Given unlimited power, how would you reform the NBA?

[Mugthis]

As with most things, I'm not a fan of tradition being used to stop improvements. "Tradition" usually is just another word for "status quo bias."
 
I love the NBA, but here are some things that I think are obvious improvements to the status quo.
 
Structural Changes:
 
1. Shorten number of regular season games to eliminate most/all back-to-backs. This should reduce injuries, increase the overall quality of play, and reduce the number of meaningless games. It would obviously screw with some of the records, but most of the records that people care about in the NBA are per game. Plus, the game has changed enough in other ways to make records over time rather incomparable. 
 
2. Remove all conferences and divisions. Given modern travel, these are rather pointless.
 
3. Have a (more) balanced schedule.
 
4. The playoffs would be a 16 team bracket, according to overall record.
 
5. I like Bill Barnwell's idea posted today to have the first round be best of 5, UNLESS both teams each have a win within the first three games (i.e., if a team falls behind 0-3, they are eliminated.)
 
6. Remove the team salary cap. I don't like that potential dynasties have to be broken up because of money. I get that parity suffers (a little), but MLB has proven that a sufficient level of parity is possible.
 
7. Remove the player salary cap. This should help counterbalance the anti-parity effects of the lack of a team salary cap, since renting a player like LeBron suddenly becomes VERY costly.
 
8. Have some sort of revenue sharing scheme that is based on market size.
 
9. Move some team to Seattle
 
10. Eliminate college/age requirements to enter the NBA.
 
11. Restructure the draft. I like the 30-year wheel idea, especially some modified versions where the timeframe is shortened and teams aren't guaranteed exact spots, but are guaranteed to be placed in certain buckets in the draft (i.e. every team gets one spot in the 1-5 range, 6-10, etc.)
 
In Game Reform:
 
1. Make all intentional fouls cost 2 free throws and the ball. Hack-a-player fouls suck, even if smart; so do fouls to stop fast breaks.
 
2. Add a four point line. Not only to watch some deep bombs, but to help increase the spacing that is needed in today's larger, faster NBA with zone and hybrid zone defenses. Plus, imagine some of the possible crazy comebacks if this were possible.
 
3. Add a five point line behind half court. Give players an incentive to heave the ball with little time left. Make crazy, flukey comebacks more likely!
 
4. Increase the size of the restricted zone. This will encourage more drives and action at the rim and it's also safer.
 
5. Somehow reform the number of time outs near the end of games. I haven't thought about the exact ways to do this, but it's clearly a huge annoyance with the NBA.
 
6. Players get an additional possible foul for every additional overtime.
 
7. Have a ref whose only job is to monitor replays at all times. If a decision can't be made in 20 seconds, the call on the court stands. Replays can be vastly increased in use (including for fouls) while being far less annoying. It's much preferable to be 90% confident on all calls at a speedy pace than 99% confident on a few calls at a glacial pace. 
 
Some of these are obviously more important than others, and some I'm less confident if they are good ideas or not. 

 

[ifmanis5]

Step One: hire actual refs instead of Stern's stooges.

 

[dirtynine]

An annual Champions League with the best Euro teams. 

 

[The X Man Cometh]

1. Remove the max salary. Its absurd.
2. Hard cap and hard floor. No luxury tax nonsense. Either you're up against the cap or you aren't.
 
Now these things will never happen, because the NBA loves to protect its "stars", and the structure of the league today makes those players more important. But it would improve the competitiveness and intrigue of the league considerably.

 

[Kliq]

Restructure the draft lottery: I actually kind of enjoy the aspect of the lottery, but it needs to be re-done. I say we make it so that the three worse teams are  ineligible for the top three picks. This makes it so that teams are not just happy sitting at the bottom, and it gives even the worst teams a ton of incentive to play their best players and to try and actually win games. I also think it rewards teams that were activley trying to win games, but just sucked anyways, (Detroit, Cleveland) and penalizes teams that are basically making a mockery of the NBA (Philadelphia).
 
No Player cap: Restricts the formation of super-teams and makes the league a little bit more watchable since a handful of teams will not control the leagues best players. You think LeBron is going to Miami when Cleveland is offering him $40 million a year to stay?
 
Limit Timeouts: Teams have way too many timeouts these days, and it really restricts the flow of the game. Watching the OKC/MEM game from last night, it seemed like down the stretch, every possesion was followed by a break in the action. Imagine playing a game of pick up hoops were after every possesion every one huddled up for a minute and then resumed playing. How can you possibly stay within the rhthym of the game?
 
Use the backup ref to monitor all replays: Every NBA game features four refs, three who ref the game, and another that is there as a backup in case one of the other refs rolls an ankle or something. Since this replacement ref is rarely needed, and since he is already at every NBA game, why not just use him to monitor all replays instead of having all three refs huddle around the screen for 5 minutes?
 
Get rid of offensive goaltending: This is an ancient rule developed during a time when only one or two guys got up to play balls at the rim. Today, it seems unecessary. Why is it a big deal if a player tips in a shot while it is still in the cylinder? I believe leagues in Europe allow this to take place.
 
Widen the court: I don't really like the idea of a four point shot, but I do agree that spacing is an issue. If you widen the court, you allow more space in the corners for threes and the paint becomes bigger. Players are bigger, faster and stronger than ever before, so why have them play in the same sized court as everyone else does/did?

 

[Brickowski]

Step One: hire actual refs instead of Stern's stooges.

Yes, fix the officiating.  That's the most pressing need.  Implement a challenge system.
 
Also, adopt the FIBA rules (makes for a faster more fluid game) but leave the game at 4 quarters, 48 minutes.  
 
Allow hand checking and eliminate the Flagrant 1.  Call a flagrant only if there is intent to injure.  No preferential treatment of stars by the officials.

 

[Dan to Theo to Ben]

1. Extend the lenth of the season by 3 weeks and reduce games to 74. 6x4 in division, 2x10 in conference, 2x15 OOC. Move Milwaukee to Seattle and West, New Orleans to Las Vegas, Grizzlies to the East.
 
2. retrain/rehire refs. Call the same way throughout the game. Enforce traveling, double dribbles. Lower fouls to 5 as an ejection. More no cauls on borderline charges/blocks, and enforce more consistently. Lower 10 second violation to 8.
 
3. 5 game playoffs in first TWO rounds.  If teams do not win 35 games but are top 8 in conference, the team they would be playing gets a bye.  Schedule playoffs more fairly, without eye to TV. 
 
4. Remove freshman year of college to enter NBA. Anyone turning 18 at the first day of training camp is eligible.
 
5. Hard cap and floor. More flexible trade allowances (salaries can be more varied). 
 
6. Jerseys. One road, one home, one special to be worn max 3 games a year. No tshirt jerseys.
 
7. Tickets. Eliminate dynamic pricing.
 
8. Timeouts. No 20 second/full. All full. 5 time outs, no more than 3 in a half, no more than 2 in a quarter, no more than 1 last minute. No advance of the ball.
 
9. Four point shot at 28 ft.

 

[The Social Chair]

I think you need a salary cap in basketball because unlike football and baseball you could dominate the league for 8 years with the right 3 players.
 
 

Step One: hire actual refs instead of Stern's stooges.

 
Silver has started to make some very nice changes in ref accountability since taking over.
 

 

[Mugthis]

 
 
Get rid of offensive goaltending: This is an ancient rule developed during a time when only one or two guys got up to play balls at the rim. Today, it seems unecessary. Why is it a big deal if a player tips in a shot while it is still in the cylinder? I believe leagues in Europe allow this to take place.
 

 
Ha, I was just thinking this on Sunday. Great, simple idea. What's the downside of having offensive goaltending? I can't think of any.

 

[Jungleland]

Eliminating the max contract cap would fix 90% of the league's non-officiating related problems. If a Lebron is suddenly something closer to an all or nothing proposition, the league gets infinitely more interesting. 
 
I'd absolutely keep the lottery the same or similar to the current system. I don't hate the idea of the 4 point line or widening the court. I also agree the one and done system for college is relatively silly, but ultimately I'm not sure changing it in either direction (i.e. eliminating it or extending the necessary time) has all that much potential to affect the quality of the NBA.

 

[Mugthis]

I think you need a salary cap in basketball because unlike football and baseball you could dominate the league for 8 years with the right 3 players.

 
A few things:
 
1) This isn't necessarily bad to me. I think dynasties can be fun (within limits, of course).
 
2) Your point is true re: baseball, but not football. An elite QB can keep a team in constant contention for the title.
 
3) When combined with eliminating max contracts, the "right 3 players" would be extremely expensive. This would help counterbalance some of the imbalance issues.
 
4) Market-based revenue sharing will help ameliorate the inherent unfairness that LA, NYC, etc. have over the rest of the league. 

 

[Mugthis]

Widen the court: I don't really like the idea of a four point shot, but I do agree that spacing is an issue. If you widen the court, you allow more space in the corners for threes and the paint becomes bigger. Players are bigger, faster and stronger than ever before, so why have them play in the same sized court as everyone else does/did?

 
Widening the court isn't a bad idea (although unlikely given the loss of revenue). I prefer the 4-point line (although both would be cool!), because why wouldn't you want to see Durant, Curry, and others try a couple 28-foot shots a game?

 

[TroyOLeary]

Assuming I don't have to answer for the financial impacts of my decisions, I'd contract down to 28.  I'd then eliminate divisions and conferences, cut a game off the schedule to 81 and make it a completely balanced schedule where you play every team 3 times.  I'd probably keep a 16 team playoffs, but go back to a best-of-5 first round, and eliminate a lot of the extra playoff off days, preferably moving to playing every other day.

 

[jose melendez]

There are two things that categorically need to be done--everything else is just tinkering
 
1.  Improve the officiating.  I know it's really, really hard to officiate basketball games, but it can't be this hard.  The league should institute tough flopping rules--suspensions for obvious flops.  They should also commit to ending the star system for foul calls.
 
2.  Decrease stoppages of play.  The end of even exciting games are creeping towards being unwatchable between endless time outs, intentional fouls and endless reviews.  The practice of reveiwing basically every play at the end to see if the right amount of time ran off has to stop--it's awful.  They should also either flat out eliminate some  time outs or make more time outs 20 second-a real 20 seconds not a two minute 20.
 
To my mind any other changes pale in comparrison to those two.

 

[zenter]

Salaries, Contracts, Etc.
 
1) Eliminate Hard Cap: Keep the soft cap in place and apply a mild "luxury tax" for going over. I'm thinking something like 25%, and not confiscatory like 150% as it is now with the hard cap. The luxury tax can contribute to rev-share.
 
2) Eliminate Player Cap: This distorts talent salaries in many ways, including having guys like Jeff Green being paid just barely less than half of a superstar salary.
 
3) Keep Team Salary Floor: Keep this in place, but let it stick at 80% of soft cap rather than forcing teams to get up to 90% of soft cap.
 
4) Kill Exception Contracts: Kill them all, including the vet minimum. With no hard cap, these are irrelevant and stupid.
 
5) Revenue Sharing: This is already going on. Enhance to assure all teams have enough to pay 120% of soft cap.
 
 
Draft
 
1) Over-18 Draft: All players over 18 are eligible to be drafted and their rights are held for six years by the drafting team. Draft rights can be traded and, as long as a player is not playing, do not count against salary caps.
 
2) Pure-Record Draft Ranking: Mediocre teams stay mediocre when they play in a weak conference (e.g., Atlanta). Meanwhile, strong teams (e.g., Phoenix) having any shot whatsoever at a number 1 pick is a bit of a crime. Rank all NBA records worst to best, regardless of playoff status. Otherwise, leave the system alone.
 
 
Court & Other
 
1) Referees: Have players and teams grade refs. No curve-grading either. All players get an equal say. Refs get bonuses and playoff gigs purely on grades. Bottom 25% in consecutive years means you are sent to D-League probation for retraining, regardless of tenure/seniority.
 
2) Review: Add a fulltime reviewing official to the crew. Any questionable call can be reversed within 10-30 seconds.
 
3) Bring Back Double Dribble: Call the carry.
 
4) Timeouts: 2 in the final 2 minutes for each team, regardless of banked timeouts.
 
5) Offensive Goaltending: Never thought about it, but, yeah - kill it.
 
 
Conferences, Scheduling, Playoffs
 
1) 5-Game Series: Conference Quarterfinals (or 4th-to-last round) should be a fiver.
 
2) Conferences: I don't dislike them, but I don't see the need for them.

 

[Kliq]

 
Widening the court isn't a bad idea (although unlikely given the loss of revenue). I prefer the 4-point line (although both would be cool!), because why wouldn't you want to see Durant, Curry, and others try a couple 28-foot shots a game?

 
For me, I find the problem with the game is in the spacing of the court and not with a lack of scoring. I think it would be entertaining, but I also think that it would hurt the game a little bit, a if one shot was worth TWICE as much as a standard field goal.

 

[WoburnDiaspora]

A time out maximum of 3 per half.  I hate timeouts.  All NBA games are unwatchable because the last 2 minutes of a game take 45 minutes.  Just let them play. If you really need to draw up a play 6 times in the last 2 minutes perhaps your team has very little idea how to play the game.  Or your practices suck.  One or the other.  

 

[FL4WL3SS]

Non-NBA fan here.
 
I gotta be honest, I might start watching the NBA again if some of your suggestions were implemented. As a non-fan, I can tell you the most painful things for me to watch during an NBA (and any basketball game, really) are:
 

1. The end of game strategy - fouling back and forth is not enjoyable.
2. The game is repetitive - I'm just sitting there in the first half waiting for the score to get large enough where I actually give a shit. There's not enough excitement in quarters 1-3 for a non-basketball fan. Not sure how to fix this.
3. The game is too reliant on superstars - I know this has changed recently, but the reliance on one or two guys each and every game is a bit boring to me. You can look at the rosters at the beginning of the season and pretty accurately pick which teams will a.) be in the playoffs and b.) be in the finals

 
I used to watch the NBA a lot as a kid, but it just got really stale. The court seems too small, the players too big, the pace too slow. Maybe I'm out of touch, I haven't tried to watch an NBA game in years.

 

[The Social Chair]

- Hard Salary Cap, No Player Max
 
- Players can be drafted at 18
 
- 62 game season starting on Christmas Day
 
- Only two 30 second timeouts in the last 2 minutes.  Last night's GREAT game was almost unwatchable because of the constant timeouts.
 
- Get rid of the conferences being divided between west and east. The current set up gives people on the east coast a chance to ignore half the league. My new realignment would be something like this.
 
League A

East
Boston
NY Knicks
D.C.
Toronto Raptors
Miami Heat

Central

Cleveland
Chicago
Minnesota
Detroit
Milwaukee

West

LA Clippers
Dallas
Portland
Sacramento
Utah
 
LEAGUE B

East

Brooklyn
Orlando
Atlanta
Philly
Charlotte

Central

Oklahoma City
Indiana
New Orleans
Memphis
San Antonio

West
LA Lakers
Denver
Phoenix
Houston
Golden State

 

[RoyHobbs]

Contraction. My impression is there's too much fodder out there on the floor.
 
Real refs, as pointed out above, would be nice, too.

 

[Chief_Macho]

I want it to be a men's game again.   And I wouldn't mind some type of interesting in season tourney's for playoff spots or winner takes on NBA champ at the next season start like EPL.   It's just so boring and unimaginative. 

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

There are a lot of great suggestions here including the elimination of the player salary cap, the removal of conferences and the move toward better officiating.  However, the NBA is never going to decrease anything including teams, games and timeouts.  All of these moves will result in decreased revenue on balance.  
 
Live sports is one of the few things that is keeping broadcast television (note the distinction between this and actual television production) and its ad-based revenue model alive.  Why in the world would the NBA ever consider doing something that results in less product and fewer opportunities for the league's sponsors to peddle their smart-phones, cheap insurance and processed food?
 
Btw, I don't know what Chief_Macho means when he says he wants it to be a "men's" game again.  What does that mean?
 
I will close by saying that I love the NBA and the league has made some serious progress in cleaning up its image from just a seven years ago when the stories out of the all star game in Vegas gave all the "thug-ball" critics plenty of ammo.  There are a bunch of exciting, likable stars and smaller market teams who are all on the upswing.  I would love to seem some subtle tweaks to the officiating, the salary structure and the playoff format but could live with everything else.  It really is a great product if you love basketball.

 

[Brickowski]

 
 
Btw, I don't know what Chief_Macho means when he says he wants it to be a "men's" game again.  What does that mean?
 
 

 I don't want to put words into Chief_Macho's mouth, but to me it means that if someone comes down the lane looking for an uncontested dunk you have the right to take his head off without being called for a flagrant.  
 
The NBA should be more like the NHL: continuous action and controlled violence.  No more silly touch fouls, no more flopping. Let 'em play the game.

 

[Mugthis]

I don't know why that's preferable. It slows down the game, increases the risk of injuries, and results in fewer plays at the hoop (since they become less efficient and more dangerous). Basketball isn't hockey. We already have plenty of violence in in the NFL and NHL, why not allow the NBA to emphasize athleticism, agility, fluidity, grace, and improvisation? 

 

[Mugthis]

It's also absurd to compare the NBA and NHL. NBA players have no protection and leap several feet in the air--"controlled violence" goes against the nature of the game. Plus, probably because of race, it's socially acceptable for players to fight in hockey and not in basketball (which would have to go along with more violent play). 

 

[Mugthis]

 
 
2) Pure-Record Draft Ranking: Mediocre teams stay mediocre when they play in a weak conference (e.g., Atlanta). Meanwhile, strong teams (e.g., Phoenix) having any shot whatsoever at a number 1 pick is a bit of a crime. Rank all NBA records worst to best, regardless of playoff status. Otherwise, leave the system alone.
 
 

 
Why you would want any incentives in place for teams to not try to win as much as possible?

 

[The Social Chair]

 I don't want to put words into Chief_Macho's mouth, but to me it means that if someone comes down the lane looking for an uncontested dunk you have the right to take his head off without being called for a flagrant.  
 
The NBA should be more like the NHL: continuous action and controlled violence.  No more silly touch fouls, no more flopping. Let 'em play the game.

 
I, for one, do not want to go back to what the game was like in the 90s. That brand of basknetball was terrible aesthetically. I feel like the league has been really great since 07-08 and it doesn't need any dramatic changes to the style of play.
 
edit- I remember Bob Ryan derisively calling the 90s Knicks style of basketball "glorified sumo wrestling".

 

[Brickowski]

What can I say?  Ricky Mahorn was always a favorite of mine.
 
There  had to be a golden mean between "sumo wrestling" and what we have today: a ton of touch fouls that should never have been called and soccer flops galore, turning the game into a parade to the foul line. A lot of games are boring crap.  The league has to take the games out of the hands of the officials and give it back to the players.

 

[SumnerH]

 
Why you would want any incentives in place for teams to not try to win as much as possible?

Yeah, my answer to this question might be "relegation". That and eliminating the no charge zone under the basket to let people play real defense, revising end game timeouts/fouls to increase late game speed, and getting rid of the "timeout advances the ball" nonsense to make you play basketball rather than run hall court sets in late games.

 

[SumnerH]

There are a lot of great suggestions here including the elimination of the player salary cap, the removal of conferences and the move toward better officiating.  However, the NBA is never going to decrease anything including teams, games and timeouts.  All of these moves will result in decreased revenue on balance.  
 

1. The slow end game had lost the game a lot of viewers. It's penny wise but pound foolish.

2. The question posits unlimited powers to improve the game, not stuff that Stern et al would let pass. It's a chance to spitball long term improvements to the game without being handicapped by short term revenue goals.

 

[southshoresoxfan]

I've always wanted a power play situation instead of the foul out system.  Nothing like going to a game but your fav guy picks up two ticky-tack fouls early and sits for an hour real time.  

 

[BrazilianSoxFan]

How about eliminating the draft?

 

[Infield Infidel]

There are a lot of great suggestions here including the elimination of the player salary cap, the removal of conferences and the move toward better officiating.  However, the NBA is never going to decrease anything including teams, games and timeouts.  All of these moves will result in decreased revenue on balance.  
 
Live sports is one of the few things that is keeping broadcast television (note the distinction between this and actual television production) and its ad-based revenue model alive.  Why in the world would the NBA ever consider doing something that results in less product and fewer opportunities for the league's sponsors to peddle their smart-phones, cheap insurance and processed food?
 

Almost every game is on cable, so subscriber money is a huge part of the pie as opposed to broadcast games which are all ad money. Even weekend games are often on cable. of the 23 games over the seven days starting Tuesday, 21 are on cable. I think the ship has sailed on NBA caring more about broadcast advertising than overall viewership. 

 

[simplyeric]

I don't understand the offensive goaltending issue. If you eliminate it for offense, but keep it for defense, you are allowing the offense to touch the ball but disallowing any defense on it. It's way too much of an advantage. Maybe you want that, but I'm not sure why.
It would become so common to lob up a shot and then leap up and kindof 'bottle cap' the hoop. It would be boring as hell.

Flopping should be tracked and 3 flops in one game should result in a game suspension. 4 flops in any two consecutive games should be a suspension. Within a season, each consecutive violation (3 in 1, or 4 in 2) is an additional game suspension. Without pay, but the team has to relinquish that pay (not sure to whom...maybe into a long term disability fund for actually injured players or something).

No music during play.

They need to reign in traveling. Either redefine it and call it consistently, or call it the old way.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Almost every game is on cable, so subscriber money is a huge part of the pie as opposed to broadcast games which are all ad money. Even weekend games are often on cable. of the 23 games over the seven days starting Tuesday, 21 are on cable. I think the ship has sailed on NBA caring more about broadcast advertising than overall viewership. 

Ok, let me re-phrase what I meant because I don't think we disagree.  
 
Live sports programs are valuable because many viewers will watch them in real time, meaning they can't simply skip through the commercials like they would with a DVR'd show or something they can watch on-demand.  As such, advertisers will pay more for those spots than they might for the spots for an average sitcom or drama.  I understand that you are saying that fewer timeouts might increase the audience but I get the sense that someone has done the math and figured that this is the efficient frontier in terms of commercial breaks vs audience size.  
 
The crazy thing is, idiots like me pay for the privilege to watch these games on cable AND be subjected what amounts to 10 hours of Cliff and Chris Paul spots per week. 

 

[Infield Infidel]

These have all be fascinating. It's really interesting seeing the breadth of opinions on here
 
Cap - Hard and Soft caps. Hard cap is 25% higher than Soft, soft penalty is 50%, and hard penalty is no acquisitions and drop to the bottom of the draft. 
 
Max -  Player Max is 50% of Soft cap. Yeah, you could still have two max players but it'd be really really hard, and you'd only have 25% over the soft cap to work with for 10+ players. There would also likely be fewer max players and they would be usually untradeable.
 
Draft - Adam Gold's Draft Idea - This was presented a few years ago at Sloan. Lottery percentage (or even draft order) is based on the # of wins a team accumulates after they have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. It gives teams something to play for after being eliminated. Teams that are eliminated earlier have more games in which to accumulate wins, so they are at an advantage to get more wins (and get a higher pick), but if they continue to play poorly, other teams could catch them. Teams are incentivized to win. Instead of fans rooting for their teams to lose and get a higher pick, fans are rooting for their teams to win down the stretch. 
 
I'd move the Bucks to Seattle, and move Minnesota to the East. 
 
Instead of having a team in Europe (dumb idea), to satiate the NBA's apparent yearning for global conquest, I'd have each division spend 10-14 days (including travel) somewhere overseas. For example, the Atlantic would go to Spain and France for 10 days, or the Pacific would go to China for 14 days. Teams would play each other once, so every team would play four games over that time. This would be done over the first 14 weeks of the season ( 12 weeks of travel + each team in US for two weeks during Thanks giving and Christmas/New Years). This way, everyone travels and it's all over by the All-Star break.

 

[ALiveH]

lots of great ideas above.  here are some of mine and my favorites from above.
 
Draft - I'd have every non-playoff team have an equal chance of winning the lottery.  No more weird incentives to lose.  I like Adam Gold's better than today's system, but even in that one, you could have scenarios where the playoff bubble teams are trying to lose down the stretch get the best lottery odds.
 
Court size - players have gotten bigger, longer and more athletic.  I would increase the width of the court to try to help spacing near the corners.  It's always been a pet peeve of mine that it's so easy to step out of bounds on the corner 3.
 
Refereeing - I'd have guys looking at every play at every angle on replay constantly up in the booth with wireless communication to the refs and give the guys in the booth the power to review and reverse any close call.  And, I'd apply this to every sport.  A lot of obviously bad calls are apparent to the TV audience within seconds with the benefit of slow motion replay.  This seems like a seamless solution that wouldn't slow down the flow of the game (much).
 
Too many TV & coach time outs, especially in the last 2 minutes.  Also consider getting rid of intentional fouling in the last 2 minutes by awarding 2 shots and the ball on intentional fouls.
 
Flopping - see my refereeing suggestions above.  With the benefit of instant replay, what is and isn't a flop can be determined more quickly and more accurately.  Therefore it should be punished more severely.  In soccer, an obvious flop can get a player a yellow or red card.  In the NBA, an obvious flop should get an equivalent type of penalty (like a flagrant 1 or flagrant 2, or a suspension if it was missed during the game).
 
No Age Limits on drafting - i'd rather get these kids paid than have them risk injury to enrich corrupt high school and college sports.
 
Travelling - call it consistently as written.  or change the rule and call it consistently.
 
Shorten the season - it's a brutal schedule especially for teams that go deep in the playoffs.  Eliminate back-to-backs.
 
Champions League - I like the idea of having the NBA champion travel around the world to play against the best teams from the other top leagues in the world.  The games could be called "exhibition" or "friendlies" but would still be intense as heck b/c of bragging rights.

 

[jose melendez]

I had a stroke of genius on my walk to work this morning.  
 
In each conference, the top 8 teams make the playoffs, just like now, but only the first four have seeds.  The number one seed gets to choose which of the bottom four it wants to face.  Then, the number two gets to choose which of the remaining three in wants and so on.
 
You get a bigger incentive to finish higher, you have a fun tv show where teams pick their opponents, and you build massive disrespect into first found matchups!  Fun!

 

[Grin&MartyBarret]

I had a stroke of genius on my walk to work this morning.  
 
In each conference, the top 8 teams make the playoffs, just like now, but only the first four have seeds.  The number one seed gets to choose which of the bottom four it wants to face.  Then, the number two gets to choose which of the remaining three in wants and so on.
 
You get a bigger incentive to finish higher, you have a fun tv show where teams pick their opponents, and you build massive disrespect into first found matchups!  Fun!

 
This is a great idea. For the anti-tanking folks, it'd also eliminate end of season tanking by playoff teams to get a more favorable matchup, a la Brooklyn this season.
 
Unrelated, I'd suggest the following:
 
1. Each team gets an amnesty clause every 4 years. This would enable them to erase bad salary mistakes, encourage additional player movement, and would conceivably fly with the player's union (though, I know in this exercise I'm a dictator so that doesn't matter) because the money itself is still guaranteed, it just no longer counts against the cap.
 
2. Invest heavily in the D-League, and re-structure it's marketing. Every NBA team would be required to have their own D-League affiliate--no more shared affiliates--and instead of giving them ridiculous names like the Toros, they should just share the name of the NBA franchise. Willing to make a naming exception for the Delaware 87ers, because of course. These teams should be located near their parent club, and should also be located near a couple of universities. Players 18+ are eligible to play in the D-League, and the franchise pays their college and living expenses. The goal should be to make this a viable long-term competitor for college talent, and to provide teams a place to develop talent over a longer timeline. After some investment, it shouldn't be out of the ordinary for teams to draft an 18 year old out of high school with the expectation of him not playing in the NBA for several years. He'd still be under contract (though it wouldn't count against the cap--a "clock" would be implemented like in MLB) so his family would be taken care of, he'd be enrolled at SUNY Purchase or wherever if he was a on the White Plains Knicks, and the Knicks would have full and complete control over his basketball development. For better or worse.
 
3. No more sleeved jerseys.
 
4. Reduce the regular season schedule, and move to a true league table a la the Premier League. The top 15 teams make the playoffs, and seeds 16-23 play a single elimination play-in tournament over the course of a single week for the 16th seed and the first overall pick in the next draft, just for the hell of it. This gives teams incentive to strive for at least 23rd place to give them a shot at the #1 overall pick, but doesn't terribly penalize teams that simply aren't good enough to get there because they're still in the lottery for picks 2-10. First round playoff series are then best of 5, unless the series is tied at 1-1, in which case it goes 7. Every other round is best of 7.
 
5. Because I'm a dictator: the Hawks are forced to revert to their Dominique era uniforms/brand, Houston must revert back to their Hakeem uniforms, and Toronto must re-brand completely and will not be allowed to name themselves after a movie that is popular currently but may not stand the test of time. And Sacramento is moving to Seattle, where they'll become the Sonics.
 
6. Any franchise that forces their fans to wear a single color t-shirt during the playoffs will be penalized by loss of a draft pick.

 

[simplyeric]

 
This is a great idea. For the anti-tanking folks, it'd also eliminate end of season tanking by playoff teams to get a more favorable matchup, a la Brooklyn this season.
 
Unrelated, I'd suggest the following:
 
1. Each team gets an amnesty clause every 4 years. This would enable them to erase bad salary mistakes, encourage additional player movement, and would conceivably fly with the player's union (though, I know in this exercise I'm a dictator so that doesn't matter) because the money itself is still guaranteed, it just no longer counts against the cap.
 
2. Invest heavily in the D-League, and re-structure it's marketing. Every NBA team would be required to have their own D-League affiliate--no more shared affiliates--and instead of giving them ridiculous names like the Toros, they should just share the name of the NBA franchise. Willing to make a naming exception for the Delaware 87ers, because of course. These teams should be located near their parent club, and should also be located near a couple of universities. Players 18+ are eligible to play in the D-League, and the franchise pays their college and living expenses. The goal should be to make this a viable long-term competitor for college talent, and to provide teams a place to develop talent over a longer timeline. After some investment, it shouldn't be out of the ordinary for teams to draft an 18 year old out of high school with the expectation of him not playing in the NBA for several years. He'd still be under contract (though it wouldn't count against the cap--a "clock" would be implemented like in MLB) so his family would be taken care of, he'd be enrolled at SUNY Purchase or wherever if he was a on the White Plains Knicks, and the Knicks would have full and complete control over his basketball development. For better or worse.
 
3. No more sleeved jerseys.
 
4. Reduce the regular season schedule, and move to a true league table a la the Premier League. The top 15 teams make the playoffs, and seeds 16-23 play a single elimination play-in tournament over the course of a single week for the 16th seed and the first overall pick in the next draft, just for the hell of it. This gives teams incentive to strive for at least 23rd place to give them a shot at the #1 overall pick, but doesn't terribly penalize teams that simply aren't good enough to get there because they're still in the lottery for picks 2-10. First round playoff series are then best of 5, unless the series is tied at 1-1, in which case it goes 7. Every other round is best of 7.
 
5. Because I'm a dictator: the Hawks are forced to revert to their Dominique era uniforms/brand, Houston must revert back to their Hakeem uniforms, and Toronto must re-brand completely and will not be allowed to name themselves after a movie that is popular currently but may not stand the test of time. And Sacramento is moving to Seattle, where they'll become the Sonics.
 
6. Any franchise that forces their fans to wear a single color t-shirt during the playoffs will be penalized by loss of a draft pick.

 
 
I'm ambivalent, but what's the hate for sleeved jerseys?  Why does it matter?
 
On the top-4-picks-bottom-4 issue, you might still see some teams try to manipulate the situation.  
 
Say team A is the 5-seed but is over-rated or has key injuries, they might be the one that the 1-seed would want (let's say the key Lebron defender is injured, or they just lost their point guard).  The 4-seed (team B) might tank out to drop to 5, because then the following:
 
standard setup with hampered 5-seed:
1 v A (who is 5th seed)
2 v 8
3 v 7
B(4) v 6 (who is actually a surging team, better than 5)
 
But B would prefer to match up v. A because of those injuries, so it drops a few games, and drops to 5th
 
1 v 8
2 v 7
3 v 6
4(A) v 5(B)
 
This way, team B gets the matchup it wants by tanking late, and forcing the other teams to pick differently.  If B feels like they are a strong opponent who matches up well against the top 1 or 2 seeds, they have a pretty strong chance of not getting picked for that round.

 

[wutang112878]

1. Remove the max salary. Its absurd.
2. Hard cap and hard floor. No luxury tax nonsense. Either you're up against the cap or you aren't.
 
Now these things will never happen, because the NBA loves to protect its "stars", and the structure of the league today makes those players more important. But it would improve the competitiveness and intrigue of the league considerably.

 
These would be my biggest 2 initiatives as well.  Removing the max doesnt artificially inflate the value of superstars with the current 'max' today, which moves the league closer to a free market value system for players which is a good thing.  The one tricky part is the floor, to make sure it allows teams to 'rebuild' by flushing out costs for a year or two, and make sure its not like $65M which could cause problems for small market teams.  But you could solve that with revenue sharing to make it so that every team had virtually the same revenue to work with across the board, although thats a crazy concept because it seems to simple and intuitive.
 
 

Court size - players have gotten bigger, longer and more athletic.  I would increase the width of the court to try to help spacing near the corners.  It's always been a pet peeve of mine that it's so easy to step out of bounds on the corner 3.

 
My only concern here is if you increase the size is there a great emphasis on a 2 on 2 game where the other 6 guys just stand around on the other side of the court.  I dont think thats great basketball to watch because I personally prefer the team game where all 5 guys are involved on offense.
 
 

No Age Limits on drafting - i'd rather get these kids paid than have them risk injury to enrich corrupt high school and college sports.

 
This one is kind of tricky, because the high school kids are the highest upside but biggest risk players.  The teams picking at the top tend to be willing to take these risks in the hope of getting a superstar, but if they whiff on one then it extends their rebuilding process.  I'd have to look at the history of the high school kids though to validation my assumption that these players are more risky
 
 

 

1. Each team gets an amnesty clause every 4 years. This would enable them to erase bad salary mistakes, encourage additional player movement, and would conceivably fly with the player's union (though, I know in this exercise I'm a dictator so that doesn't matter) because the money itself is still guaranteed, it just no longer counts against the cap.

 
I was thinking about this last night, if we really have carte blanche to make changes, how about going to the NFL model with guaranteed signing bonus and salaries that are not guaranteed.  Then rather than an amnesty, you could possibly trade a player because the cap hit without the signing bonus charges make the player a value.  But you are stuck with the 'dead money' hit, so there also isnt a huge incentive to sign players to bad contracts with the thought of trading them later.  In that way it might be a nice middle ground to let teams get out deals, still take some risk, but without incentives to take too much risk
 
 

 

 
2. Invest heavily in the D-League, and re-structure it's marketing. Every NBA team would be required to have their own D-League affiliate--no more shared affiliates--and instead of giving them ridiculous names like the Toros, they should just share the name of the NBA franchise. Willing to make a naming exception for the Delaware 87ers, because of course. These teams should be located near their parent club, and should also be located near a couple of universities. Players 18+ are eligible to play in the D-League, and the franchise pays their college and living expenses. The goal should be to make this a viable long-term competitor for college talent, and to provide teams a place to develop talent over a longer timeline. After some investment, it shouldn't be out of the ordinary for teams to draft an 18 year old out of high school with the expectation of him not playing in the NBA for several years. He'd still be under contract (though it wouldn't count against the cap--a "clock" would be implemented like in MLB) so his family would be taken care of, he'd be enrolled at SUNY Purchase or wherever if he was a on the White Plains Knicks, and the Knicks would have full and complete control over his basketball development. For better or worse.

 
In a world where a draftee can spend a year or 2 in the D-league, how long does the drafting team hold its rights?  If its just 4 NBA seasons after drafting the player, then 'project' players would probably slip on the draft board which I think would actually be a good thing
 
 

I've always wanted a power play situation instead of the foul out system.  Nothing like going to a game but your fav guy picks up two ticky-tack fouls early and sits for an hour real time.  

 
This would create such an incentive not to foul it would create a completely different type of game.  Today most of your fouls are And1s on 2s, the 2pt FG% is 48.8% and the FT% is 75.6%, so on a shooting foul you would expect to get 1.7 points per shot = .488 * 2 + .756   Whereas the points per shot for the league as a whole is 1.2, so there is already a big (0.5 points per shot) incentive not to foul so if players are fouling intelligently they are willing to foul because the shot they are contending is so good its worth the incentive risk.  In a scenario where you are playing 5 on 4 assuming a similar distribution of 3s to 2s, you would have to get to a 65% 3ptFG% and a 80% 2pt FG% to get to 1.7 points per shot.  Even at 5 on 4 those seem like incredible shooting percentages for teams to achieve.  Based on that, I think there might be an incentive to foul even more in comparison to our current rules.

 

[wutang112878]

 
 
I'm ambivalent, but what's the hate for sleeved jerseys?  Why does it matter?

 
Personally, I think they look like womens uniforms and why would you ever want to cover up those shoulders they are amazing eye candy  :wub:

 

[Blacken]

I had a stroke of genius on my walk to work this morning.  
 
In each conference, the top 8 teams make the playoffs, just like now, but only the first four have seeds.  The number one seed gets to choose which of the bottom four it wants to face.  Then, the number two gets to choose which of the remaining three in wants and so on.
 
You get a bigger incentive to finish higher, you have a fun tv show where teams pick their opponents, and you build massive disrespect into first found matchups!  Fun!

This would work great with my own pet idea: take-it seeding. If you beat the #1, you get home court the rest of the way. If Atlanta can drop the Pacers, they should get home court, because they're the king of the hill.

 

[zenter]

 
Why you would want any incentives in place for teams to not try to win as much as possible?

 
I'm not sure it does. I'm saying: Let the Hawks pick in the lottery even though they made the playoffs.
 
First, most of my other proposed changes mitigate many fears about tanking (which I don't think is a problem anyway). Second, that the Suns did not make the playoffs doesn't mean they're a bad team - it has to do with the conference system (which I left alone). In lieu of destroying conferences, and keeping in mind that I think the lottery system is largely fine, I want to allow teams in weaker conferences (e.g., Hawks) to get picks commensurate with their records.
 
I don't think promotion/relegation is realistic in historic American professional sports leagues, so I ignore it as an option, even with my hypothetical unlimited power.

 

[04101Seadog]

I'd go with:
 
Lottery - Take out the weighting, every team including playoff teams get 1 ball. Start at #30, and pull numbers working backwards to #1. Last ball standing wins. 
 
Refs - Make their usage and pay based on surveys and feedback from the players and the coaches. The worse you ware the less you make, and the less you work. 
 
In game - Hand-checking is good, remove goal tending (both offense and defense) and eliminate the zone so that players can't camp out at the basket and swat. Fouling intentionally in the last 2:00 of the game is 2 shots and the ball - if you wan the ball back try to steal it and actually play D. 

 

[EL Jeffe]

I really hate charges - they're too difficult to officiate, and they're dangerous to the offensive player who's left his feet and then some dude just slides in under him and draws a charge. I'd eliminate those "player control" charges (I believe that's what they're called) and make people actually play defense. 
 
I also hate when three point shooters fall down after their shots to try and draw a foul. I know the NBA said they'd crack down on shooters kicking out their feet to intentionally draw contact on their threes, but I still see guys fall needlessly flop/fall down after their shots all the time. Stop that crap.
 
Agreed with allowing offensive goaltending. One more thing that's too difficult to officiate.

 

[Mugthis]

I don't understand the offensive goaltending issue. If you eliminate it for offense, but keep it for defense, you are allowing the offense to touch the ball but disallowing any defense on it. It's way too much of an advantage. Maybe you want that, but I'm not sure why.
It would become so common to lob up a shot and then leap up and kindof 'bottle cap' the hoop. It would be boring as hell.
 

There has already been a discrepancy between offense and defense. The defense can't touch the ball after it reaches its apex...the offense can touch the ball until it hits the rim or backboard. Even if offensive goaltending were allowed, it would still be really hard to do (they would just be legal offensive rebounds) or would affect players where the ball would have gone through the hoop anyway.

 

[simplyeric]

re: offensive goaltending:  You'd have shooters lobbing up way more corner 3's, because when the guard shoots from there the center can jump up to create a "backboard" with his hands, volleyball style.  Defender cannot defend this.  Can't get in front (can't touch the ball on the way down). Can't get in back (can't touch the ball over the cylinder)
 
Do you guys really want to see this?  This would suck.  You can't say "oh box the offense out" because a guy like KG or Howard could slap his hand in there between the defender's arms.  Only way to avoid that is call a lot more "over the back" fouls, which would suck.
 
Honestly, I can kinda see why offensive goaltending seems optional, but you have to imagine more than just "how would that shot/rebound I just watched have gone differently" you have to imagine the overall change in shot strategy that would result.  You'd end up with a lot of "shots" being not much more than the basketball equivalent of a centering pass or just a slapshot that gets the puck in front and hope it can be slapped in.  It's not the same as just more alley-oops at all.
 
I think you'd see a noticeable decline in the quality of basketball, because "making the outside shot" would become less important than "getting the ball to the rim where the offense has a remarkable advantage over the defense, much more so than you have now"
 

There has already been a discrepancy between offense and defense. The defense can't touch the ball after it reaches its apex...the offense can touch the ball until it hits the rim or backboard. Even if offensive goaltending were allowed, it would still be really hard to do (they would just be legal offensive rebounds) or would affect players where the ball would have gone through the hoop anyway.
 

 
I thought that the offense could grab it on the way down, but still not over the cylinder.  Is that incorrect?  Anyway, I disagree with this.  I think there'd be a lot of plays lobbing the ball over top of the hoop to the "hand backboard".  Heck they could even jump up high enough to release the ball downward at a really shallow slope (almost horizontal but slightly down) so the D can't touch it at all.  That shot would never go in from the corner, but if you chucked it at some guy's hands directly at the opposite rim, even slightly over, it would tip right in.
 
 

 
I don't think promotion/relegation is realistic in historic American professional sports leagues, so I ignore it as an option, even with my hypothetical unlimited power.

 
 
I think the outlier character of such a move would be really interesting, but it would be kindof impossible...you wouldn't want the Celtics (or Knicks, or Lakers) to drop out of the "real" NBA for years at a time.  How would you handle the draft?  If the Celtics really suck for a couple of years, and you bring up the Pittsburgh Iron Towers (or whatever), does the promoted team take part in the upper echelon draft, and Celtics lose their draft position?  Because you clearly can't have a draft extending between the "Real" teams and the "Hopefuls", unless you simply eliminate the Hopefuls from the 1st round or something, and the only way to get a 1st round draft pick is to be one of the promoted teams that year.  Rebuilding over multiple drafts would be really difficult.  Legacies would get screwed up...I want to see it, but I can't picture it.

 

[Awesome Fossum]

A few not fully-formed ideas I've just been playing around with this week:
 
A two-tiered regular season
 
No conferences, no divisions. Every team plays every other team twice, once home and once away. After the 58-game regular season, or "first season", the top 16 teams advance to the "second season" and play every other surviving team again, once at home and once away. You could either wipe everyone's records clean after the first season or, as an incentive for the very best teams to not coast through the first season, roll over everyone's record against the other surviving teams into the second season. (That is, the Celtics go 38-20 in the first season and enter the second season with a record of 18-12 with 30 games left to play.) The best eight teams advance to the playoff tournament.
 
This creates a 58-game regular season for the bad teams and an 88 game regular season for the second season teams. The eventual NBA Champions would play anywhere from 100-109 total games compared to the current system of 98-110. Total number of games would fall from a range of 1290-1335 to 1159-1170. This could be addressed by expanding the field of teams that advance to the second season. (For example, a 20-team field gives you a minimum of 1299 games and a max of 1310, while extending the number of games the champion will play by 8 games.)
 
Eliminate the draft
 
As soon as a player turns 18, he's free to sign a developmental contract with any NBA team. He can be assigned to the D-League or -- and this part would require an overhaul of the NCAA -- he can attend and play in college while being paid by the team. For example, Jabari Parker signs a contract with the Bulls and is paid by the team to attend Duke for however many years makes sense. In the summer, he can play in the NBA Summer League.

 

[zenter]

With so many in favor of the hard cap, I'd love to get some insight on this. Why? How high
 
To me, in the context of revenue sharing, I don't see the downside of removing the cap and allowing teams to spend a lot of (or a little) money on constructing their team. I also see no problem with having a revised "soft cap" which is basically a luxury tax line above which the penalty is painful, but not unbearable (~25-35%).
 
Under this regime, a team with a bunch of midrange contracts is capable of luring (or trading for) star talent without stupid trade balancing or tanktastic shenanigans. It also allows greats like LeBron to be paid what the market (and his competitive drive) will bear. Put differently, with their farm system a couple years away from delivering top-tier talent, the Mariners were able to get arguably the best 2B in the game via free agency and become competitive in their division. You don't see that kind of simple transformation in the NBA and that's a shame. It's always overly-complex and dependent on a lot of cap-related parts.
 
Two more things I'd change/clarify:
 
1) Hand Check Enforcement: Go back to mid-90s level of enforcement.
 
2) Trade Value Balancing, S&T, etc: Since I'm killing the hard cap, trade value balancing and S&Ts become irrelevant, along with cap holds and a bunch of other annoying rules. I want to trade a #1 for a 20M contract that puts me over the luxury tax line, so be it.