RealGM

It's time to get rid of the draft.

This isn't just sour grapes.

I know the knee jerk reaction is always, how would a franchise like Charlotte compete, but I agree with David Aldridge:

The Spurs have won the first, fourth and second picks in the last three drafts. San Antonio has a great organization, and, again, good on the Spurs for getting Victor Wembanyama in 2023. But they’ve been able to continue hoarding great young players in the last two years, adding Stephon Castle last year, and, in all likelihood, Harper on Wednesday.

The Spurs tanked and were rewarded; Utah and Washington and Charlotte were not, and have not been, for several years. I’m talking about the impact, not the philosophy, when one team’s rebuild is turbocharged, while another’s stalls out.

Getting rid of the draft would give every team the same chance to convince a Flagg or Harper that they could build a great team around them, and that their organization’s staff and infrastructure were worth joining. Teams would have to prove that they were worth the trouble.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6446664/2025/06/25/cooper-flagg-nba-draft-abolished/?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes

What say you?

I think it's a terrible idea, but have a hard time seeing it going any worse for Charlotte than most lotteries have gone.

Get rid of the lottery and give the non playoff teams 2 months to openly campaign to the league office as to why they deserve the number 1 pick.

That is likely what's going on behind closed doors anyway. Might as well make it transparent.

The flattened lottery odds have just replaced one problem with another. Lottery reform is greatly needed and I think factors should include things like cumulative record over multiple seasons, playoff appearances and recently grabbing #1 picks. There's no simple answer, but if you basically rank the lottery based on non-playoff AND non-play-in teams and then make the order based off the last 3-5 seasons of winning %, you will help parity.

The draft works just like the NBA cabal has wanted it to. They say it is impossible to rig. Writers who’ve observed the procedure say the same thing. But smart adults at a magic show also swear that the illusion they just saw is absolutely real.

“Odds are odds” responds Skeletor when asked about this year’s incredulous results. Yes, how amazing that those tiny odds the Mavs had got them fully replenished after such blowback to their trade of Luka; a trade that possibly saved the Lakers competitiveness in a critical market for many more years. Same for the golden child Spurs, who just need MORE young stars to add to their bloated list.

Of course it’s just “odds” that enabled Cleveland to win the lottery the same year favored son LeBron was to be drafted. Example after example where it is in the LEAGUE’S INTEREST to see players route to a particular franchise…all part of boosting the SHOW and FRANCHISE VALUES.

So long rant but they won’t significantly alter anything. They’ve got a system, and when needed it sends the juice where they want it.

I just want to abolish Jeff Peterson

Ive been anti-draft for a long time. I personally would be fine with completely getting rid of it, but its probably a more realisitic solution to just significantly unflatten the odds again.

I would like a lottery where it is somehow set up so that teams can only move up or down like 2-3 spots.

So possible outcomes by worst record would be

1st: 1-3
2nd: 1-4
3rd: 1-5
4th: 2-6
5th: 3-7
6th: 4-8
7th: 5-9
8th: 6-10
9th: 7-11
10th: 8-12
etc.
etc.

And despite bad lotto luck, our franchise has had ample opportunity to build a quality team via draft, yet have and continue to shot ourselves in the foot on nearly every pick possible.

It's hard for a franchise to recover from using high picks on Biz, MKG, Vonleh, Kaminsky, Bouk, Mark, Salaun while passing in Klay, Booker, SGA, Duren, etc. Last night didn't bode much confidence in our drafting history either.

The Pacers have never even won the lottery. I wanna say OKC hasn't either since moving the franchise. A bad lottery system isn't even a top 10 reason we are a poverty franchise.

I love Braggins idea. And yes KingCat, if you can’t make good judgements or manage draft well, teams won’t improve no matter the system.

Getting rid of the draft will create a situation like European football where all the elite young talent just signs with their favorite childhood team (Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Warriors) leaving small market or irrelevant teams like us to scrap up talent like a Salaun or Knupple...hey wait a minute!?

I do agree that it is bs that teams like the spurs and cavs can just luck into the lottery so much. Fix that aspect of it, and the lottery is fine imo.

Better than NFL or WNBA where the worst team automatically gets pick 1. Creates an even worse race to the buttom syndrome.

not too relevant if you self filter for only players that want to play for your org like we apparently do

I've been in favor of removing the lottery altogether and doing a draft just like the NFL purely based on records.

You want parity, you want talent distribution, you want teams to stop tanking for 15 years straight? Worst record gets the top pick.

I've thought about abolishing the draft(s) a lot in recent years because it's inherently unfair to the incoming players to not allow them any say in where they go. as part of that I am a bit sympathetic to players who try to make moves to influence that to some degree, whether it works (Eli Manning) or not (Ace Bailey).

but I've landed on the view that we should keep the draft, if for no other reason than it's fun and people like to talk about it and argue about it.

Rich4114 wrote:The flattened lottery odds have just replaced one problem with another. Lottery reform is greatly needed and I think factors should include things like cumulative record over multiple seasons, playoff appearances and recently grabbing #1 picks. There's no simple answer, but if you basically rank the lottery based on non-playoff AND non-play-in teams and then make the order based off the last 3-5 seasons of winning %, you will help parity.

Obvious answer is obvious.

Getting rid of the draft is cucking for LA, contenders and other big market teams.

idk drafting in general is too risky for LA, its easier to let the farm teams raise your prospects and harvest them at their peak. they probably dont care either way

- limit teams from getting top picks in consecutive draft
- use rolling 3 year avg for odds
- lottery for bottom 6-8 teams, not all 14
- incentivize playoffs by 2nd round picks in reverse order by record with best record getting 31, worst getting 60... and so on...

fatlever wrote:- limit teams from getting top picks in consecutive draft
- use rolling 3 year avg for odds
- lottery for bottom 6-8 teams, not all 14
- incentivize playoffs by 2nd round picks in reverse order by record with best record getting 31, worst getting 60... and so on...

I think you could make a valid argument for all of these proposals except the last one.

Rolling 3 year average records for odds alone would stop most tanking IMO. Limiting the consecutive draft donations ala Spurs is another obvious no brainer.

Bottom feeders aren't going to stop tanking out of fear of their 31st pick becoming the 60th pick. So the last proposal is kind of pointless and just giving contenders a little unnecessary boost.