Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open

Moderators: BombsquadSammy, Domejandro, bwgood77

RealGM Wiretap
RealGM
Posts: 72,854
And1: 196
Joined: Mar 19, 2013

Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#1 » by RealGM Wiretap » Sat Dec 5, 2015 12:13 am

The NBA is unlikely to have another discussion of lottery reform until the next session of collective bargaining in 2016 or 2017.


Last fall, Adam Silver submitted a proposal that would have flattened the lottery odds but it was voted down by 12 teams voting with the Philadelphia 76ers. The Oklahoma City Thunder were among the teams to lead a behind-the-scenes lobbying effort.


The fear was small market teams would be at a disadvantage to tanking for a high draft pick.

Via Zach Lowe/ESPN

Sam195
Analyst
Posts: 3,263
And1: 301
Joined: May 18, 2013

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#2 » by Sam195 » Sat Dec 5, 2015 3:20 am

The best way to reform the lottery is to give each non-playoff team an equal chance at the #1 pick/best prospect. Than do weighted odds by losing record to determine the next 4 picks. Than losing order and coin flips for tied records will determine the next 9 selections. This way a team that tanks for the worst record has a very reasonable chance of landing the #6 pick instead of being guaranteed #4 at worst. There are usually a max of only 3-4 game changing prospects (players projected to be all stars before their drafted not guys like Steph Curry and Kobe who got picked later and developed into stars - but guys like Duncan, Wiggins, Lebron, etc) in a draft most have had less than that. NBA should also enact a rule where a team cannot win the #1 pick in back to back years. So in my equal odds scenario - if a repeat winner is selected than the balls are redrawn. To fix the small market dynamic - nba should expand revenue sharing where the local tv money regardless of which city should be shared equally like the national revenue. This way teams like the lakers and knicks cannot consistently outspend teams like the hornets and bucks.
rammagen
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,647
And1: 410
Joined: Feb 17, 2003
Location: Atlanta GA

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#3 » by rammagen » Sat Dec 5, 2015 4:17 am

Sam195 wrote:The best way to reform the lottery is to give each non-playoff team an equal chance at the #1 pick/best prospect. Than do weighted odds by losing record to determine the next 4 picks. Than losing order and coin flips for tied records will determine the next 9 selections. This way a team that tanks for the worst record has a very reasonable chance of landing the #6 pick instead of being guaranteed #4 at worst. There are usually a max of only 3-4 game changing prospects (players projected to be all stars before their drafted not guys like Steph Curry and Kobe who got picked later and developed into stars - but guys like Duncan, Wiggins, Lebron, etc) in a draft most have had less than that. NBA should also enact a rule where a team cannot win the #1 pick in back to back years. So in my equal odds scenario - if a repeat winner is selected than the balls are redrawn. To fix the small market dynamic - nba should expand revenue sharing where the local tv money regardless of which city should be shared equally like the national revenue. This way teams like the lakers and knicks cannot consistently outspend teams like the hornets and bucks.


That works but you did not address taxes in states. in NY or LA taxes are higher versus states like Texas or Florida where they have no state tax. so that would also need to be adjusted. If you are going to spread the big market money then flatten the playing field across the board.
For example, a team like Orlando right now can technically out spend NY or LA because there is no state tax so a player making 10 million a yr brings home more in Florida (when they play games in the state they do not pay taxes on that money earned) then the same player making 10 million a yr in NY or LA.
Quote from ESPN’s Bill Simmons posted on Twitter “28 FT’s to 5. I don’t watch rigged NBA games, I’m switching to hockey”
Pickled Prunes
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,479
And1: 625
Joined: Sep 14, 2010

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#4 » by Pickled Prunes » Sat Dec 5, 2015 5:26 am

rammagen wrote:
Sam195 wrote:The best way to reform the lottery is to give each non-playoff team an equal chance at the #1 pick/best prospect. Than do weighted odds by losing record to determine the next 4 picks. Than losing order and coin flips for tied records will determine the next 9 selections. This way a team that tanks for the worst record has a very reasonable chance of landing the #6 pick instead of being guaranteed #4 at worst. There are usually a max of only 3-4 game changing prospects (players projected to be all stars before their drafted not guys like Steph Curry and Kobe who got picked later and developed into stars - but guys like Duncan, Wiggins, Lebron, etc) in a draft most have had less than that. NBA should also enact a rule where a team cannot win the #1 pick in back to back years. So in my equal odds scenario - if a repeat winner is selected than the balls are redrawn. To fix the small market dynamic - nba should expand revenue sharing where the local tv money regardless of which city should be shared equally like the national revenue. This way teams like the lakers and knicks cannot consistently outspend teams like the hornets and bucks.


That works but you did not address taxes in states. in NY or LA taxes are higher versus states like Texas or Florida where they have no state tax. so that would also need to be adjusted. If you are going to spread the big market money then flatten the playing field across the board.
For example, a team like Orlando right now can technically out spend NY or LA because there is no state tax so a player making 10 million a yr brings home more in Florida (when they play games in the state they do not pay taxes on that money earned) then the same player making 10 million a yr in NY or LA.

Historically Orlando hasn't done better than LA at acquiring or holding onto free agents. The teams with the greatest disadvantage are in cold whether cities. Nothing Silver can do about the climate so the playing field will never be equal.

The lottery needs to be separated from the playoff seeding altogether. It should consist of an odd number of teams so the weaker conference always has at least on more representative. A 7 or 9 team lottery would be ideal. There is no reason a .500 team should ever be in the lottery. OKC was in the lottery last year with a .549 record. Can you imagine the outcry if they won?
twix2500
RealGM
Posts: 16,534
And1: 11,862
Joined: Dec 25, 2003
   

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#5 » by twix2500 » Sat Dec 5, 2015 12:10 pm

why? There gonna be fault in every system
boston_fan_ct
Sophomore
Posts: 155
And1: 16
Joined: Jul 13, 2010

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#6 » by boston_fan_ct » Sat Dec 5, 2015 2:58 pm

the only reform that I can think of that works is, if a team gets a top 5 pick, they are excluded from getting a top 5 pick for a set peiord of time (3 or maybe 5 years). this way a team cannot decide to do what Philadelphia has decided to do and suck for years. I don't know how the fan base in Philly puts up with it. anyway, if I were commish that's what I would do. everything else discussed doesn't make any sense to me. I have not heard this idea anywhere, I actually thought it up myself, but perhaps it has been suggested.
boston_fan_ct
Sophomore
Posts: 155
And1: 16
Joined: Jul 13, 2010

Re: Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#7 » by boston_fan_ct » Sat Dec 5, 2015 3:14 pm

whatever proposal that they devise must favor the teams with the weakest records. there must be a component in there that helps the bad teams get better so that there remains some level of parity in the league. If the league and players want free agency, there will always be teams that lose the best players to a top market franchise and if they are excluded from getting better draft picks, the franchise is doomed. that's why I like the proposal I suggested where you can only get a top 5 pick once every set period of time. I hate the idea of one of the better teams in the NBA getting a top pick by luck, or from some stupid wheel concocted draft scheme. I hate the wheel too because if a player is thinking of coming out of college, he may delay or decided to come out early to go to a better situation further dooming a small market or fallen on hard times franchise. wheel idea is stupid.
BasketballJunky
Sophomore
Posts: 212
And1: 15
Joined: Oct 02, 2015

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#8 » by BasketballJunky » Sat Dec 5, 2015 9:13 pm

NBA needs to clean up a few things.
1.The lottery system
2. The variance in talent across conferences /The playoff seedings
3.The Super teams... The super teams are lowering the amount of true superstars because one team can only have one leader/alpha dog so the others become role players example - Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving in Cleveland.
4. The One and done needs to stop , the rookies don't become NBA contributors until year 3 anyway. Its also hurting the NCAA game.

Once those things are complete in my eyes we will have a perfect league.
JazzMatt13
Analyst
Posts: 3,746
And1: 293
Joined: Sep 22, 2013

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#9 » by JazzMatt13 » Sat Dec 5, 2015 10:41 pm

I really hated how they allowed 1 team to get more than 1 #1 pick in a 5 year radius.

My Rule: If Team gets #1 pick, it must take 5 years to get another. If said team luckly wins #1 again, they will be swapped with a coin toss between the teams who #2 and #3, if #2 wins, the original #1 will be moved to 2, and if #3 wins that team will be moved to #3.

^-This would have kept Cavs from picking 3 #1 picks in 4 years, which was a complete rig cause nothing like that is possible, that is why they use that weird machine, and complex system cause any magician or mechanical engineer could build the exact same thing, but have it shoot out any number they please, even on voice command.
rammagen
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,647
And1: 410
Joined: Feb 17, 2003
Location: Atlanta GA

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#10 » by rammagen » Sun Dec 6, 2015 4:26 am

Pickled Prunes wrote:
rammagen wrote:
Sam195 wrote:The best way to reform the lottery is to give each non-playoff team an equal chance at the #1 pick/best prospect. Than do weighted odds by losing record to determine the next 4 picks. Than losing order and coin flips for tied records will determine the next 9 selections. This way a team that tanks for the worst record has a very reasonable chance of landing the #6 pick instead of being guaranteed #4 at worst. There are usually a max of only 3-4 game changing prospects (players projected to be all stars before their drafted not guys like Steph Curry and Kobe who got picked later and developed into stars - but guys like Duncan, Wiggins, Lebron, etc) in a draft most have had less than that. NBA should also enact a rule where a team cannot win the #1 pick in back to back years. So in my equal odds scenario - if a repeat winner is selected than the balls are redrawn. To fix the small market dynamic - nba should expand revenue sharing where the local tv money regardless of which city should be shared equally like the national revenue. This way teams like the lakers and knicks cannot consistently outspend teams like the hornets and bucks.


That works but you did not address taxes in states. in NY or LA taxes are higher versus states like Texas or Florida where they have no state tax. so that would also need to be adjusted. If you are going to spread the big market money then flatten the playing field across the board.
For example, a team like Orlando right now can technically out spend NY or LA because there is no state tax so a player making 10 million a yr brings home more in Florida (when they play games in the state they do not pay taxes on that money earned) then the same player making 10 million a yr in NY or LA.

Historically Orlando hasn't done better than LA at acquiring or holding onto free agents. The teams with the greatest disadvantage are in cold whether cities. Nothing Silver can do about the climate so the playing field will never be equal.

The lottery needs to be separated from the playoff seeding altogether. It should consist of an odd number of teams so the weaker conference always has at least on more representative. A 7 or 9 team lottery would be ideal. There is no reason a .500 team should ever be in the lottery. OKC was in the lottery last year with a .549 record. Can you imagine the outcry if they won?


Then explain Miami, Houston, San Antonio even Dallas? My point is valid and Orlando was an example of a team in a state that has no sales tax. Historically since the big 2.5 men formed the president is set to go to where you pay less in taxes generally. Why do you think they formed in miami and not in Toronto or even Cleveland? They could afford to take less because they saved on taxes. That has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with money and the salary cap not being equal.
Quote from ESPN’s Bill Simmons posted on Twitter “28 FT’s to 5. I don’t watch rigged NBA games, I’m switching to hockey”
Pickled Prunes
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,479
And1: 625
Joined: Sep 14, 2010

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#11 » by Pickled Prunes » Mon Dec 7, 2015 12:08 am

rammagen wrote:
Pickled Prunes wrote:
rammagen wrote:
That works but you did not address taxes in states. in NY or LA taxes are higher versus states like Texas or Florida where they have no state tax. so that would also need to be adjusted. If you are going to spread the big market money then flatten the playing field across the board.
For example, a team like Orlando right now can technically out spend NY or LA because there is no state tax so a player making 10 million a yr brings home more in Florida (when they play games in the state they do not pay taxes on that money earned) then the same player making 10 million a yr in NY or LA.

Historically Orlando hasn't done better than LA at acquiring or holding onto free agents. The teams with the greatest disadvantage are in cold whether cities. Nothing Silver can do about the climate so the playing field will never be equal.

The lottery needs to be separated from the playoff seeding altogether. It should consist of an odd number of teams so the weaker conference always has at least on more representative. A 7 or 9 team lottery would be ideal. There is no reason a .500 team should ever be in the lottery. OKC was in the lottery last year with a .549 record. Can you imagine the outcry if they won?


Then explain Miami, Houston, San Antonio even Dallas? My point is valid and Orlando was an example of a team in a state that has no sales tax. Historically since the big 2.5 men formed the president is set to go to where you pay less in taxes generally. Why do you think they formed in miami and not in Toronto or even Cleveland? They could afford to take less because they saved on taxes. That has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with money and the salary cap not being equal.

Toronto and Cleveland are both cold. Miami, Houston, San Antonio and Dallas are all warm. I think you're making my case for me.

Seriously, I hear what your saying. In reality I think Bosh wanted out of Toronto and nobody was agreeing to go to Cleveland. Miami had a winning culture, had won recently and had Riley at the helm. It was the more practical situation regardless of the taxes or sunshine.

My point was that there are many things that play into the advantage or disadvantage of NBA cities. Taxes are just a small part of the equation. Hopefully on-court opportunity is the #1 factor but quality of life, nightlife, local endorsements and state tax are some of the other considerations. I don't believe most states have a fixed tax rate so adjusting the cap to match the state tax would be tricky to say the least. That said, I don't know why you would try when beachfront property may be a bigger advantage.
rammagen
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,647
And1: 410
Joined: Feb 17, 2003
Location: Atlanta GA

Re: Discussions On Lottery Reform Unlikely Before CBA Talks Open 

Post#12 » by rammagen » Mon Dec 7, 2015 1:24 am

Pickled Prunes wrote:
rammagen wrote:
Pickled Prunes wrote:Historically Orlando hasn't done better than LA at acquiring or holding onto free agents. The teams with the greatest disadvantage are in cold whether cities. Nothing Silver can do about the climate so the playing field will never be equal.

The lottery needs to be separated from the playoff seeding altogether. It should consist of an odd number of teams so the weaker conference always has at least on more representative. A 7 or 9 team lottery would be ideal. There is no reason a .500 team should ever be in the lottery. OKC was in the lottery last year with a .549 record. Can you imagine the outcry if they won?


Then explain Miami, Houston, San Antonio even Dallas? My point is valid and Orlando was an example of a team in a state that has no sales tax. Historically since the big 2.5 men formed the president is set to go to where you pay less in taxes generally. Why do you think they formed in miami and not in Toronto or even Cleveland? They could afford to take less because they saved on taxes. That has nothing to do with the climate and everything to do with money and the salary cap not being equal.

Toronto and Cleveland are both cold. Miami, Houston, San Antonio and Dallas are all warm. I think you're making my case for me.

Seriously, I hear what your saying. In reality I think Bosh wanted out of Toronto and nobody was agreeing to go to Cleveland. Miami had a winning culture, had won recently and had Riley at the helm. It was the more practical situation regardless of the taxes or sunshine.

My point was that there are many things that play into the advantage or disadvantage of NBA cities. Taxes are just a small part of the equation. Hopefully on-court opportunity is the #1 factor but quality of life, nightlife, local endorsements and state tax are some of the other considerations. I don't believe most states have a fixed tax rate so adjusting the cap to match the state tax would be tricky to say the least. That said, I don't know why you would try when beachfront property may be a bigger advantage.

Taxes are a huge part we can be talking hundreds of thousands of dollars on the level of a LBJ. Most states have a flat rate of 10 to 15 % And fixing the cap to fix the taxes is nothing more then a figure to be added into the salary. I.E. If you sign in Brooklyn you get the x amount plus 10% added to allow for taxes. Not that complicated.
I lived in South Florida when 2.5 men formed and that was a part of the reason they could each take less but make more then signing in Cleveland.
You can't pick and choose reform either do it all fairly or leave it alone. Beach front property is nice but having an extra 250 grand every yr because you don't pay a state tax is equally nice
Quote from ESPN’s Bill Simmons posted on Twitter “28 FT’s to 5. I don’t watch rigged NBA games, I’m switching to hockey”

Return to Wiretap Discussion