|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 26, 2014 19:44:44 GMT
dependent on Bundy's approval of course
no team from now on can deal a 1st past their projected CY year until they have mathematically clinched a playoff spot and then they have a 5 year window to trade their next 1st (CY reset).
For example, the 76ers cannot trade away a 1st past 2027, if they make the playoffs next season (in 2025) then they can trade a 1st up to 2030.
I don't think anyone has a problem with this
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 26, 2014 19:45:12 GMT
only posted because I'm suppose to be the commish without FBB or some shit like that
|
|
|
|
Post by celticfan on Oct 26, 2014 20:25:47 GMT
I think it really depends on each situation. I don't think you should completely handcuff someone like that, especially if they are trying to avoid CY and are making an effort to win... Maybe could have some special protection that could be attached or something
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 26, 2014 20:32:37 GMT
I think it really depends on each situation. I don't think you should completely handcuff someone like that, especially if they are trying to avoid CY and are making an effort to win... Maybe could have some special protection that could be attached or something there's still value in the pick before a team hits expansion, the Nets just got the #9 pick that pick is gonna make someone happy The only other option is to void a pick completely if a team hits expansion, but there's not a ton of value in that either |
|
tyfreak
Administrator 
Indiana Pacers
Posts: 12,962 
Staff Member
|
Post by tyfreak on Oct 26, 2014 20:37:01 GMT
Maybe if a pick becomes lotto that someone in CY (who was fired obviously) traded it becomes completely lotto protected. (Every following year as well)
Idk just throwin shit out there
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 26, 2014 20:44:03 GMT
if you do loto protection, the pick needs to go right back to the team in that if said team does get expanded, the team trading for the pick would get nothing.
Reason being, the next GM should have freedom, and you can't really have much freedom if a pick is loto protected because you can't trade a pick that is loto protected and make it loto unless you trade it at draft time. There's GM's that like to trade loto picks to get real established talent (entrapy's Dwight deal is an example of that). So they need the freedom to do that.
My head is spinning a little after explaining that
|
|
shorty
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 15,223
Staff Member
|
Post by shorty on Oct 28, 2014 3:39:59 GMT
Bump. We'll have all season to discuss since there's no CY team this season, but SRG's idea is a good one.
My proposal would just be to force top 7 protection on picks traded in CY year
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2014 3:51:46 GMT
Veto deals like the Schroeder deal that do absolutely nothing for them and there's little problem eh.
|
|
bundybastard
Administrator
Co Commish
Posts: 15,661
Staff Member
|
Post by bundybastard on Oct 28, 2014 3:51:56 GMT
Should not disallow it, I think a protection must be on a possible 1st in an Expansion yr
|
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 28, 2014 3:53:38 GMT
top 7 is too light imo
|
|
|
|
Post by BrazilianDude on Oct 28, 2014 4:10:54 GMT
Why would anyone trade for a top 10 protected pick tho? I mean if they are giving up a good asset |
|
|
|
Post by somerandomguy on Oct 28, 2014 4:24:04 GMT
Why would anyone trade for a top 10 protected pick tho? I mean if they are giving up a good asset given the craziness in the past season, why should potential expansion picks be tradeable at all? A team looks very unattractive when they're not very good and don't have 1st round picks, so making them untradeable or loto protected picks imo is the best way to deal with that. Even giving up a top 8 pick is devastating to a team trying to rise the Wizards look like a team that could be used as an example. Though I'm of personal belief that a known loto team shouldn't trade a 1st round pick of their own unless they got something that will for sure make them a postseason team. |
|
|
|
Post by BrazilianDude on Oct 28, 2014 4:31:44 GMT
Why would anyone trade for a top 10 protected pick tho? I mean if they are giving up a good asset given the craziness in the past season, why should potential expansion picks be tradeable at all? A team looks very unattractive when they're not very good and don't have 1st round picks, so making them untradeable or loto protected picks imo is the best way to deal with that. Even giving up a top 8 pick is devastating to a team trying to rise the Wizards look like a team that could be used as an example. Though I'm of personal belief that a known loto team shouldn't trade a 1st round pick of their own unless they got something that will for sure make them a postseason team. Maybe we should stop clearing teams then and just fire the gm... Seems pointless to do both |
|
