Is the lottery working? Is it really needed?
No other sport has one. Derrick Rose goes to the team with the least opportunity to get him. For the sake of parity, this isn't good And the team with the worst record never seems to get the first pick. I'm not so sure it's needed. It creates excitement I guess, and may or may not prevent teams from tanking, but I'm not so sure it should be conducted. For parity purposes, weakest teams should get best draft picks. What do you guys think?
I like the lottery. The unpredictability of it makes it intriguing. Sometimes the worst team gets screwed but who cares....Sometimes the team with the 1st pick gets a bust. Nobody wants to see a bunch of teams losing on purpose simply to have the worst record and be guaranteed the 1st pick. Its just FATE....Blake Griffin was meant to go to the Clippers....its his destiny haha Even though I would have much rather seen the KIngs with the 1st pick. If the NBA could prevent teams from tanking I wouldn't be to upset if they got rid of the lottery. But overall the lottery is pretty fun.
I think it prevents teams from completely tanking, and only seems to lead to a few woe be gone squads trying to lose at the end of the year to try and get a few more combinations. I think it is a fun system, and hell, it could be rigged, but at least we do not have teams that are constantly down in the dumps getting the first pick every year. The lottery makes sense, it adds a little intrigue and competition. Plus, even if you have the worst record in the league, you can't get lower than a 4 pick, which is not bad. Hell, the Grizz and Raps started off at 6 and 7, and even though the Raps got Damon Stoudamire who went on to win the Rookie of the Year, Rasheed Wallace and Kevin Garnett went 4 and 5 respectively. As much as Isiah wanted Damon, I remember him sweating out where KG was going when they held that draft in Toronto. I think automatically rewarding teams with poor records is just a bad system, and if the lottery is unfair, than it is just as unfair for a team to intentionally suck for two years just to get franchise pillars. The NBA wants to be a league of intrigue and parody as much as possible, and as cool as it would be to have a team suck for 3 years and than draft their way to a championship (Penguins anyone, lol, even though I love it), that just does not seem to happen regardless in the NBA. Teams that stay cellar dwellers are usually their for a reason, and it has nothing to do with the lottery.
In the "olden days" they tossed a coin between the teams with the worst record in each conference with the first pick at stake. I think this might have taken some of the tanking out, but maybe not all of it. That is a point to consider. However, a horrific team was assured of having no worse than the 2nd pick in the draft.
Here's funny bit of history.....talk about fate. In 1978, they had the Junior. eligible rule. That meant that if a player's class had graduated, he would be eligible for the draft. Celtics drafted Bird after his Junior year at Indiana State. So.....Bulls and Lakers wind up flipping the coin if you can imagine that. How times have changed!!!! Anyway, Lakers win toss and pick a kid out of Michigan State with a nice smile, and sideburns. Forget his name, but boy could he pass.....like Magic! Any other year, Bird would have been the consolation pick or vice versa. But since Celtics had his rights till that draft, and eventually signed Larry Bird. Bulls had to settle for David Greenwood. Any other year in history, Bird or Magic would have been a Bull. Her's the rub. Do you think Bulls would have had 3rd pick in '84 draft with Bird or Magic? Me neither. So Jordan would have wound up on a different team as well, and we might be talking about a Mavs dynasty. Funny how things work in the end. Thanks for letting me ramble!
1st off- Great post
Overall, I say the Lottery works. I think if you eliminate the lottery, many teams would just bail on a season and lose on purpose. I think we could tweak the lottery but it needs to stay,
Maybe more weight should be involved. Teams with weaker records have more ping pong balls in machine or something.
without the lottery imagine how teams would have of been tanking in order to get Lebron. The end of the 02-03 season would of been terrible. The teams would of been losing all of their games in order to get this franchise changing player. IT could of ruined the season.
If it was me...I would have it like this
In a ping-pong machine are 200 balls with numbers (Bewteen 1-10) inside.
The worst the record, the higher the amount..for example
Sacramento this year would have had 10 ping-pong balls and so on and so forth.
Unlike most drafts the consolation prizes would have been franchise players like Melo, Wade, Bosh and of course....Milicic. It's all in the beholder on draft night. an intelligent man such as Joe Dumars figured Darko was the best of the lot. You not only have to own the pick, you have to take the right player........and live with the consequenses of who you select.
It's a hell of a lot better than when the NBA used territorial picks. It's got some flaws, but it prevents teams from outright tanking for the most part.
Yea but that then you would have establish territories...
Maravich, the lottery is weighted so teams with worser records have more balls. I like it because teams would flat out tank the last couple months of the season if it was solely based on records. Also, I can't feel bad for the Kings or any other crappy team when the lottery does'nt work for them. Run your franchise efficiently if you want to win games. Sucking should'nt be automatically rewarded.
i think it adds to the excitement of the draft. and, i'm pretty sure it adds some dollars to the nba.
My suggestion was to consider weightin more so teams with poorer records would get additional balls in the hopper, but still have no guarantees.