Here come the Tanks!

[AbeVigodaLive]

So looking at what's turning into a fun battle royale in the West (with the #3 and #4 seeds dealing with season-ending injuries to their star players)... anything can happen. It's going to be close with each team scratching and clawing to get in to the playoffs.

(AND PEOPLE WANT TO BLOW THIS FORMAT UP? WHY?)

On the other end of the spectrum, about 8 teams are actively trying to lose. As Wolves fans, we know what it looks like and I've even posted the astronomically insane statistics to show just how well previous Wolves regimes have tanked late in seasons.

So let's look at "guaranteed" wins:

The Wolves have 5 games vs. 18-win teams... and one vs. the 24-win, but probably tanking, NY Knicks. 6 guaranteed wins isn't bad.

OKC has 7... including the next 3 games. So expect them to jump right back to the #4 or #5 position.

Utah is currently out of the playoffs, but it has 8 games vs. 18-win teams. And 2 more vs. the LA Lakers.

The Wolves can NOT lose any more of the easy games... to be fair... most of those teams are going to make it impossible.

[kekgeek]

You are right on beating the tanking teams. We can't afford to lose any games where teams are purposely tanking.

On the topic of tanking, I saw a poker player Daniel Negreanu (a hockey guy) tweet an idea to eliminate tanking. Here was his idea an I liked it a lot and I have never heard of it before. When a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, they have to try and win and the more wins you get when you are mathematically eliminated the higher pick you get.

For example. If the Suns are mathematically eliminated with 20 games left on the season, they go 4-16 the rest of the way. If the Jazz are mathematically eliminated with 5 games left and they go 5-0 in those last 5 games they would get a higher pick than the Suns.

It would force teams to try and win. It also allows teams that are actually really bad more games to win ball games. If this happened playoffs would have to move to 1-16 seeding, so teams have the same shot at being mathematically eliminated at the same time.

Let me know what you guys think. I just thought it was a really good idea. That I had never heard before.

[Wolvesfan21]

You are right on beating the tanking teams. We can't afford to lose any games where teams are purposely tanking.

On the topic of tanking, I saw a poker player Daniel Negreanu (a hockey guy) tweet an idea to eliminate tanking. Here was his idea an I liked it a lot and I have never heard of it before. When a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, they have to try and win and the more wins you get when you are mathematically eliminated the higher pick you get.

For example. If the Suns are mathematically eliminated with 20 games left on the season, they go 4-16 the rest of the way. If the Jazz are mathematically eliminated with 5 games left and they go 5-0 in those last 5 games they would get a higher pick than the Suns.

It would force teams to try and win. It also allows teams that are actually really bad more games to win ball games. If this happened playoffs would have to move to 1-16 seeding, so teams have the same shot at being mathematically eliminated at the same time.

Let me know what you guys think. I just thought it was a really good idea. That I had never heard before.

That is a good idea. I had a concept that was more complicated. Basically your W/L for draft seeding was based on a skewed W/L formula. Losses in the beginning of the year are heavily weighted, at the end, tanking season, wouldn't count.

Losses in the beginning of the season would count fully into you loss column. For instance the first 20 games would be full losses. After that the next 20 games would be 2/3rd. Next 20 games would be 1/3rd and the final 22 games wouldn't count at all! If you make the playoffs obviously you are not in the Lottery.

Teams tanking, would have to tank in the beginning of the season eliminating themselves from the playoffs most likely. Teams who are bordering the playoffs at the end would have zero incentive to tank since the games don't count for lottery selection.

The only problem is you'd have to try and balance the schedule very well based on the previous years results so it's fair.

[AbeVigodaLive]

You are right on beating the tanking teams. We can't afford to lose any games where teams are purposely tanking.

On the topic of tanking, I saw a poker player Daniel Negreanu (a hockey guy) tweet an idea to eliminate tanking. Here was his idea an I liked it a lot and I have never heard of it before. When a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, they have to try and win and the more wins you get when you are mathematically eliminated the higher pick you get.

For example. If the Suns are mathematically eliminated with 20 games left on the season, they go 4-16 the rest of the way. If the Jazz are mathematically eliminated with 5 games left and they go 5-0 in those last 5 games they would get a higher pick than the Suns.

It would force teams to try and win. It also allows teams that are actually really bad more games to win ball games. If this happened playoffs would have to move to 1-16 seeding, so teams have the same shot at being mathematically eliminated at the same time.

Let me know what you guys think. I just thought it was a really good idea. That I had never heard before.

Sadly, I see the #1-#16 seeding getting closer.

I think this season is a great example of why I don't like it.

Did you guys know that both Houston and Toronto recently became the #1 seeds? Do you care? How about the other 8 teams in 8 different Western markets battling for only 6 spots? Which one is more engaging?

Regular season games need to have significance. Battling for a #12 or #11 seed is a lot less compelling than battling for your playoff lives.