Caseloads wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

Knixkik wrote:

BigDaddyG wrote:

KnickDanger wrote:

franco12 wrote:I wonder what the discussion was with our pick vs. dallas when we made the Portland trade. Like did Portland prefer ours over Dallas?

Good question. At the time I think the Knicks and Mavs were just about in the same slot. My guess is that the Knicks pick may have been seen as the better choice based on recent history/ But I have no idea.

Our pick has tighter protections than the Dallas pick. From a value standpoint you'd want the Dallas pick. I just think Hart's value leveled out at mid first rounders and a decent wing prospect

Getting a player like Josh hart is how good teams get better. I get his value being a mid first but you would think hart is an ideal fit for a Lillard team. Not great stuff going over in Portland but to our benefit.

No doubt. But Portland has to pay Grant and something most of happened to make them believe they weren't resigning Hart. From their perspective, you gotta believe that they'd think something is better than nothing. Another thing is that Cam plus two second rounders might've been enough to get Hart last season. The fact that our pic converts to four second rounders if it doesn't convey kinda shows us that the value of pics in general has watered down.

1sts are valuable. 2nds lost value this season

Picks in general still have value. But pay attention to the next time a nonstarter like OG gets trade. The price in first round picks will surprise you.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

Who made that dumbass assumption?

Who else would? Adam Silver represents the owners.

If someone else other than the owners or the guy who represents the owners by proxy is making the selection, I admit I don't understand who it could be.

So I'd appreciate the insight. If owners/Silver doing the rigging isn't a natural conclusion from the theory the lottery is rigged, what are the alternatives? Who rigs it?

And since you're asking questions, would be cool if you answer why teams would tank to the bottom if the owners are aware the lottery is subjectively selected and not determined by mathematical odds?

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

Who made that dumbass assumption?

Who else would? Adam Silver represents the owners.

If someone else other than the owners or the guy who represents the owners by proxy is making the selection, I admit I don't understand who it could be.

So I'd appreciate the insight. If owners/Silver doing the rigging isn't a natural conclusion from the theory the lottery is rigged, what are the alternatives? Who rigs it?

And since you're asking questions, would be cool if you answer why teams would tank to the bottom if the owners are aware the lottery is subjectively selected and not determined by mathematical odds?

Why do you think a consortium of competing NBA owners needs to be involved? It's a jump with zero basis

Because at you and others have stated, 'billions are a stake.' Those billions belonging to the owners.

Who else is in the equation here?

It's a simple question. I don't understand the delay in answering. If the owners aren't decided who gets the college players, who is? And why?

fishmike wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

Who made that dumbass assumption?

Who else would? Adam Silver represents the owners.

If someone else other than the owners or the guy who represents the owners by proxy is making the selection, I admit I don't understand who it could be.

So I'd appreciate the insight. If owners/Silver doing the rigging isn't a natural conclusion from the theory the lottery is rigged, what are the alternatives? Who rigs it?

And since you're asking questions, would be cool if you answer why teams would tank to the bottom if the owners are aware the lottery is subjectively selected and not determined by mathematical odds?

Why do you think a consortium of competing NBA owners needs to be involved? It's a jump with zero basis

Because at you and others have stated, 'billions are a stake.' Those billions belonging to the owners.

Who else is in the equation here?

It's a simple question. I don't understand the delay in answering. If the owners aren't decided who gets the college players, who is? And why?

google it

The top results are explanations of the weighted lottery system (even if you search on "who REALLY determines the NBA draft order?"), which makes sense given that's how the draft order is really decided.

I happen to be asking someone who doesn't think the lottery system really determines the draft order ... or at least the first pick of the draft (I'm not sure which), which is why I'm asking him those things.

Maybe you can suggest a better search term to get the results you have in mind rather then the public facing ones?

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

Who made that dumbass assumption?

Who else would? Adam Silver represents the owners.

If someone else other than the owners or the guy who represents the owners by proxy is making the selection, I admit I don't understand who it could be.

So I'd appreciate the insight. If owners/Silver doing the rigging isn't a natural conclusion from the theory the lottery is rigged, what are the alternatives? Who rigs it?

And since you're asking questions, would be cool if you answer why teams would tank to the bottom if the owners are aware the lottery is subjectively selected and not determined by mathematical odds?

Why do you think a consortium of competing NBA owners needs to be involved? It's a jump with zero basis

Because at you and others have stated, 'billions are a stake.' Those billions belonging to the owners.

Who else is in the equation here?

It's a simple question. I don't understand the delay in answering. If the owners aren't decided who gets the college players, who is? And why?

I don't think you really have a base level understanding of how businesses operate in the real world or how the NBA operates.

You made an assumption, it's a bad one and you haven't been even inclined to realize or consider this. It's a moot discussion after that.

Cool.

I don't think you have an answer. At least one that can be factually supported.

That the lottery doesn't work as advertised is also an assumption, one you've made. It's an awful one and you don't seem inclined to consider this, given you refusal to engage in any discussion (which I think on some level you realize), other than drive by posts (which is your right).

But I disagree, I don't think the point is moot. I think if you engaged in an actual discussion I have some faith you'd come to realize what an untenable, illogical theory it all is.

foosballnick wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:

martin wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/KnicksMuse/status/1638567087349149703

pick aside what the play-in has done is so great. All these games are so meaningful and riveting when for decades nobody would care. It not only helps kill the tankathon but also keeps teams from coasting and resting because nobody wants to be 7-10 if they dont have to be

Here's a random thought...

Some believe the lottery is rigged, given the stakes involved.

Okay. Let's run with that....

If the lottery is rigged, why would any team full-on tank?

To make it look convincing?

Even when a team like the Pelicans jump the field in order to get Zion?

Hmmmm...

Inquiring minds want to know.

Because pick #2 is still pretty good? Cause pick 3-5 is still better than 6-10?

Because in some drafts someone ****s up and draft Marvin Bagley over Doncic?

Don't be this daft.

If whoever gets the #1 selection is chosen by a consortium of competing NBA owners, why wouldn't the owners also select who picks 2-14?

If you want to argue teams tank to qualify FOR the lottery (a premise I agree with) that's one thing. But what's the argument for teams tanking to finish near of the bottom of win totals when having 15 wins versus 25 wins is irrelevant because the competing orders decide the order?

I may be daft but god save the king I bloody don't understand why any team would compete for the very bottom of the lottery when it doesn't matter.

Open to explanations (as always).

Who made that dumbass assumption?

Who else would? Adam Silver represents the owners.

If someone else other than the owners or the guy who represents the owners by proxy is making the selection, I admit I don't understand who it could be.

So I'd appreciate the insight. If owners/Silver doing the rigging isn't a natural conclusion from the theory the lottery is rigged, what are the alternatives? Who rigs it?

And since you're asking questions, would be cool if you answer why teams would tank to the bottom if the owners are aware the lottery is subjectively selected and not determined by mathematical odds?

Why do you think a consortium of competing NBA owners needs to be involved? It's a jump with zero basis

Because at you and others have stated, 'billions are a stake.' Those billions belonging to the owners.

Who else is in the equation here?

It's a simple question. I don't understand the delay in answering. If the owners aren't decided who gets the college players, who is? And why?

I don't think you really have a base level understanding of how businesses operate in the real world or how the NBA operates.

You made an assumption, it's a bad one and you haven't been even inclined to realize or consider this. It's a moot discussion after that.

Specifically, at who's direction do you feel the draft being fixed and who is involved in implementation of the fix? If you or others are going to allude to a conspiracy at least share some thoughts on the specifics.

My thoughts are that a fix of the draft for a $10 Billion professional league that has built its revenue on the backs of generational/recreational fanaticism and "on the level" competition would be out of its mind from a risk manageI'mment standpoint to risk any of that revenue stream should a scandle of "fixing" be revealed. Also, assuming Silver is behind the draft fixing (if not him then whom?)...why would he risk his $10M annual salary on this should he be found out?

The moderator of this forum has made it clear such reasonable and relevant questions are based in a lack of base level understanding of how business works in the real world. But since I don't see any point in discussing whether the Knicks should try to qualify for the first pick in the 2023 NBA draft because they lost in Miami last night (which apparently isn't received with the same dismissive hostility this topic is), I'M going to continue the discourse.

And I'm going to quickly disagree with a point you make foos - the NBA is NOT a $10 billion dollar league. That's overlooking the real value of the league, the individual team valuations.

The Phoenix Suns, estimated to be a middle of the pack team in terms of valuation (estimated to be worth $2.5 to $3B a few months ago) just sold for $4 billion. Purchased for $400m 18 years ago, that's a 10x return, or a 55% increase in value per year.

So the NBA is more like a $120 billion-plus league, with again, the REAL value being in the valuation of the individual teams to their individual owners.

Given the significant rise in the valuation of the Golden State Warriors (#8 to #1) and the Milwaukee Bucks (#30 to #15) since 2013, individual on-the-court success obviously leads to significant increase in individual team value, making postseason success, championships, and having marketable marquee players as valuable if not more so than revenue from shared league media rights.

In simple terms, all 30 owners are competing versus one another for postseason and marketing success in order to maximize the REAL value of their teams, their individual market value in terms of both a held asset and when the time comes, sale.

Understanding this principal is required to have (to borrow a term) a "base level understanding" of the topic.