Is it me or should the draft lottery be changed? Even if it is just minor tweaking.. I mean the Bobcats are easily the worst team and sure they have the greatest chance of getting the first pick (25%), but they are 3 times more likely to not get the first pick and they actually have a 35.8% chance of dropping to the fourth pick. How is that fair? The Colts were the worst team, they automatically get the first pick and they get Andrew Luck. The first pick doesnt always pan out and sometimes players taken later in the lottery end up better, but let them have the first pick and roll the dice themselves.
If you were to change the lottery at all what would you do? or would you keep it the same?
I think that there certainly has to be adjustments made.
Looking at this article http://www.nba.com/history/lottery_probabilities.html , it just shows how often teams who finish last don't recieve the pick. Maybe by making a guaranteed last place-first pick scenario would be best. But then there might be an increase in tanking.
I think that every team missing the playoffs should have an equal shot at the number 1 pick in order to end tanking aka stanking in the NBA.
What was the lock out about again- BRI %??????
Pro 1, I like that idea, that might actually work. Still use a draft lottery but give every team that does not make the playoffs the exact same number of pin balls. Still use 1000 pin balls, but give 71 to each team. (14 does not go into 1000 evenly but I'm sure one team receiving 72 or a team receiving 70 won't make that big of a difference.) That means every team has about a 7.1% chance of getting one of the top 3 picks. Nice thinking.
But I still like Bill Simmons' "Exciting as Hell Tournament" idea. Maybe the NBA should adopt both ideas.
That could stop your team from tanking but then their are teams like the bobcats who if they tried to tank they might actually win a game bc they are so awful. They suck so bad so you take them from a 25% chance to 7? Should teams tank? No. But that doesn't mean you should penalize a team for being genuinely bad and give a team like the rockets with an above .500 record the same shot at gettin the best player.
I think the worst team gets 75% at 1 an 25% at the 2. The second worst gets 25% at 1, 50% at 2, and 25% at the 3 and so on. And the 14th team would be reverse of the first team with 25% at the 13 and 75% at 14.
Currently the 14 has sumthin like a 98.2% chance of getting their 14th pick and if they don't it's a guaranteed top 3 pick. How does that even make sense?
Are a special case... They are so much worse than the second worse team that you could really accuse them of tanking...they tanked all year... They are the reason y there is a min salary requirement in the nba.. Getting the first draft pick will not change their team around... But that is what mj wanted so he set out for that goal the lottery was created to prevent teams from tanking at the end of the year but also to prevent teams from tanking from the beginning of the year... If there is any karama a team like the bucks or suns who did not tank will step in and win the lottery...
You guys have all lost your minds. By increasing the odds for bad teams, you increase tanking. Period. I don't care about how the NFL does it. The number one pick in the NBA means so much more.
Here's what I think the NBA should do- At the All-Star break, give each team the opportunity to choose another teams year-end pick, starting with the worst team and then have a lottery. For example, this year, the Bobcats had the worst record at the break. They would have had the opportunity to select first. They would have chosen the Wizards. Then the Wizards would have chosen the Bobcats.
That way, the Cats wouldn't have been incentivized to lose all those games and neither would the other 5 teams that tanked away all their games.
I'm all for the "Entertaining as Hell" tournament and getting rid of the lottery so all non-playoff teams get an equal shot. Teams are built through high draft picks far less often than is commonly assumed. Teams like the Warriors have just been consistently terrible in the draft and really, that, as much as losing, shouldn't be constantly rewarded.
what if the NBA just gave every team an equal chance to win the lottery, I mean competitive balance would suck but it would stop tanking
Ya the NBA first overall pick means so much more that's why the worst team deserves it more.. Teams will tank no matter what bc of how valuable it is. It's not about eliminating the tankong it's about giving the worst teams the best players. How is it fair to the bobcats that they have a 75% chance of NOT getting the best player? And how is it fair that the above .500 rockets even have a chance at a top 3 pick?
Some teams are just plain bad and they will still be bad regardless on if they tank or if they don't. If every crappy team in the bottom 10 tries to tank to move up in the lottery then they cancel out so why does it even matter? U think if the bobcats tried harder they would have rly made a difference? Ya they might have gotten double digit wins if they were lucky and still had the 1st pick. Just acknowledge the worst teams by giving them the best players and move on
The first overall pick just doesn't mean that much more many years. Kwame, Olowokandi, and even Kenyon Martin all show that. Sometimes it means more and we don't know it - Kyrie would have went after Barnes last year, but it's evident Kyrie is far better - and usually just getting a great player doesn't change the franchise.
I think the lottery should be be 18 teams - so that the teams that made the playoff push wouldn't be penalised for doing so (I think I stole this idea from SVG)
Also give like the first 8 teams 50% of the balls (an equal amount for each team - 6.25% for each) and the the next 10 teams the other 50% (5% for each), that would be only fair.
That would be terrible. Could you imagine a team getting 5 consecutive top 5 picks simply because they just barely missed the playoffs? You would have a team like the Rockets getting guys like Kyrie Irving one year, Anthony Davis the other, and Shabazz Muhammad the other. How exactly would a team like the Bobcats improve? What if a team like the Nets lose Deron Williams and don't get a top-10 pick for the next 5-8 years? Teams would lose a lot more money that way than they do by tanking the rest of a season.
Tongue-Out - Then how do the Pacers and 76ers compete? Just because they have an equal chance doesn't mean they'd get the pick every year. The Thunder are really the only team that's ridden purely draft success to being contenders. It's about drafting well, not drafting first. It's about developing talent with a plan, not just having the best talent. Look at the Kings and Warriors and Wolves and Clippers of the world - they're always picking early and only ever really become relevant when a great coach or truly transcendent player turns up (KG, pick 5; Webber, acquired through trade; Chris Paul, acquired through trade; Kevin Love, pick 5). The Rockets get to be middle of the pack forever even though they're great at player development and identifying talent merely so someone can waste a few years being crappy for a bad franchise then leave? Come on.
here are the rough odds for each team, numbered, so the bobcats would be 1. but you can get the picture of how the chance of winning each pick goes. srbadger is a moron. The lottery is only for the first 3 picks. then after that they go by worst record to best record. 1st number is the chance of getting the first pick and the second number is chance of getting the second pick and so on
I like the system as it is. If it was a guarenteed top pick there would be much more tanking than there already is. The way it's set up now makes tankers look like fools because they usually won't get the pick they were expecting.
how exactly am I a moron..?
not everything you said was dumb, but this is an NBA draft forum, so you should know how the draft lottery works.
srbadger you said: I think the worst team gets 75% at 1 an 25% at the 2. The second worst gets 25% at 1, 50% at 2, and 25% at the 3 and so on. And the 14th team would be reverse of the first team with 25% at the 13 and 75% at 14.
That is not even close. I think you could have been suggesting something, but I didn't think you were.That makes no sense any way even if you were suggesting it, but it is worse if you really thought thats what it is.
That was a suggestion. I know how it works or else I would not have been foolish enough to start this topic. If you dont understand something then maybe next time you could ask instead of calling somebody a moron. Thanks for being honest though
I don't think there is a perfect way that will stop tanking. My idea would be to split up the worst teams. Still have the lottery but take the top 7 worst teams and have the lottery. Still give the worst team the best chance at the first pick. Then have a lottery for the teams from 8 to 14. The team that wins that lottery gets the 8th pick. This would give a team like Houston a chance at a top 10 pick but no chance at a top 3 pick.
I'll be happy with the results either way as long as the Conspiracy Theories are put to bed...
As long as the draft lottery is done in secret they'll be whispers of Collusion...