There is zero fix that involves the lottery.
Solving For Tanking, We're smart, let's figure it out
- Thread starter SoberasHotRod
- Start date
How about this
Any current draft order should be based on a teams record from two years ago
So no team is tanking for upcoming draft
No team knows who will be available in two years
Best and most realistic fix is if you have moved up in the lottery the last 2 years you can’t move up again so no top-4 pick. If you are 1-4 you are taken out of the lottery balls.
If you haven’t moved up your odds increase the following year depending on what spot you were at previously.
For example, the Spurs and Hornets wouldn’t be able to move up this year. We would have extra good odds because we didn’t move up the last two years.
If you haven’t moved up your odds increase the following year depending on what spot you were at previously.
For example, the Spurs and Hornets wouldn’t be able to move up this year. We would have extra good odds because we didn’t move up the last two years.
Step-Back Lauri
Well-Known Member
I solved this and send my proposition to NBA. I proposed rewards for winning. Your ranking in the lottery is based on the percentual increase of wins compared to previous season.
You also set some kind of a bottom, from where you can start counting, to prevent anyone to tank to like 10 wins to get easier high percentual increase for winning. The average wins for worst teams past ten seasons is around 16-17 and it involves some blatant tankers. Id suggest the bottom line to at that, from where you start counting. When you increase wins, you keep rewarded.
In this model, I'd like to see also bottom three teams to be guaranteed 5-7% change for the 1st pick, in case you just happen to had bad luck and got worse by injuries. Keep it low enough to probably have better chances to just improving your win column. (In this model it's easiest in the bottom of the table to start improving.)
The additional thing could be to add some sort of bonus for the lowest payroll. That would incentivize player and organization development.
Another additional note is, if your team is in the lottery land, and already has under 30 years old top 5 player in MVP voting, your odds for 1st pick are automatically something like 0,5% at most, no matter how much you improved your winning record in the bottom 14, and also their top 3 pick chances are halved - in both situations the residual percentages will be evenly shared to every other lottery team.
If you have a youngish top 5 MVP candidate, you don't never ever need to have realistic chances for the 1st pick. Well give you a miniscule chance though, keep fingers crossed.
You also set some kind of a bottom, from where you can start counting, to prevent anyone to tank to like 10 wins to get easier high percentual increase for winning. The average wins for worst teams past ten seasons is around 16-17 and it involves some blatant tankers. Id suggest the bottom line to at that, from where you start counting. When you increase wins, you keep rewarded.
In this model, I'd like to see also bottom three teams to be guaranteed 5-7% change for the 1st pick, in case you just happen to had bad luck and got worse by injuries. Keep it low enough to probably have better chances to just improving your win column. (In this model it's easiest in the bottom of the table to start improving.)
The additional thing could be to add some sort of bonus for the lowest payroll. That would incentivize player and organization development.
Another additional note is, if your team is in the lottery land, and already has under 30 years old top 5 player in MVP voting, your odds for 1st pick are automatically something like 0,5% at most, no matter how much you improved your winning record in the bottom 14, and also their top 3 pick chances are halved - in both situations the residual percentages will be evenly shared to every other lottery team.
If you have a youngish top 5 MVP candidate, you don't never ever need to have realistic chances for the 1st pick. Well give you a miniscule chance though, keep fingers crossed.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
2025 Prediction Contest Winner
They will never do the wheel. It’s a 30 year commitment.
Tanktastic
Well-Known Member
This is just playing around the edges without fixing the problem. Just mitigating it in some random scenarios.
Yeah, I know the NBA won't doing anything radically smart
cmrd
Active Member
I like the wheel, but see one possible backfire in that it could lead to elite prospects strategically declaring in order to land in bigger markets, etc. For instance, if it was known that this year number one is Charlotte’s selection, while next year will be the Lakers then Miami, I could see a scenario where multiple top end prospects return to school.
One possible circumvention: do the wheel format, but structured with groups of five teams. There is an internal lottery within each group, not tied to season record. So, one year you get a lottery for 1-5, the next maybe 20-25, and so on.
One possible circumvention: do the wheel format, but structured with groups of five teams. There is an internal lottery within each group, not tied to season record. So, one year you get a lottery for 1-5, the next maybe 20-25, and so on.
Would Flagg opt out of a draft if the next draft Boozer/Peterson/Dybantsa could overtake him for that theoretical big market team? Doesnt seem likely.
cmrd
Active Member
Very possible it’s a solution to a non-existing problem. What about the Wemby year?
I just highly doubt any #1 pick is going to forgo a year of being paid 13 million dollars to go to the Lakers the next year when there is no guarantee he would be the pick.