If the draft is rigged...

[Nebuchadnezzar]

There is zero actual evidence the draft is rigged ( and team x or y got the first pick is not evidence). This is a conspiracy theory.

If the draft were rigged....there is no way on earth that lebron and wemby would end up in smaller key cities. Cleveland is the last place the league would've wanted lebron to be.

The clv kid starting his career in clv makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint, it's not like LBJ didn't end up in 2 of the biggest markets in each conference over his career.
Wemby in SA makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint as well, wouldn't necessarily call SA a small market either

You're just building the conspiracy out earlier by "what makes sense". The Cleveland kid thing is again not evidence- there is little value to the NBA to have him in Cleveland, let alone risking reputation, law suits etc. to having LeBron play in Cleveland.

[RoteSchroder]

Please, by all accounts regale us with your “literature review” to show how the draft might be rigged. If you could post the JSTOR links that would be even better.

Congrats on having the dumbest post of 2025 (so far). “Literature review” LOLOLOL

character assassination and ridicule is a common method for people who don't want to get to the truth

Show us the literature! We must see the literature!

1) Media counts as literature

2) I never claimed to have the literature, only that it's how I analyze controversies to try and figure out the truth, not whatever moronic thing you're doing here

3) Conclusions can be that the answer to the question at hand is inconclusive

[mdenny]

If the draft were rigged....there is no way on earth that lebron and wemby would end up in smaller key cities. Cleveland is the last place the league would've wanted lebron to be.

The clv kid starting his career in clv makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint, it's not like LBJ didn't end up in 2 of the biggest markets in each conference over his career.
Wemby in SA makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint as well, wouldn't necessarily call SA a small market either

You're just building the conspiracy out earlier by "what makes sense". The Cleveland kid thing is again not evidence- there is little value to the NBA to have him in Cleveland, let alone risking reputation, law suits etc. to having LeBron play in Cleveland.

Yah that is insane. There was literally nothing for the nba to gain from having lebron in Cleveland and Wemby in San Antonio.

The whole rigged thing started with the knicks getting Ewing....which at least makes sense.

[mdenny]

If the draft were rigged....there is no way on earth that lebron and wemby would end up in smaller key cities. Cleveland is the last place the league would've wanted lebron to be.

The clv kid starting his career in clv makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint, it's not like LBJ didn't end up in 2 of the biggest markets in each conference over his career.
Wemby in SA makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint as well, wouldn't necessarily call SA a small market either

You're just building the conspiracy out earlier by "what makes sense". The Cleveland kid thing is again not evidence- there is little value to the NBA to have him in Cleveland, let alone risking reputation, law suits etc. to having LeBron play in Cleveland.

Yah that is insane. There was literally nothing for the nba to gain from having lebron in Cleveland and Wemby in San Antonio.

The whole rigged thing started with the knicks getting Ewing....which at least makes sense.

[Shakril]

character assassination and ridicule is a common method for people who don't want to get to the truth

Show us the literature! We must see the literature!

1) Media counts as literature

2) I never claimed to have the literature, only that it's how I analyze controversies to try and figure out the truth, not whatever moronic thing you're doing here

3) Conclusions can be that the answer to the question at hand is inconclusive

1.) Counts as a source not as literature, and depending on the Media it may not even count as a source

2.) What you are doing is NOT analyzing a controversy, you are creating the controversy by saying things without a shred of evidence and then claiming you search for the truth. "Wemby to San Antonio" on it own its not enough to say you have analyzed anything.

3.) You really should learn the words you are using, cause you are using them wrong. As pointed above, stating a simple fact and making a claim based on it is not enough. You need a valid point of suspicion to even start the process. And with valid i mean not something you just made up in your mind, but something thats backed up by a third party or evidence that ties the Lottery with rigging.

Just for the record:

Inconclusive means simply, that with the current state of Information it is not possible to be sure about something. On the Subject we are actually debating, that is not the case. There is more than enough to support the statement that the Lottery is not rigged. For an example, the 3rd party that is overseeing the procedure of the Lottery has never raised any points of concern.

You cant just say it is inconclusive cause you havent found evidence for the rigging. Thats not how this works.

[RoteSchroder]

Show us the literature! We must see the literature!

1) Media counts as literature

2) I never claimed to have the literature, only that it's how I analyze controversies to try and figure out the truth, not whatever moronic thing you're doing here

3) Conclusions can be that the answer to the question at hand is inconclusive

1.) Counts as a source not as literature, and depending on the Media it may not even count as a source

2.) What you are doing is NOT analyzing a controversy, you are creating the controversy by saying things without a shred of evidence and then claiming you search for the truth. "Wemby to San Antonio" on it own its not enough to say you have analyzed anything.

3.) You really should learn the words you are using, cause you are using them wrong. As pointed above, stating a simple fact and making a claim based on it is not enough. You need a valid point of suspicion to even start the process. And with valid i mean not something you just made up in your mind, but something thats backed up by a third party or evidence that ties the Lottery with rigging.

Just for the record:

Inconclusive means simply, that with the current state of Information it is not possible to be sure about something. On the Subject we are actually debating, that is not the case. There is more than enough to support the statement that the Lottery is not rigged. For an example, the 3rd party that is overseeing the procedure of the Lottery has never raised any points of concern.

You cant just say it is inconclusive cause you havent found evidence for the rigging. Thats not how this works.

1) I don’t define the term “literature”, a lot of written content counts as literature, if you want to label it something else, then go ahead. You’re talking semantics

2) I have never claimed to analyze anything and I have said multiple times that I don’t know. Pay attention.

3)
3rd party isn’t foolproof evidence, there are hundreds of instances of 3rd parties being a part of the scheme and/or not being aware that they’re being duped. The third party you mentioned has been caught for corruption and cheating, so maybe the NBA should switch firms.

The NBA has taken steps to appear transparent as they claim it’s a fair process and thus took on the burden of trying to prove it. Except what they show is not foolproof, hence I can’t say it’s 100%. If there’s a plausible way of rigging it under their current conditions, then it’s not sufficient evidence for a 100% certainty. A couple more steps in their process and I can say it’s 100%, simple as that.

We’re going in circles here, everything I have said has already been mentioned multiple times. You have really poor logic.

[EG73]

With Araujo draft I felt I wasted time, so I completely stopped looking at draft prospects. So I can’t answer.
But I have one question: why NBA would want Wembanyama drafted by Spurs, instead of other teams? I may have missed something.

you mean the franchise that has experience and is really good at developing big men? Beats me

Plus having Pop, the international/French history and the Kawhi fiasco still fresh.

I was calling Wemby to Spurs halfway through that season because it just made sense.

If it was rigged, Washington Wizard would have the 1st choice. Their uniform has the same colors as the French flag. Also, the team owner lives in a house that once was owned by Franklin Roosevelt, who was president of the USA when they provided great help the French during WW2. Wembanyama to Wizards is just pure logic .
Also, did you saw the recent handshake between Macron and Trump?

[YogurtProducer]

Third parties can be bought or corrupt. The FDA, for example, also got caught up in a several scandals, some known to the public, many unknown.

Ernst & Young themselves got caught in a scandal where they had to pay up $100 M for cheating on ethics exams. Double whammy considering they’re the ones who are supposed to catch cheaters and that it was an ethics exam.

When informed of potential cheating, they investigated themselves and claimed that there were no cheating issues.

So you think Ernst and Young is sacrificing their entire reputation so Wemby goes to SA instead of a massive market like Chicago?

That’s NOT to say the draft is rigged, only that there’s no 100% certainty of anything without full transparency. I would accept it with 100% certainty if they made certain tweaks to the ping pong machine process, for instance.

What a bull argument.

There is full transparency. Every GM and Owner understands the process, and it is publicly posted.

The 40th annual NBA Draft Lottery will determine the order of selection for the first 14 picks of the 2025 NBA Draft. Drawings will be conducted to determine the first four picks in the NBA Draft. The remainder of the “lottery teams” will select in positions five through 14 in inverse order of their 2024-25 regular-season records.

The actual lottery procedure will take place in a separate room just before ESPN’s national broadcast. Select media, NBA officials and representatives of the participating teams and the accounting firm Ernst & Young will be in attendance for the drawings.

Fourteen ping-pong balls numbered 1 through 14 will be placed in a lottery machine. There are 1,001 possible combinations when four balls are drawn out of 14, without regard to their order of selection. Before the lottery, 1,000 of those 1,001 combinations will be assigned to the 14 participating lottery teams. The lottery machine is manufactured by the Smart Play Company, a leading manufacturer of state lottery machines throughout the United States. Smart Play also weighs, measures and certifies the ping-pong balls before the drawing.

The drawing process occurs in the following manner: All 14 balls are placed in the lottery machine and they are mixed for 20 seconds, and then the first ball is removed. The remaining balls are mixed in the lottery machine for another 10 seconds, and then the second ball is drawn. There is a 10-second mix, and then the third ball is drawn. There is a 10-second mix, and then the fourth ball is drawn. The team that has been assigned that combination will receive the No. 1 pick. The same process is repeated with the same ping-pong balls and lottery machine for the second through fourth picks.

If the same team comes up more than once, the result is discarded and another four-ball combination is selected. Also, if the one unassigned combination is drawn, the result is discarded and the balls are drawn again. The length of time the balls are mixed is monitored by a timekeeper who faces away from the machine and signals the machine operator after the appropriate amount of time has elapsed.

A representative from Ernst & Young oversees the entire lottery process and stuffs and seals the envelopes before bringing them to the studio for the broadcast. The announcement of the lottery results will be made by NBA Deputy Commissioner and Chief Operating Officer Mark Tatum. A second representative from each participating team will be seated on stage. Neither the Deputy Commissioner nor the team representatives on stage will be informed of the lottery results before the envelopes are opened. The team whose logo is in the last envelope opened will have the No. 1 pick in the 2025 NBA Draft.

Do you not understand how ridiculous it is suggest that this could be rigged? In total we have

The NBA
14 Team Reps
Ernst and Young (a reputable firm of auditors)
Smart Play Co.

17 different parties involved. And they are all conspiring? Some against their own best interests?

Do you not get how much money is on the line? E&Y generates 51B of revenue per year. That trumps the NBAs $11B. They aren't risking their entire reputation over a **** raft lottery.

Why would all 17 parties be involved, you know something I don’t or are you making assumptions?
.

Because all 17 parties are in the room. Do you understand how incredibly infeasible it would be to create a ping pong machine that only pulls out the exact 4 digit combination you need one time and then somehow stops after 4 pulls (despite the same 10 balls being used?).

All 17 parties in the room witness what happens. If there was any **** it would be incredibly noticeable.

[RoteSchroder]

So you think Ernst and Young is sacrificing their entire reputation so Wemby goes to SA instead of a massive market like Chicago?


What a bull argument.

There is full transparency. Every GM and Owner understands the process, and it is publicly posted.



Do you not understand how ridiculous it is suggest that this could be rigged? In total we have

The NBA
14 Team Reps
Ernst and Young (a reputable firm of auditors)
Smart Play Co.

17 different parties involved. And they are all conspiring? Some against their own best interests?

Do you not get how much money is on the line? E&Y generates 51B of revenue per year. That trumps the NBAs $11B. They aren't risking their entire reputation over a **** raft lottery.

Why would all 17 parties be involved, you know something I don’t or are you making assumptions?
.

Because all 17 parties are in the room. Do you understand how incredibly infeasible it would be to create a ping pong machine that only pulls out the exact 4 digit combination you need one time and then somehow stops after 4 pulls (despite the same 10 balls being used?).

All 17 parties in the room witness what happens. If there was any **** it would be incredibly noticeable.

If I’m doing it, I’d probably line the balls with magnetic powder/paint with variation in the coating to alter to magnetic strength. Then use multiple, evenly placed coils in the platform under the plastic ping pong ball container, which can be turned on/off and can be adjustable in magnetic strength. Might be a couple other ways to get it done.

If their blower under the ping pong ball container is also transparent or if they open it up and show all the components inside before use, then I would say it’s pretty foolproof. Like I said, I haven’t really looked into it, but I wouldn’t hold anyone back from scrutinizing over the process, even if I find that it’s 100% foolproof.

Another way to further ensure transparency is to shuffle unmarked balls in a transparent container, have a random blindfolded player select the first ball he touches and the balls are marked 1-14 in the order he selects them. It’s overkill, but the NBA is selling a product and are making the claim that it’s not rigged, so the burden of proof is on them to show 100% transparency.

[YogurtProducer]

Why would all 17 parties be involved, you know something I don’t or are you making assumptions?
.

Because all 17 parties are in the room. Do you understand how incredibly infeasible it would be to create a ping pong machine that only pulls out the exact 4 digit combination you need one time and then somehow stops after 4 pulls (despite the same 10 balls being used?).

All 17 parties in the room witness what happens. If there was any **** it would be incredibly noticeable.

If I’m doing it, I’d probably line the balls with magnetic powder/paint with variation in the coating to alter to magnetic strength. Then use multiple, evenly placed coils in the platform under the plastic ping pong ball container, which can be turned on/off and can be adjustable in magnetic strength. Might be a couple other ways to get it done.

If their blower under the ping pong ball container is also transparent or if they open it up and show all the components inside before use, then I would say it’s pretty foolproof. Like I said, I haven’t really looked into it, but I wouldn’t hold anyone back from scrutinizing over the process, even if I find that it’s 100% foolproof.

Another way to further ensure transparency is to shuffle unmarked balls in a transparent container, have a random blindfolded player select the first ball he touches and the balls are marked 1-14 in the order he selects them. It’s overkill, but the NBA is selling a product and are making the claim that it’s not rigged, so the burden of proof is on them to show 100% transparency.

Right, and you think 14 NBA franchises, a international audit firm, a company that creates these machines for lotteries, and the NBA itself are all just going along with this?

Why would any of these entities risk their entire reputation? Based on what you said, that would require the creator of the machine to be in cahoots with the NBA, as well as the audit firm lying about the weights of the balls. So we already have 3 separate entities all lying about this, as well as 14 NBA franchise who are in the room just completely unaware of whats happening.

Again, you are just making up conspiracy theories. You even admit "I haven't really looked into it" but are claiming there is no burden of proof or whatever the **** it is your rambling about.

COME ON MAN. Give it up. They have 100% transparency on the entire process and have 17 different entities involved in the process. That is more transparency than you get from 99.999% of things you come across in your daily life.

[Los_29]

No one would think the lottery is rigged if they bothered to do any research on this.

[Shakril]

1) Media counts as literature

2) I never claimed to have the literature, only that it's how I analyze controversies to try and figure out the truth, not whatever moronic thing you're doing here

3) Conclusions can be that the answer to the question at hand is inconclusive

1.) Counts as a source not as literature, and depending on the Media it may not even count as a source

2.) What you are doing is NOT analyzing a controversy, you are creating the controversy by saying things without a shred of evidence and then claiming you search for the truth. "Wemby to San Antonio" on it own its not enough to say you have analyzed anything.

3.) You really should learn the words you are using, cause you are using them wrong. As pointed above, stating a simple fact and making a claim based on it is not enough. You need a valid point of suspicion to even start the process. And with valid i mean not something you just made up in your mind, but something thats backed up by a third party or evidence that ties the Lottery with rigging.

Just for the record:

Inconclusive means simply, that with the current state of Information it is not possible to be sure about something. On the Subject we are actually debating, that is not the case. There is more than enough to support the statement that the Lottery is not rigged. For an example, the 3rd party that is overseeing the procedure of the Lottery has never raised any points of concern.

You cant just say it is inconclusive cause you havent found evidence for the rigging. Thats not how this works.

1) I don’t define the term “literature”, a lot of written content counts as literature, if you want to label it something else, then go ahead. You’re talking semantics

2) I have never claimed to analyze anything and I have said multiple times that I don’t know. Pay attention.

3)
3rd party isn’t foolproof evidence, there are hundreds of instances of 3rd parties being a part of the scheme and/or not being aware that they’re being duped. The third party you mentioned has been caught for corruption and cheating, so maybe the NBA should switch firms.

The NBA has taken steps to appear transparent as they claim it’s a fair process and thus took on the burden of trying to prove it. Except what they show is not foolproof, hence I can’t say it’s 100%. If there’s a plausible way of rigging it under their current conditions, then it’s not sufficient evidence for a 100% certainty. A couple more steps in their process and I can say it’s 100%, simple as that.

We’re going in circles here, everything I have said has already been mentioned multiple times. You have really poor logic.

1. Its not semantics, its actual the term.

2. You literally are claiming to analyze it in every post you are writing.

3. You just cant admit that you are wrong. I am stoppind responding on that topic. Live in ignorance if you must, i tried to help.

[billy_hoyle]

The lottery isn't rigged.

Is there any deviation from the expected lottery odds?

For example I expect to see multiple teams jump into the top 4. That's what the odds predict will happen. If the 76ers win the lottery, it's because they had a legitimate shot to win, and got lucky, not because the NBA wanted to reignite the process era and avoid giving more talent to the Thunder. Theres always a narrative to create for why the draft might be rigged in one teams favor. That's not evidence that rigging occurred.

[YogurtProducer]

The lottery isn't rigged.

Is there any deviation from the expected lottery odds?

For example I expect to see multiple teams jump into the top 4. That's what the odds predict will happen. If the 76ers win the lottery, it's because they had a legitimate shot to win, and got lucky, not because the NBA wanted to reignite the process era and avoid giving more talent to the Thunder. Theres always a narrative to create for why the draft might be rigged in one teams favor. That's not evidence that rigging occurred.

I expect there would be a deviation, simply because these odds have only been used like a handful of time. It would take a hundred lotteries before it would normalize I would think.

[DreamTeam09]

The clv kid starting his career in clv makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint, it's not like LBJ didn't end up in 2 of the biggest markets in each conference over his career.
Wemby in SA makes total sense from a conspiracy standpoint as well, wouldn't necessarily call SA a small market either

You're just building the conspiracy out earlier by "what makes sense". The Cleveland kid thing is again not evidence- there is little value to the NBA to have him in Cleveland, let alone risking reputation, law suits etc. to having LeBron play in Cleveland.

Yah that is insane. There was literally nothing for the nba to gain from having lebron in Cleveland and Wemby in San Antonio.

The whole rigged thing started with the knicks getting Ewing....which at least makes sense.

I'm not saying the draft is 100% rigged, maybe it isn't, but of course the NBA had plenty to gain for the Ohio kid to be drafted to the small market clv team who won them their first championship, the NBA had plenty to gain, like giving it's small market teams hope, especially during those early 2000 szns

[billy_hoyle]

The lottery isn't rigged.

Is there any deviation from the expected lottery odds?

For example I expect to see multiple teams jump into the top 4. That's what the odds predict will happen. If the 76ers win the lottery, it's because they had a legitimate shot to win, and got lucky, not because the NBA wanted to reignite the process era and avoid giving more talent to the Thunder. Theres always a narrative to create for why the draft might be rigged in one teams favor. That's not evidence that rigging occurred.

I expect there would be a deviation, simply because these odds have only been used like a handful of time. It would take a hundred lotteries before it would normalize I would think.

Can't that be quantified? Isn't there a deviation that gets progressively normalized as the sample size gets larger?
So, at n = y we can expect pick 7 to move up x number of times (with a plus or minus that's dependent on y). If the x is within the plus minus range, then no irregularity is found.

[YogurtProducer]

The lottery isn't rigged.

Is there any deviation from the expected lottery odds?

For example I expect to see multiple teams jump into the top 4. That's what the odds predict will happen. If the 76ers win the lottery, it's because they had a legitimate shot to win, and got lucky, not because the NBA wanted to reignite the process era and avoid giving more talent to the Thunder. Theres always a narrative to create for why the draft might be rigged in one teams favor. That's not evidence that rigging occurred.

I expect there would be a deviation, simply because these odds have only been used like a handful of time. It would take a hundred lotteries before it would normalize I would think.

Can't that be quantified? Isn't there a deviation that gets progressively normalized as the sample size gets larger?
So, at n = y we can expect pick 7 to move up x number of times (with a plus or minus that's dependent on y). If the x is within the plus minus range, then no irregularity is found.

The sample size would have to get significantly larger.

You can expect pick 7 to move up 32/100 times. So essentially 1/3. If it happens 2/4 times we already have a “irregularity” that would take another 2 years to normalize.


Stuff like ATL winning #1 last year is a 1/33 event taking place. So it “shouldn’t” happen for 33 years.

However, every lottery is independent. Them hitting last year has no bearing on this year. It’s still a 1/33 chance of that pick moving up.

So it would take a TON of samples for it to normalize. More than we will ever see in our lifetime

[WhatsaTDot]

“I’m probably wealthier than you are” from a conspiracy theorist in a thread about the draft being rigged is the equivalent of “my dad can beat up your dad” in a primary schoolyard argument.

[Jstock12]

Why would Wemby going to Spurs mean that it's rigged?

A Tim Duncan 2.0 for a franchise with 5 titles.

So having 5 titles decreases your chances of a number one pick to 0%?

[billy_hoyle]

I expect there would be a deviation, simply because these odds have only been used like a handful of time. It would take a hundred lotteries before it would normalize I would think.

Can't that be quantified? Isn't there a deviation that gets progressively normalized as the sample size gets larger?
So, at n = y we can expect pick 7 to move up x number of times (with a plus or minus that's dependent on y). If the x is within the plus minus range, then no irregularity is found.

The sample size would have to get significantly larger.

You can expect pick 7 to move up 32/100 times. So essentially 1/3. If it happens 2/4 times we already have a “irregularity” that would take another 2 years to normalize.


Stuff like ATL winning #1 last year is a 1/33 event taking place. So it “shouldn’t” happen for 33 years.

However, every lottery is independent. Them hitting last year has no bearing on this year. It’s still a 1/33 chance of that pick moving up.

So it would take a TON of samples for it to normalize. More than we will ever see in our lifetime

I've done statistics before, but it's been awhile. I don't think in a sample of n = 4 an 'irregularity' can even be determined. That's my point. How are people arguing any sort of bias when the sample size is so small?