How Would You Fix the Lottery?

DanTown8587 · Post #1 » by **DanTown8587** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:07 am

I currently think that the lottery system is bogus. It rewards teams for not trying and severely punishes teams just out of the playoffs. Think of it this way: last year of the five teams that picked top 5, three made the playoffs this year, while the other 9 lottery teams had only two playoff recipients and they were picking 12th and 13th because of trades and injuries. So these would be my projected changes:

Top 2 Picks are picked through equal lottery

Pick #3 would be equal lottery for the six worse teams remaining.

Pick #4 would be equal lottery for the six best teams remaining.

Picks #5 through 14 would be order of finish.

This tackles the tanking issue very easily: it allows teams to play their best players because there is no advantage to be gained by being worst over fourth worst. You would never see a Miami Heat D-League team because fans would go: "There is nothing gained by losing, why are you doing this?"

Secondly, this would actually reward teams that tried to win games at the end of the year. With that fourth pick lottery for the "good teams" it would allow teams that just missed the playoffs to possibly get a high end player who can take them over the top.

Third, no team would have worse picks that drastic than what they have now. The worse team would still get a top 5 pick, instead of fourth. Granted, I am not saying 4=5, just saying its not like its a free for all lottery where the worse team could end up like 12th. The teams that have a lot to risk in terms of moving are teams at the back, but they get ample chances to be rewarded for that risk. I mean the worse possible outcome would be teams 12, 13, 14 win respective top 4 picks and pick 11 picks 14th, but I bet a team like NJ would take that chance.

Finally, as Bill Simmons loves to say, is it a BAD thing when teams move up and get picks? Would the league all of the sudden get angry if Portland moved up and got a Mayo? Would the league be so much worse off if the Warriors got Beasley? I mean I think of it like this: teams that just missed the playoffs need the luck of getting a top prospect to take them to top team in their conference, where as a bad team needs the luck of getting a prospect to take them to the playoffs.

freshie2 · Post #2 » by **freshie2** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:06 pm

Lottery for the top 5 picks with less bias towards the worst 5 teams. They still would have the best chance of landing the top picks, but less of a percentage. No team has less than a 1% chance of winning, and the worst team goes from 25% to about 20%.

Teams then wouldn't be as willing to tank b/c they would not be guarunteed a top 4 pick, but a top 6 pick, which can be a huge difference in most drafts.

Post #3 » by **Paydro70** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:20 pm

People say the lottery system is broken all the time, but never really seem to know what their criteria are.

If there is ANY bias towards the worst teams, like under freshie's scheme, there will still be tanking, because there is no reason not to. Even if there were NO benefits, the Miami D-league all-stars would still happen, because there would still be no incentive to win. If you were the GM/coach, if you have no shot at the playoffs you'd want to play your young players to see how they do.

It IS a bad thing when teams move up, because the main purpose of even having a draft is to apportion young talent to the worst teams, so that they can get better. So any draft system needs to help the bad teams get better, which is why there is a bias towards the bad teams in the NBA.

There is no way to simultaneously reward a team for winning, but also give bad teams the highest picks. The former helps the rich get richer, the latter encourages tanking. Pick your poison. I think tanking is much better, because it means that the best teams will rotate in and out of contention, so anyone can be competitive. As such, I think the lottery as it stands is fine, as most of the time the worst teams pick at the front.

Badd_Intentions · Post #4 » by **Badd_Intentions** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:22 pm

I'm agreeing with Paydro, the lottery system is fine as is. Why would u give a perennial playoff team a shot at landing a top 2 pick in the draft? Just doesn't make sense.

Also I believe only 2 of the teams that picked top 5 last yr made the playoffs this yr (ATL and Boston).

There will always be tanking, I'm not saying it's good or it's bad, but hey if the Heat end up getting Beasley what can you say? The NBA is a business involving lots and lots of money so teams are going to do as much as they can to get a player that will make them better and ultimately make them more money, even if the means are not what one would consider "noble".

The NBA works in cycles anyways, only every few years you get a draft class with All-world draftees that can change a franchise. Clevland was awful after they Mark Price, Brad Daughtery years, they were horrible up until they got LeBron. Heck look at the Knicks and Bulls to.

The Lotto system is fine, if teams choose to tank there is still a chance they don't receive the top 2 picks. The bad teams still have a shot of getting better.

MalReyn · Post #5 » by **MalReyn** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:03 pm

All I can say is it's better than the NFL system, where the worst team always gets the top pick. The big issue is, we WANT to give the worst teams the best players from the draft, to help the competitive balance of the league.

It would be a bigger issue if near-playoff teams consistently got outstanding players. The system as it is works pretty well.

Smills91 · Post #6 » by **Smills91** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:25 pm

I say ALL 14 positions are up for grabs. 1 ball each, process of elimination. Show it publicly to eliminate "fixing" the lottery.

john2jer · Post #7 » by **john2jer** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:30 pm

The system is fine. The point of a draft is to assist the bad teams, and create competitive balance, parity.

The only problem is that in the NBA, one player can completely change a franchise, while in the NFL, one player is just one player.

It would be even worse if it was a straight draft, but the way the lottery is set up is just fine.

The heat have a 25% chance of getting the top pick, but a 75% chance of NOT getting the top pick.

Teams that are on the brink of the play-offs, such as; Portland, Golden State, shouldn't have much of a chance of getting the top pick.

deeney0 · Post #8 » by **deeney0** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 6:38 pm

It all comes back to guaranteed contracts. The lottery needs to be weighted, Portland ans GS do not deserve an equal shot at the top pick this year, but any weighted system will encourage organizations to tank. But if the players had serious incentives in their contract tied to wins, who cares what the organization's incentives are?

Wade2k6 · Post #9 » by **Wade2k6** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 7:32 pm

DanTown8587 wrote:I currently think that the lottery system is bogus. It rewards teams for not trying and severely punishes teams just out of the playoffs. Think of it this way: last year of the five teams that picked top 5, three made the playoffs this year, while the other 9 lottery teams had only two playoff recipients and they were picking 12th and 13th because of trades and injuries. So these would be my projected changes:

Top 2 Picks are picked through equal lottery

Pick #3 would be equal lottery for the six worse teams remaining.

Pick #4 would be equal lottery for the six best teams remaining.

Picks #5 through 14 would be order of finish.

This tackles the tanking issue very easily: it allows teams to play their best players because there is no advantage to be gained by being worst over fourth worst. You would never see a Miami Heat D-League team because fans would go: "There is nothing gained by losing, why are you doing this?"

Secondly, this would actually reward teams that tried to win games at the end of the year. With that fourth pick lottery for the "good teams" it would allow teams that just missed the playoffs to possibly get a high end player who can take them over the top.

Third, no team would have worse picks that drastic than what they have now. The worse team would still get a top 5 pick, instead of fourth. Granted, I am not saying 4=5, just saying its not like its a free for all lottery where the worse team could end up like 12th. The teams that have a lot to risk in terms of moving are teams at the back, but they get ample chances to be rewarded for that risk. I mean the worse possible outcome would be teams 12, 13, 14 win respective top 4 picks and pick 11 picks 14th, but I bet a team like NJ would take that chance.

Finally, as Bill Simmons loves to say, is it a BAD thing when teams move up and get picks? Would the league all of the sudden get angry if Portland moved up and got a Mayo? Would the league be so much worse off if the Warriors got Beasley? I mean I think of it like this: teams that just missed the playoffs need the luck of getting a top prospect to take them to top team in their conference, where as a bad team needs the luck of getting a prospect to take them to the playoffs.

^^ I have a problem with your last part. Yes, the league would be much worse if fringe playoff teams had the chance to draft the best prospects available. Whether or not you believe the Heat are tanking, they are still terrible right now, and without Wade they're even worse. It is unfair to reward the fringe playoff teams so highly because they just missed the playoffs, when a team like the Sonics or heat that really need a great young player won't get it.

I mean if the Blazers get the 1st pick based on their currect % ( Around 5% ?) then sure that's fine. But to give the Blazers a 20-35 % chance at a top 3-4 pick is just unfair and it would set the league back alot.

sipclip · Post #10 » by **sipclip** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:52 pm

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the system.

Wade2k6 · Post #11 » by **Wade2k6** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:18 pm

Also, I don't know the exact numbers but something like only 3 or 4 of the last 10 years the team with the best % to win the lottery, has actually won.

deeney0 · Post #12 » by **deeney0** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:22 pm

It's 3 out of the last 16. Given the percentages, you'd expect 4 out of 16, but for some reason people seem to think that's a huge discrepancy.

streetp0et · Post #13 » by **streetp0et** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:17 am

how about awards team that are out of the playoff race for winning games? let's say for every win after a team has been mathematically eliminated from the playoff, their chances in the lottery increase by 0.2% or something. ideally, it would prevent team from tanking and also fringe playoff teams wouldn't benefit.

Post #14 » by **Paydro70** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:28 am

How would fringe playoff teams not benefit? If you're eliminated with 3 games to go, and you win all 3, you get major points. If you're the worst team, and you win three of your last 15, your odds should not be the same. There is no magic scheme that will simultaneously reward winning and losing.

J~Rush · Post #15 » by **J~Rush** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:00 am

The blazers won 41 games and have a .006 chance of winning the lottery. I think the system is fair.

ponder276 · Post #16 » by **ponder276** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:15 am

The current system is very good. There will always be legitimately bad teams, and if you ever want them to improve, you have to give them high picks. It is very important to have teams cycle between being good and bad, and ensuring bad teams high picks is the best way to do it.

Tanking very rarely happens to the extent of what Miami did this season, it's not a huge problem for the most part. This league is all about money, and tanking has it's own inherent punishment - loss of fan support, and therefore loss of revenue.

blazersmaniac8 · Post #17 » by **blazersmaniac8** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:05 am

its .06 jrush dont belittle our odds haha back 2 back 1s! but agreed have no complaints with the setup, tanking will happen no matter what happens but if someone could truly fix it they'd be AWFULLY rich hah.
editx2 i need sleep my writing has gone out the gutter

streetp0et · Post #18 » by **streetp0et** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:46 pm

Paydro70 wrote:How would fringe playoff teams not benefit? If you're eliminated with 3 games to go, and you win all 3, you get major points. If you're the worst team, and you win three of your last 15, your odds should not be the same. There is no magic scheme that will simultaneously reward winning and losing.

i didn't say their odd would be the same. i said their chances in the lottery would increase. let's say the worst team gets 50 lottery balls and best team not in the playoff gets 5, in the end they will end up with 53 and 8 total from your scenario. it will have more impact on the top picks. say miami tanking gets them 50 balls with 2 wins, they'll end up with 52. minnesota is second and is able to win 5 more times cause they're trying. so their chances increase, not significant enough to overtake miami, but enough to increase their chances thereby lowering miami chances.

i dont know in details how draft and lottery works, so those are just scenario.

Curmudgeon · Post #19 » by **Curmudgeon** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 6:57 pm

David Stern already knows how to fix the lottery.

J~Rush · Post #20 » by **J~Rush** » Wed Apr 23, 2008 2:50 am

blazersmaniac8 wrote:its .06 jrush dont belittle our odds haha back 2 back 1s! but agreed have no complaints with the setup, tanking will happen no matter what happens but if someone could truly fix it they'd be AWFULLY rich hah.
editx2 i need sleep my writing has gone out the gutter

No, it's .006

It was .06(ish) last year.