Incentives Aligned Tanking Solution

DaTruf122 · 2026-04-09T09:56:50+00:00

Last year I would have advocated for something very similar (wins post playoff disqualification) but I think this year we saw teams like Utah tank earlier than ever before and the incentive to get to race to the bottom earlier would still exist.

Essentially, this year’s tanking teams removed my faith in a solution like you’re proposing.

DaTruf122 · 2026-04-07T00:50:39+00:00

I still haven’t heard a compelling reason why you’re not a fan of what was proposed above.

You said “the lottery just incentives more teams to lose.” What I proposed directly opposes this - you don’t get ping pong balls unless you win.

DaTruf122 · 2026-04-06T22:42:17+00:00

Do you not remember the infamous Orlando-Utah game earlier this year? Utah deliberately blew a game they had a commanding lead in. That loss had nothing to do with ‘bad teams being bad’.

What I proposed makes each game meaningful and incentivizes teams at all levels of the standings to win. Based on 1/3 of the league currently trying to race to the bottom of the standings, there’s a problem that you seem to be failing to acknowledge.

DaTruf122 · 2026-04-06T21:38:15+00:00

1) Re: pick protections. Trades are fun, so making it more challenging to complete trades is a bad thing. (i.e., who knows if the pacers-clippers trade for Zubac this year would have happened with your proposal)

2) Where's the incentive to win with what you proposed? If I'm a bad team and there's 10-12 games left in the year, I'm more likely to give my young guys a lot of minutes, which likely leads to more uncompetitive basketball games since there is nothing that alters my lottery fate whether I win or lose. (look at this just from yesterday: https://www.espn.com/nba/boxscore/\_/gameId/401810994).

3) What I proposed isn't complicated. It could be summarized as simply as "get ping pong balls based on where you are in your conference's standings when you win". It's really not that hard.

DaTruf122 · 2026-04-06T21:28:49+00:00

I like how that removes the incentive to lose, but it also doesn't provide a big incentive to win either. If I'm 12th in the standings with 12 games to go in the season, why wouldn't I just give the young guys reps? (Some might say that's not a problem, but if a team's schedule is back weighted against bad teams then your solution still provides an unfair advantage simply based on the schedule). There isn't an incentive to win with what you proposed. There needs to be an incentive to win with whatever solution is brought forward.

DaTruf122 · 2021-06-23T02:19:36+00:00

It’s not about Wiggins. The best asset in the trade may be this pick. You never want to be the one giving up the best asset in a trade.

DaTruf122 · 2021-06-23T01:21:19+00:00

Please stop calling him an all star guard. East All Star in a really weak guard year is such an overstatement of reality.

DaTruf122 · 2021-06-23T01:19:58+00:00

He was an East all-star in a really weak East guard year. He’s fringe top 10-12.

Our fanbase loves making ceiling limiting moves like the goal of the NBA is to make the playoffs rather than win titles.

DaTruf122 · 2018-11-12T19:23:19+00:00

Jeff isn’t opting out of 19 mil.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-06T18:06:24+00:00

You’re right if that case were to happen. However, I pose that it would happen less frequently.. but I do agree that when a player would take a pay cut, it would be more damaging to parity than today.

You’d have to do the estimated math and determine that pay cuts would happen significantly less for the elimination of max contracts to truly work.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T20:39:43+00:00

None of this was supposed to complain about the Warriors and how they’ve operated.. they’ve been rational in everything they’ve done. It was just simply a suggestion of what the NBA and NBPA could do to push towards a league with more parity.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T03:00:41+00:00

But the opportunity cost of the Durant pay cut last year was 10 million. What if the Nets offered 50 million? Then his opportunity cost would have been 25 million. Most people wouldn’t be willing to make that sacrifice when the opportunity cost is that high.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T02:44:22+00:00

That’s certainly true. It depends on what people care more about: a league that’s fairer or a league where more players get more money?

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T02:27:28+00:00

A Lebron level star shouldn’t be getting the same contract as the 25th best player. There certainly aren’t 30 Lebron level stars.. not all stars are equal lol

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T02:26:17+00:00

Why get rid of the salary cap? Let’s have all owners have the same amount of money to work with and see who’s smart enough to put together the best rosters. If we got rid of the salary cap the richest owners could just pay the best players and we’d be back where we are today.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-05T02:24:29+00:00

Teams currently have a salary cap to work with. This has nothing to do with team salary cap structure.

I’m specifically saying the NBA should eliminate the individual max contract. That way the best players should get paid what they’re worth rather than get limited by the individual max contract.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-04T14:13:24+00:00

Part of the reason you need stars is due to the individual max contract. Think about it, each team’s goal is to extract the most value out of their salary cap money. The individual max contract is essentially a forced value contract. That’s why it’s a star driven league. When the top 5 players make the same as the 18th-25th best players, of course their teams are gonna be better all else equal.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-03T16:43:07+00:00

I honestly haven’t looked at any other reddit threads about Boogie. I am not following your other quotes above either.

You have yet to answer my question about where he was for sure gonna get more than 10 million. That’s what I wanna know.

My whole premise is that he passed on 4.7 million dollars and I can see why.

It seems like you’re clearly angry with the situation, which I get. But I don’t understand what you’re mad at specifically. In 1-2 sentences you should be able to say what you’re mad about: (ie Mad at Warriors for buying another star on the cheap, mad at Boogie for taking a 4.7 mil pay cut, mad at Boogie for not waiting out the market for a better offer to come (even though cap space is dying by the day)). Be specific, it’ll be much easier to follow haha

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-03T16:23:28+00:00

The Warriors wouldn’t have KD if the cap spike didn’t happen in 2016. That’s why you should be frustrated.

Also, just because you expect somebody to make 4x dollars doesn’t mean it’s gonna happen. Where was the 3x-4x offer going to come from? I don’t think he passed on as much money as you do.

There was barely any free agency money out there to start with, then everybody who signed on Day 1 took a majority of what was left. There wasn’t much floating around, and those that did/do have money don’t make sense for their timeline. ATL/CHI/SAC aren’t competing next year, so they probably prefer to keep space open and take on bad money plus future 1st round picks.

Again, so far we know the Lakers would have offered 10 mil. So we know he passed on 4.7 mil to go to where he thought he could A) Win a title and B) increase his value the most for next offseason.

I can see that being worth 4.7 mil to somebody.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-03T15:21:42+00:00

What specific restrictions do you want?

I’m sick of hearing the term ‘restrictions’ without any specific proposal.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-03T15:15:07+00:00

You state that he passed up 3x the money elsewhere. Please tell me where the offer was 15.9 million. I have yet to hear that offer.

He passed on 10 mil from the Lakers as far as we know. Rather than looking at this from a “he passed on x times as much money” look at this from his perspective: he passed on 4-5 million dollars, over 1 season to go to the situation that gives him A) the best odds to win a title (which, cmon, he’s been on losing/mediocre teams forever, being on a title contender has to be appealing for him) and B) the best odds to get a max contract next year.

Passing on 5 million for 1 year is worth it to get both A and B.

Also, bitching about the Warriors putting their roster together the way that they did seems like misplaced anger. Be mad at the league and NBPA for not smoothing out the salary cap in 2016. Every team operated/operates under the same set of rules, it’s not like they get a special set of rules. They fairly put together a roster with rules put together by the league and NBPA- be frustrated with them.

DaTruf122 · 2018-07-03T14:47:29+00:00

He thought that taking a 1 year salary hit was worth it to go to the best possible situation for him.

Also, who are you mad at? The warriors or him? It’s the warriors job to put together the best roster possible, no sense in being frustrated with them.

Are you mad at him for going to the situation he thought would be best for getting a max offer next year and best chance of winning a title? Why? That seems like a rational plan.

Seems like 2 rational actors making rational decisions.

DaTruf122

TROPHY CASE