If you were a top 5 pick
Would you black ball the Kings? And tell them that not only do you not want to play there but if they draft you, you'll not show up.
Thomas Robinson has be jumping for joy that he ended up with the Rockets. First look who his head coach is, Kevin McHale can coach this kid up on how to be a big time PF. Second he's on a young team still but a young team that wants to win.
Would have been nice to see Tyreke Evans get out as well and go to the C's that was being talked about. Hate seeing ball players waste away in bad places when thigns could have been so much different if they just played for a different coach or front office that had winning on their minds.
Honesly if I were a to 5 pick or an NBA pick period, i'd be grateful and play anywhere, and i'd decide my future after my rookie contract was up.
If i had the chance to be drafted i wouldn't be picky at all where i played where millions of people would kill to be in my position. Playing pro sports is a privilege not a right. Plus i ain't no Eli MAnning
Don't short change yourself. I'm sure if given the opportunity you, too, could turn the ball over thirty times in one season.
I would love to be a top 5 pick or a draft pick at all for that matter. To get paid to play at that level would be a dream. It kills me when these kids aren't humble enough to realize a true blessing...
If it were me right now? No, but eventually I'd probably want out. If I was a star high school player who got everything handed to me like a typical top 5 pick would? Hell yeah I would, I can't even imagine how big my ego would be.
This is precisely why I created a thread about "Socialist NBA?". It's weird that the draft system developed in a country such as the US. The Kings, who don't deserve any reward, get to choose the best kids because they are bad. In the american society, if you don't have talent and if you don't try hard enough, people tend to think that you should be left in your mediocrity so that more deserving people (whatever that means) can get their reward.
So I have a question: what do Republican readers think of the draft system?
It has nothing to do with society...it is strictly about competitive balance. If the rich kept getting richer none of the teams at the bottom would have any chance and eventually fold.
Imagine if David Stern said...."and with the first overall pick the Miami Heat select Anthony Davis Power Forward from the University of Kentucky"...that would be ridiculous.
Well, that doesn't seem so ridiculous in the real world. Inter-generational social mobility is very low in the US (lower than in Europe, eg), because usually (I insist on "usually") when you're born in a poor family, nobody gives you the "first pick".
The example you give is still a draft, although a different kind of draft. In a real market-based system, players would sign a contract with whoever they want. Of course, the best players would end up on the best teams. That's what happen in Europe, by the way.
The NBA is not a government. If the top picks were awarded to chamionship winners then 21 of the 28 top picks since the draft lotto was instituted would have gone to the Bulls, Lakers, Spurs, or Pistons. Keep in mind that those teams won all those times with terrible picks, if they were to get the Lebrons, Griffins, and Roses during the times when they already had players like MJ, Duncan, and Shaq it would render at least 2/3 or the teams almost pointless. Its a bit hard to make money and create interest when almost every game becomes a huge blowout.
In Europe, the best soccer teams always hire the best players, which doesn't prevent soccer to be hugely popular. Most people root for a team that will never, ever win the Champion's league (ie the competition reserved to be best teams in Europe); they just adapt their ambitions accordingly.
I'm not saying the draft system is bad (I like it. I repeat: I like it), I'm saying it's weird that it appeared and thrived in the US. "Punishing" the best young players by sending them to bad teams is rather "unAmerican" too me.
According to neoclassical economics (which reigns everywhere, but especially in the US), people react to incentives. Helping poor people too much isn't a good idea, because you make them lazy and dependent. In the NBA, there's a clear incentive to be bad. There's no point in struggling to be average. That's even counterproductive, because you won't get a good pick if you're average.
I don't think you can say "economics is one thing, BB is quite another, so what are you talking about?". I'm sure some GMs are staunch Republican who scorn "welfare queens", but are thrilled at the end of the season because their awful team could land the first pick. The same goes for the fans.
I see what you are saying but the NBA isn't European soccer or even European basketball. The Bobcats aren't going to ever get relegated to the D-league. The idea is to keep an even playing field where there is a salary cap. If it weren't designed this way the Mavs would have had LeBron and 4 other superstars years ago.
There is no incentive to be average and it helps to tank but it still comes down to a lottery. When the Bulls got Rose they weren't the worst team in the league...they had the 9th worst record. Do you know which team had the best odds to win the lottery that year? The 17-67 Miami Heat...that was 2009. In 2012 they were the NBA champs...the reason being free agency and signing LeBron James. The fact is after four years you are eligible to be a free agent so they are free to sign with who they want.
I don't know what point you are really trying to make about the Socialist USA...but save it for somewhere else.
I only used the word "socialist" because it's such a terrible adjective in the US. As I said, when someone suggests that something could be done to create a more level economic playing field in the real world, he's immediately being accused of being "socialist", which is ridiculous. By the same token, you could say that the NBA is "socialist". I don't think so obviously, I'm just surprised that the US has the draft system and the Europe hasn't.
I didn't mean to offend anyone.
No offense taken here...I just didn't understand what the point of comparing the two was. I see where you are coming from and the NBA and NFL share revenues which is pretty much the definition of being a socialist. The NHL wanted the same thing and that was a lot of the reason they were on strike. I think it almost has to be that way to ensure competitive balance because that is what is best for the product
The NBA, as a whole, is much like the U.S. and it's society. Sure the draft allows bad teams a chance at top end talent, but the free market system of free agency trumps the draft by a long shot. How many times do guys get drafted by a bad small market team and opt via free agency to pick their destiny. The draft didn't create the 2012 Miami Heat, the free market did.
Large market teams and winning squads are rewarded with veteran players in their primes, which is a far greater reward than most 19-22 year old players. If the deck was so stacked against the best teams in the league, then how come the lotto teams seem to find themselves there year after year, for the most part? Complaining about the draft being socialist, in my opinion, is overlooking the whole picture of the leauge. Much like complaining about the poor people ruining America because they accept benefits is ignoring that most of our nations problems were caused by the rich and powerful.
People throw around the word socialism too much without fully understanding what it means. Everytime something goes down in favor of an entitlement plan or government run program, Republicans cry socialism. When, in fact, it's little more than a scare tactic because most of the United State population doesn't even know what Socialism on a national standpoint really looks like. Just that they hate it and it's un-American.
Good point. I'm not "complaining" though, not at all.
I agree with what you say about socialism. I'm not a socialist, but the use of this word in the US is ridiculous. "Obama wants to reform the healthcare system, he's a socialist, run away!!".
Sorry, I probably just mis-understood you're tone.
I agree, though, I'm not a socialist either, but it's ridiculous and now they American right over-dramaticizes everything.
Yeah it's easy for us to sit here and say it such a privilege to just be in the NBA bla bla bla. But if you were a top 5 pick with everyone in high school and college acting like you are a god and pulling all the girls you want and all that it is natural for your ego to go through the roof with a few exceptions. And if you proved your worth and were a competitive player in a horrible situation like the kings currently are there is no denying you would want out or not want to be there in the 1st place and threaten them with not showing up.
This is why even though a lot of people hate him you have to respect KG. He sat in Minnesota through his prime years on a mediocre team in a city that is not the most popular dstination for players and where the front office was literally throwing 1st round picks away and did not go to the front office demanding a trade once.
You can respect KG but don't gloss over the fact that the TWolves paid him over 180 million dollars to play for them. I'm pretty sure that played a big role in him staying there. It's easy to have integrity in a crap situation when you're making 28 million a season.
I wouldn't black ball the Kings in the upcoming season because it appears that they'll have new owners and management next season...they may not even be the Kings next season.
I think it'd be awesome to play in Seattle (some of the greatest and obsessive sports fans in the country), so no I wouldn't black ball the Superson....er the Kings.
At the end of the day you are going to be in the NBA. I would go to the Kings and be the driving force behind the turn around.
Apparently, a good number of people are just cool with ignoring the reality that Thomas Robinson just wasn't a top 5 caliber player. He is a good athlete who gives good effort, but there isn't a ton of skill. He is basically a dump off, alley oop, and put back player who is making 43 percent of his layups. I will concede that a player of his type is a terrible fit for a team like Sacramento that doesn't exactly share the ball freely, but those limitations are going to be there in Houston as well. The Kings got someone who is two years older, and two years closer to his second contract, but the fact that he is a better player who is certain to receive a second contract (not a huge one, but certainly a multi-year one with guaranteed money) also matters.
Tyreke Evans is no better now than when he entered the league. There is plenty of blame to go around for why that is the case, but it is time to part ways. I think Otto Porter would be a tremendous fit for them. He is a high character guy, plays unselfishly, can perform on both ends of the court, and would address the long-term positional need at the 3. Patrick Patterson might be a good rotational fit for their frontcourt. It is probably the last good chance for Cole Aldrich to stick in the league. It is worth a shot for the Kings in another lost season to see if that is the case. The guy has played only 500 minutes in 3 years, it is still possible that if he gets an extended look he might prove himself worthy of bringing back. Most importantly, though, they need to make sure DeMarcus Cousins is the only high maintenance player in that locker room, and need a coach who will call him out when it is time to call him out. Sacramento needs a coaching change, and an identity change. It would be a great spot for Stan Van Gundy or Nate McMillan. They need more structure.
To be fair if your a top 5 draft pick you have probably made some serious sacrices and worked at an incredible rate to get there. In HS your coddlled but you also have alot of pressure ad competition to stay on top of , then dominate right away at the nex level to keep that regard as a player(look at McAdoo, 2 years in a row proj as top 5). Im just saying its not like being a top 5 pick just happens.
Look how much money Lebron made cleveland before he left. KG had a similar impact althouhg not nearly as much in Minnesota. Hes Jersey was a hot seller for years, He represented them in the ASG for years helped them become a playoff staple, got them TV time, he got the respect you remeber them, before him. Therses a balance somewhere surely
Its hard to say they have the right to be picky in fairnes but Its also hard to believe how some of these owners run there teams. Its scary cnsidering how much the overall team is worth.
I don't remember to many guys working out for the Kings pre-draft anyway. They get turned down a lot. Brandon Knight refused to workout for them and a few top flight guys last year, I remember Harrison Barnes canceled his workout.
The Kings front office sucks but if they move to Seattle they might have one of those synergy movements. Besides the Warriors were terrible and now they are a bright up and coming team. Imagine if they had cap space, if Bogut and Jefferson wasn't there they would be seriously contenders for Dwight next summer. Who wouldn't want to play there right now.
A change in ownership would be a blessing for a top 5 pick and no matter what the MaGooofs will be gone.
Honestly, the type of person I am, I would just focus on being the best player I could be. I would work hard and do everything that was asked of me. That way no one could say I didnt do my part in contributing to the team success. I am not the type of person that would boycott being drafted by a team. I would try and make the best out of it til my deal is up then wouldnt resign if I didnt like the situation.
Basketballl is collectively bargained. Meaning....the rules governing the sport and salary cap were agreed upon by both the players union and the owners.
You make it sound like you think the NBA arenas are plantations. The owners and players are both fortunate to have one another. Neither would have anything without the other.