just bonuses, kinda like the NFL.

That way, players have to do everything they can on the court, because, if not, their jobs are at risk. That alone leads to more intensity on those teams, which equals to more wins.


I think that is too extreme.

I think there are more creative ways with dealing with a situation. I have always thought of an idea i wish all leagues implemented, which is a compromise of how the NBA and NFL do their contracts

Example. Lets say you cut someone with three years remaining a contract. The first year is completely guarenteed from the time you cut him until the end of the season. You still have to pay for the other two years, but year two, you only have to pay half of his contract. Then, on the final year, you only have to pay 30%. Subsequent percentages are 20%, 10%, and 5% if applicable.

I think my idea puts both sides in check. The owner can get rid of its own mistake schotch free, and the player can get a fat paycheck and become fat and lazy and doesn't care (JaMarcus).... its a compromise.
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Fri Feb 19, 2010 8:03 am
Mr. Crackerz wrote:Example. Lets say you cut someone with three years remaining a contract. The first year is completely guarenteed from the time you cut him until the end of the season. You still have to pay for the other two years, but year two, you only have to pay half of his contract. Then, on the final year, you only have to pay 30%. Subsequent percentages are 20%, 10%, and 5% if applicable.

I think my idea puts both sides in check. The owner can get rid of its own mistake schotch free, and the player can get a fat paycheck and become fat and lazy and doesn't care (JaMarcus).... its a compromise.


I don't like it... I mean, I get it, but it's... you know, there's no reason to not use guaranteed bonuses instead of that method. I love the NFL system, because the bonus is fully guaranteed, but the salary is not and, thus, teams can cut guys that are not performing as expected.

That system works, in a way, in a similar way that your own idea. Players can sign prorated bonus over the length of the contract, which are guaranteed, and will get that money no matter what happens... but the team still keeps the freedom to cut them.

I don't know if I'm explaining myself or making it even more confusing, tho. :wink:

All Star
Posts: 3173
» Sat Feb 20, 2010 12:59 am
I like the addition of Howard, and Thornton, to go along with Blatche. Not having the spot light on Jamison, Butler and Arenas will really show that in-fact the new Wizards are not as bad as people might perceive them.

The question is what is the situation with Arenas, after he is finished serving the suspension will he still be a Wizard. At this point I think it would be better for both parties to split.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:26 am
warriorsstepup wrote:The question is what is the situation with Arenas, after he is finished serving the suspension will he still be a Wizard. At this point I think it would be better for both parties to split.


Arenas is leaving Washington. After his suspension, they're going to look to trade him if anyone is willing to take him. They don't want him back, period.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3242
» Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:55 am
Wiz had a good win tonight
User avatar

Hall of Famer
Posts: 18315
» Sat Feb 20, 2010 6:14 am
xbay wrote:
warriorsstepup wrote:The question is what is the situation with Arenas, after he is finished serving the suspension will he still be a Wizard. At this point I think it would be better for both parties to split.


Arenas is leaving Washington. After his suspension, they're going to look to trade him if anyone is willing to take him. They don't want him back, period.


Well, Grunfels said he'll be back with the Wizards... Then again, he might be trying to create some trade value, making other teams think they're not forced to trade him.


I'd look closely at the Arenas situation. This FO is so retarded (medical term) that I'm not totally sure we won't be on the race for him.

All Star
Posts: 1128
» Sat Feb 20, 2010 8:37 pm
TMC wrote:
Mr. Crackerz wrote:Example. Lets say you cut someone with three years remaining a contract. The first year is completely guarenteed from the time you cut him until the end of the season. You still have to pay for the other two years, but year two, you only have to pay half of his contract. Then, on the final year, you only have to pay 30%. Subsequent percentages are 20%, 10%, and 5% if applicable.

I think my idea puts both sides in check. The owner can get rid of its own mistake schotch free, and the player can get a fat paycheck and become fat and lazy and doesn't care (JaMarcus).... its a compromise.


I don't like it... I mean, I get it, but it's... you know, there's no reason to not use guaranteed bonuses instead of that method. I love the NFL system, because the bonus is fully guaranteed, but the salary is not and, thus, teams can cut guys that are not performing as expected.

That system works, in a way, in a similar way that your own idea. Players can sign prorated bonus over the length of the contract, which are guaranteed, and will get that money no matter what happens... but the team still keeps the freedom to cut them.

I don't know if I'm explaining myself or making it even more confusing, tho. :wink:


agree with TMC. This is the way every sport should be set up...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest