Bill Simmons is back with another sequel to "Let's Save The NBA" today. In his blog post, he basically takes Bob Fitzgerald's playoff reseeding proposal, but adds some minor tweaking and this Bill Simmons favorite:
For the No. 13-16 playoff spots, the league adopts my antitanking idea (from my April 23 magazine column):
"Shorten the regular season by four games, guarantee the top six seeds in each conference, then have a double-elimination tourney for the seventh and eighth seeds between the remaining ... teams. I suggest this for five reasons. First, it would be entertaining as hell. In fact, that's what we'll call it: the Entertaining-as-Hell Tournament. Second, I'm pretty sure we could get it sponsored. Third, the top 12 teams get a reward: two weeks of rest while the tournament plays out.
"Fourth, a Cinderella squad could pull off some upsets, grab an eighth seed and win fans along the way. And fifth, with the Entertaining-as-Hell Tournament giving everyone a chance, no team could tank down the stretch without insulting paying customers beyond repair."
Okay idea, except I don't understand this: "no team could tank down the stretch without insulting paying customers beyond repair". Why not?!? "Lottery teams couldn't tank down the stretch and sideline their best players with dubious injuries". Um, why not?
Let me see if I understand this correctly: this is a post-season tournament, right? I'm thinking so, because of this line "Shorten the regular season by four games...". So this playoff tournament is not the regular season, it's the postseason. Hence, I assume that draft order will still be determined by regular season finish, right? So what's to stop my team from tanking the regular season, especially if my team still makes the playoffs?!?
Or is the draft order based on the postseason results? Like if a team gets eliminated first, that team gets the #1 draft pick overall? If so, wouldn't that potential lead to situation where, say, a marginal playoff team, one that is say 41-41 (like say the Nets) loses Jason Kidd to a severe hamstring injury the week before the knockout tournament starts, they gets knocked out first, and they still get the #1 pick the next season? That's fair?!? Kidd+Carter+Jefferson+Krstic+ODEN?!?
Nah, this makes no sense, and more importantly it doesn't stop tanking. You know what stops tanking? Finding out it doesn't help!
Here's how Bill Simmons ended his initial column on this topic:
"That's the lamest thing about tanking: not that it's morally unsound, but that fans pay full price to see a depleted group of losers with dubious intentions. At a recent Bobcats-Celtics game, my father (a 34-year season ticket-holder) watched Boston toss away a double-digit lead while Pierce and Jefferson watched from the bench. To his right, a fan screamed at Doc Rivers, "You're doing the right thing!" To his left, another fan screamed that the collapse was "an absolute disgrace!" And as my father told me later, the disturbing thing was that both guys were right."
Let me ask ya'll - that Celtic fan that shout "You're doing the right thing!" - think he still thinks his team did the right thing? Or does he maybe now wish his team had tried harder, like the 76ers did? Maybe then he would feel good about his team, as 76ers fans like Depressed Fan do, even though they have the #12 pick. Maybe had they tried, the Celtics could have even made a run at the playoffs - the 76ers were worse than the Celtics at the end of December when they trade Iverson, yet they came within a few games of making the playoffs.
No, you know what stops tanking, Bill? Seeing that tanking did nothing - NOTHING - to help teams that tanked, teams like the Celtics, Bucks and even the Grizzlies (to an extent they tanked, though I don't really think so). The teams that got the top-3 picks - the Blazers, Sonics, and Hawks - were all teams that did not openly tank at the end of the season. That right there should end all any "tanking" bandwagon.
On today's podcast with Simmons, David Stern said this, in regards to Simmons' tanking question: "If any tanking was happening, do you think it benefit anyone?"
The answer is "No, it didn't", and that's why the NBA's lottery setup is fine. And why Bill Simmons' add-on suggestion to Fitzgerald's original proposal is okay, but does not address the tanking issue at all. It is a nice idea, because a tournament is always fun ("Anything can happen, it usually does..."), but my point is this: let's clear this up - doing a tournament does nothing for stopping tanking, or making the draft "fairer"; it, in fact, does the opposite - it actually creates all whole mess of new problems.
Simmons to Stern: "Why didn't the Celtics get a top-2 pick?" Stern: "Maybe if you accused them of doing those other things,justice was handed out."
Get it, dunny? Stern did the best thing he could to stop the "tanking" problem. Problem solved, beyatch. Boston is in tears, and justice as been served.
Leave a comment
|
