NBA looking to change Draft Lottery; 76ers say no

[LloydFree]

It all comes down to the League should have announced the changes June 1st, instead of the middle of July. Teams' long term plans haves already been made. Ultimately, the changes will hurt the 76ers in year 2 of this rebuild, but only slightly. The 76ers would benefit in year 3, if Embiid comes back healthy and makes any kind of impact.

As a 76er fan, I can totally understand the hate. I've watched Boston do the same thing three (3) times in the last 20 years, and have always hated on them for doing it, while wanting the 76ers to do this same thing. I've been the same kind of hypocrite as the opposing fans, who've criticized the 76ers in this thread.

[Sixteen]

Are those the same sauces that claimed Philly wanted Wiggins so bad? This actually potentially very beneficial to the 76ers.

[[e]]

Oh the team that wants to tank doesn't want the lottery system to change. What a surprise lol

I don't think it needs to change, but don't care if it does. I think they should simplify it - while giving teams better odds to win the lottery.

14 teams in lottery. Worst team gets 14 chances at 1st pick. First team to miss Playoffs gets 1 chance at getting first pick. Don't only draw for the first 3 picks or whatever, do it for the entire lottery.

These would be the odds for each of the 14 teams at their chance of landing the 1st pick
13.33%
12.38%
11.43%
10.48%
9.52%
8.57%
7.62%
6.67%
5.71%
4.76%
3.81%
2.86%
1.90%
0.95%

My numbers looked different. I know there are a few proposals being batted around.
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nba-l ... is-coming/

"The league’s proposal gives at least the four worst teams the same chance at winning the no. 1 pick: approximately an identical 11 percent shot for each club. The odds decline slowly from there, with the team in the next spot holding a 10 percent chance. The lottery team with the best record will have a 2 percent chance of leaping to the no. 1 pick, up from the the minuscule 0.5 percent chance it has under the current system.

"The proposal also calls for the drawing of the first six picks via the Ping-Pong ball lottery, sources say. The current lottery system actually involves the drawing of only the top three selections. The rest of the lottery goes in order of record, from worst to best, after the top-three drawing is over."

"it’s important to note that the league has kicked around several different proposals with varying weights; the 11 percent figure for the first teams is not universal among those proposals, sources say."

So, the scale is different.
Current Scale - New Scale:
25.0 - 11.0
19.9 - 11.0
15.6 - 11.0
11.9 - 11.0
8.8 - 10.0
6.3 - ?
4.3 - ?
2.8 - ?
1.7 - ?
1.1 - ?
0.8 - ?
0.7 - ?
0.6 - ?
0.5 - 2.0

Those questions marks will all be higher than the existing scale: (0.5 - 8.8) v (2.0 - 10.0).

So, it hurts the bottom 4 teams (except the 4th, 5th, and 6th finisher get a shot at the draw). It helps the rest.

Not really a fan of only drawing the first 6 teams. You kind of end up with the same situation, just to a lesser extent. Draw the entire lottery and put it on TV.

With my "proposal" you'd have 105 balls in the tumbler. Make it just like the real lottery drawing and have someone draw the balls out. Would make it exciting for picks 1 through 14. It's a simple process everyone could understand - while still being pretty fair to the worst teams.

[Sonny Carson]

[Luigi]

Not really a fan of only drawing the first 6 teams. You kind of end up with the same situation, just to a lesser extent. Draw the entire lottery and put it on TV.

With my "proposal" you'd have 105 balls in the tumbler. Make it just like the real lottery drawing and have someone draw the balls out. Would make it exciting for picks 1 through 14. It's a simple process everyone could understand - while still being pretty fair to the worst teams.

Oh, my bad. I didn't realize you were offering your own proposal. Looks interesting.

[[e]]

Not really a fan of only drawing the first 6 teams. You kind of end up with the same situation, just to a lesser extent. Draw the entire lottery and put it on TV.

With my "proposal" you'd have 105 balls in the tumbler. Make it just like the real lottery drawing and have someone draw the balls out. Would make it exciting for picks 1 through 14. It's a simple process everyone could understand - while still being pretty fair to the worst teams.

Oh, my bad. I didn't realize you were offering your own proposal. Looks interesting.

Think that's how the had originally done the lottery system - like back in 93 or something like that. Can't remember if they limited to the first 3 teams or what for what they drew for.

[Mik317]

The issue is that it punishes legitimately bad teams like the Bucks.

So lets say it was in place this year and the Bucks fell to 7.....how is that fair to them?

The whole point of the lottery is that bad teams get top chances at getting the best prospects...any fix to punish tankers is a system in which teams that truly need the help gets hosed. I also think this year was an outlier with how talented the top 4-5 was

I am all for the change..if only to see how far the goalposts are moved when it changes nothing

(also perhaps falling to 7 in what could be a bigman heavy draft isn't the worst outcome for us lol)

[Baller2014]

This isn't about the 76ers. There have been bigger tank jobs than they pulled this year. The 2003 Cavs and Nuggets tanked way harder than the 76ers did. This is about a new commissioner putting his own stamp on the NBA, a lot of which is about addressing perceptions (and improving the NBA's image).

[Koponen]

I actually agree with the basic idea of Silver's proposal (although it does create other, unintended negative consequences), but I think if we're all being reasonable here, this is something that should take effect beginning in 2016 at earliest. Really, this should not take effect until all draft obligations are paid by teams that currently owe picks (2019?). At very least, if the league wanted to change the rules for 2015, they needed to inform teams before the 2014 Draft and free agency, so teams could make decisions accordingly.

[GallagherArt]

I doubt that it's implemented so soon anyways, there are teams that have made trades with protections (top 3, top 5, etc) with the assumption that the current lottery system would still be in place.

[BJGOAT3]

The issue is that it punishes legitimately bad teams like the Bucks.

So lets say it was in place this year and the Bucks fell to 7.....how is that fair to them?

The whole point of the lottery is that bad teams get top chances at getting the best prospects...any fix to punish tankers is a system in which teams that truly need the help gets hosed. I also think this year was an outlier with how talented the top 4-5 was

I am all for the change..if only to see how far the goalposts are moved when it changes nothing

(also perhaps falling to 7 in what could be a bigman heavy draft isn't the worst outcome for us lol)

I don't think Bucks need any other top prospects, they have a promising young core already, Knight-Giannis-Parker-Henson-Sanders, any new added prospect to that core will replace these anyways. What they need is improvement of their players and that doesn't happen with getting top picks, it happens with good coaching, winning culture and veteran experience/leadership. Same with the Sixers, how many top picks do you want in a roster? For every new prospect you add you deter the improvement of others by not improving your team.

Cavs have like 5 top 5 picks on their roster right now, how did it turn for them up until this offseason? Irving & Waiters conflict, Bennett not getting any chance and constantly being under pressure, getting many top prospects does not build a winner necessarily.

My concern would be for teams that have to push the reset button due to age. Still, we see that most veteran teams try to reload through FA and the young teams stay in lottery.

EDIT: of course I don't want the worst team in the NBA to fall to 10th while a top 5 team gets a higher pick, but it depends on the model that is being suggested to replace the current system

[Snotbubbles]

The issue is that it punishes legitimately bad teams like the Bucks.

So lets say it was in place this year and the Bucks fell to 7.....how is that fair to them?

The whole point of the lottery is that bad teams get top chances at getting the best prospects...any fix to punish tankers is a system in which teams that truly need the help gets hosed. I also think this year was an outlier with how talented the top 4-5 was

I am all for the change..if only to see how far the goalposts are moved when it changes nothing

(also perhaps falling to 7 in what could be a bigman heavy draft isn't the worst outcome for us lol)

I don't think Bucks need any other top prospects, they have a promising young core already, Knight-Giannis-Parker-Henson-Sanders, any new added prospect to that core will replace these anyways. What they need is improvement of their players and that doesn't happen with getting top picks, it happens with good coaching, winning culture and veteran experience/leadership. Same with the Sixers, how many top picks do you want in a roster? For every new prospect you add you deter the improvement of others by not improving your team.

Cavs have like 5 top 5 picks on their roster right now, how did it turn for them up until this offseason? Irving & Waiters conflict, Bennett not getting any chance and constantly being under pressure, getting many top prospects does not build a winner necessarily.

My concern would be for teams that have to push the reset button due to age. Still, we see that most veteran teams try to reload through FA and the young teams stay in lottery.

EDIT: of course I don't want the worst team in the NBA to fall to 10th while a top 5 team gets a higher pick, but it depends on the model that is being suggested to replace the current system

In order to land Kevin Love they will need top prospects. If you don't have enough top prospects when you try to trade for a Kevin Love you simple fill one hole and create another.

[Embiid P]

Gotta love all of these self-righteous fans of other teams that disagree with the Sixers' strategy of tanking because it hurts the "integrity of the game". Before Hinkie came along, where did all of our "integrity" get us during the last decade-plus? Oh that's right, to the playoffs as a 7th or 8th seed only to get knocked out in the first or second round. Been there, done that. If you're going to tank, you either go hard or go home as Hinkie has shown.

Last I checked we aren't the first and most certainly not the last team to tank. Bottom line is that no matter how much you try to change the system, teams will always find a way to tank. That's just the way that the NBA, a league consisting of small rosters (at least in comparison to the other major team sports) with a small handful of superstars, is.

Personally I think that the NBA should do away with the lottery altogether and just go back to awarding pick order by record like the other sports do. If the worst team is guaranteed the top pick, it automatically increases the team's chances of getting better thus that team won't be bad for very long.

Is there a chance that our strategy doesn't pan out? Of course. Nobody including most knowledgeable Sixers fans is denying that. Hinkie is not infallible but he has given us hope and promise that we in Philly haven't had for quite a long time. For now, I'm putting my trust in him to do what's best for our team heading forward until he has explicitly proven otherwise.

[83SixersRocked]

If they change the system, IMO they need to enact it so that it doesn't impact picks from pre-existing trades. They've just changed the value of everything.

[MiltownHawkeye]

The league doesn't hate the fact that the Sixers tanked, they hate that the Sixers tanked and are completely unapologetic and "in your face" about it. Teams that are just really **** happen every year, but I can't recall any other teams openly stating that they don't expect to win any more games or declaring their 19-63 season as a "success." It hurts the NBA's bottom line to have a franchise publicly committing to losing. What the Sixers are doing is pragmatic but it's also a bad look and you have to be delusional not to see that.

[BullyKing]

The league doesn't hate the fact that the Sixers tanked, they hate that the Sixers tanked and are completely unapologetic and "in your face" about it. Teams that are just really **** happen every year, but I can't recall any other teams openly stating that they don't expect to win any more games or declaring their 19-63 season as a "success." It hurts the NBA's bottom line to have a franchise publicly committing to losing. What the Sixers are doing is pragmatic but it's also a bad look and you have to be delusional not to see that.

What looks bad is that the current NBA structure more or less forces a team like the Sixers to do this. What looks worse to me is trying to go after the effect without doing anything to address the cause.

[Effigy]

It all comes down to the League should have announced the changes June 1st, instead of the middle of July. Teams' long term plans haves already been made. Ultimately, the changes will hurt the 76ers in year 2 of this rebuild, but only slightly. The 76ers would benefit in year 3, if Embiid comes back healthy and makes any kind of impact.

I don't think that matters. The Sixers know they aren't supposed to tank. They were circumventing the spirit of the rules if not the letter of the law. Now they want another year so they can keep circumventing it? I'm sorry, no. It's like if a college professor starts sleeping with a student at a college where there is no explicit rule about it and then the college puts in a rule about it, he doesn't get to keep sleeping with her just because it used to technically be legal. He knew damn well he *shouldn't* be doing that regardless what the actual rule said.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

Never gonna happen, but I like the idea of fining the bottom five owners. It means owners will push winning from the top and it will trickle down to the GM and players. Will make for a more competitive league.

[omerome]

Never gonna happen, but I like the idea of fining the bottom five owners. It means owners will push winning from the top and it will trickle down to the GM and players. Will make for a more competitive league.

It would be interesting if there was a rule like the repeater tax; if you fail to make the playoffs three years in a row, you get fined.

[BullyKing]

It all comes down to the League should have announced the changes June 1st, instead of the middle of July. Teams' long term plans haves already been made. Ultimately, the changes will hurt the 76ers in year 2 of this rebuild, but only slightly. The 76ers would benefit in year 3, if Embiid comes back healthy and makes any kind of impact.

I don't think that matters. The Sixers know they aren't supposed to tank. They were circumventing the spirit of the rules if not the letter of the law. Now they want another year so they can keep circumventing it? I'm sorry, no. It's like if a college professor starts sleeping with a student at a college where there is no explicit rule about it and then the college puts in a rule about it, he doesn't get to keep sleeping with her just because it used to technically be legal. He knew damn well he *shouldn't* be doing that regardless what the actual rule said.

Such ridiculous nonsense. As has been pointed out repeatedly here and elsewhere, at least a dozen teams have transparently tanked at one point or another. So basically you want to punish the Sixers because they're not lying about it? You know what else circumvents the spirit of the CBA - the way the Rockets structured the Asik and Lin contracts. But so what, they found a loophole that let them structure the contracts this way and exploited it - good for them. And if was so obvious that a tank isn't "supposed to tank" how come Silver had positive comments about what the Sixers were doing a few months ago?