NBA Tweaking the Lottery - how will it impact the Jazz?

[orangello]

What needs to happen as well is the #1 winner shouldn't win top 3 for 4 years after.

Said the same thing.

So did Dong

 

[franklin]

I'm sorry, I hate this. It really hinders the chances of a God awful team who is trying to rebuild the right way, without taking on shorter term vet contracts just to win an extra few games for no reason, from being able to get the #1 or 2 pick. Teams should be able to construct their team for the long haul intelligently and how they see best fit. This twists their arm some from doing so.

The whole tanking thing is way overblown imo. Really what's happening is teams like the Sixers are trying to build their team wisely now, no longer overpaying for the Charlie Villaneauva's of the world. They know bad contracts weigh them down and instead are trying to gut, get strong lotto picks, develop those guys from within, take on salary dumps to get more picks, and add in solid vets on the cheap for shorter term deals to help fill some gaps and lead as the team develops the first few years. Could you call the Sixers process tanking? Sure. But not to the extent that this board and the league makes it sound and in no way does it even guarantee that they even get the #1 or 2 or in a very rare lottery, #3 pick, anyway.

As soon as some fringe playoff team (the Knicks) get the #1 pick in a top-heavy draft, they'll realize it imo. The strong get stronger and the really weak have that much tougher of a chance from truly helping themselves.

This.

I don't see why anyone cares if teams rebuild. It not only serves the league well by allowing them to rebuild the right way as you say, but it also straightens the lower rung playoff teams and makes them more competitive against the elite. That's a healthy thing for competition and parity.

 

[fishonjazz]

The wheel system is better. AND, the biggest argument against this system was: "it's not fair because Miami could get a #1 pick, blah, blah, blah."

Well Cleveland just received THREE #1's the last four years AND LeBron James. That wouldn't happen in a wheel system.

From the "wheel" article:

"that every team would be guaranteed one top-six pick every five seasons, and at least one top-12 pick in every four-year span"

Also, LeBron going back to Cleveland...doesn't that show that the CBA worked? It has broken up the superteam and kept others from forming.

Back to the article:

"The Wheel proposal is more complex, and it has gained significant support from some powerful people around the league. It took a backseat this week as the competition committee focused more on the league’s favored proposal."

The wheel will be the "fix" IMO. This is just something to talk about to help us realize the wheel is better.

Stop.

I would rather a crappy lotto team get a bunch of #1 picks in a row than tue nba champions get a #1 pick

 

[fishonjazz]

I like this.

The wheel is freaking horrible. Would tilt the advantage to big markets even more and should not even be a consideration IMO.


£¥£

High five!

 

[fishonjazz]

I wonder, with Utah being Utah, if there was a projected #1 pick who would actually stay in school if Utah had the #1 pick (and let's say the following year, LA had the top pick)?

Since the order would be predetermined, college players could control when to come out based on who is in the lottery.

Yup.
Another problem with the wheel system

 

[One Brow]

This change is fine but still won't prevent tanking for good picks. Does this mean Silver is admitting tanking has occurred? As for the Jazz, they mode of building could still be the draft for another year or so but they have assets to trade. The group we have now won't stay intact. Kanter and Trey could definitely become trade bait as could several others which is a more likely scenario for our future growth.

There is little advantage to tanking for the first picks in a setup like 11% - 11% - 11% - 11% - 11% - 10% - 8% - 7% - 6% - 5% - 3% - 2% - 2% - 2%. Getting worse by 3 positions only nets you an increase of a 4% chance for the top pick. There might still be protection-based tanking, like the GSWs did a couple of years ago.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

My draft lottery solution:

Expand the lottery to include every team that doesn't get home court advantage in the playoffs. Thus, only the top 4 teams in each conference will not be in the lottery. Run the odds so that the worst team gets roughly 10% of the ping pong balls, and the "best" lottery team gets about 1%. Space them evenly. Then, run the lottery for draft position for EVERY pick in the lottery, 1-22 (8 teams left based on record).

-This idea seriously ends tanking, but still gives a minor edge to teams that don't have talented players. It also help combat the idea that being "average" is worse than being terrible.

There are some very good ideas in here.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Yeah, now that LeBron has returned, I think it's a safe bet they won't be getting the #1 for a while at least.

Exactly.
I'd go one step further with this revision and not allow the same team to get a top-3 pick in successive seasons. Along with Cleveland, you have to address the Philadelphia Experiment. They're did absolutely nothing to field a competitive team last year and this season will be even worse. The player's association has to be upset Philly is spending zero FA dollars.

 

[Stifle Tower]

I wonder, with Utah being Utah, if there was a projected #1 pick who would actually stay in school if Utah had the #1 pick (and let's say the following year, LA had the top pick)?

Since the order would be predetermined, college players could control when to come out based on who is in the lottery.

You better believe it. A few players like Jabari were waffling. If New York, LA or Chicago had the top pick next season (vs Cleveland and Milwaukee), do you think Parker would have stayed in school? GUARANTEED.

And you better believe the shoe companies would ENCOURAGE (demand), that prospects like Parker and Wiggins stay in school so they can then go to the larger markets. Does Nike get more bang for the bucks by having Wiiggins play in New York or in Cleveland (sans Lebron, of course). Is Parker a better marketing prospect in LA or Milwaukee? On the other hand, not sure they care too much if the best pick in the draft is a Bennett.

Also, it would flow all the way through the top picks. If LA even has an 8-10 pick, does someone pull a Kobe and have their agent tell all teams not to draft that player because he'll ONLY go to that particular team.

The wheel idea is probably the worst proposal ever. Sure it has support by the larger market teams. It's a windfall for them to buy the best talent to get to the top and then be able to stay there by adding cheap, upper-level picks.

 

[Coach Ellis]

Exactly.
I'd go one step further with this revision and not allow the same team to get a top-3 pick in successive seasons. Along with Cleveland, you have to address the Philadelphia Experiment. They're did absolutely nothing to field a competitive team last year and this season will be even worse. The player's association has to be upset Philly is spending zero FA dollars.

I'd actually favor a system that hurts tankers and makes teams more willing to compete, even if they're bad. It's more or less a spin off of Mark Cuban's suggestion to adjust the lottery to discourage out-and-out tanking. He suggested making the worst three teams automatically pick at #4, #5 and #6, but I'd rather see their odds reduced to the same ones as the better lottery teams instead of just automatically slotting them at lower picks.

My solution would be to get rid of the current number combination system and put in a specific number of balls (based on what their records are) with the team's logos on them. The total number of balls that they start out with should be 62, distributed as follows. . .

#14, #13 and #1 all have one ball = 1.613%
#12 and #2 both have two balls = 3.226%
#11 and #3 both have three balls = 4.834%
#10 has four balls = 6.452%
#09 has five balls = 8.065%
#08 has six balls = 9.678%
#07 has seven balls = 11.290%
#06 has eight balls = 12.903%
#05 has nine balls = 14.517%
#04 has ten balls = 16.129%

This system gives teams a reward for trying to field the best team that they can and being somewhat competitive. It also doesn't hurt the worst teams that much by allowing them to get a top 6 pick regardless of how the lottery ends up. It's not a perfect system, but I think that it would be better than the one that is in place right now. It would discourage teams from outright tanking and create a battle for the 4th, 5th and 6th spots instead. If the bottom dwellers are competing to not suck on a nightly basis, it creates better basketball for the whole league.

 

[green]

I wonder if large markets are losing their pull to players. Durrant and LeBron have never been in a large market. LA can't get a FA. If Durrant stays in OKC and Love goes to a "small" market team (GE/Cle) then the NBA has changed. No more super teams, no more play in Milwaukee for 6 years, demand a trade to LA...

This is good. Also, if you are a #1 pick and you can go play on a Utah team with Stockton, Olajuwan and Grant Hill or a bad NY team, are you really going to stay in school one more year, give up millions on the front end of your deal and tens of millions on the back end?

Your arguments against the wheel system are not as applicable as you think. They sound nice, but don't really hold as much substance as you'd think.

 

[GVC]

Plus the increase incentive to fall off the 7-8th seed bubble.

Playoff revenue v. a 1-2% chance at the #1 pick...

This scheme is so much better than the current ********; the marginal benefit of losing a few extra games is incredibly small. I suspect this would decrease tanking considerably.