An idea on how to fix the Lottery

[Shakril]

Introduction:

No matter where you stand on the topic of tanking, we all agree that the games arent entertaining if a tank team is involved.
This is overall bad for the league, cause it gives free wins to other teams and isnt really enjoyable to watch, when you know one Team is throwing the game. I have an Idea on how to fix it, in a way that bad teams still have a chance to get the best players in a draft and at the same time discourage tanking.

I know its a lot to read, but explanations are never short, if they actually want to explain things.

The Idea:

My Idea may sound complicated at first, but in reality is rather simple once you get it. In my opinion it would solve the issue i mentioned above.

Right now the three worst teams have the best odds for the #1 pick, and then they get lower with each position.
So every team, that is in the lottery for several years (Repeater) gets a penalty, which will result in them dropping in the draft order. This penalty only resets, if the team at least manages to reach the play-in.
I will try to showcase it with an Example how it would work.

The Example:

For the case of simplicity i will only demonstrate it with 4 teams over the course of 4 years to explain what i meant above.
P stands for the Penalty.

Year 2025

Wizards has the worst record;
Pistons have the 2nd worst record;
Jazz have the 3rd worst record
Pelicans have the 4th worst record

All 4 teams are in their first year of the lottery, so their positon for the odds dont change.
In this case all teams gain a Penatly point and stand at 1. ( P = 1)

Year 2026

Wizards have the 4th worst record;
Pistons have the 9th worst record, but make the Play-in
Jazz have the 11th worst record
Pelicans have the 12th worst record

In this case, the Pistons would jump ahead of the Wizards. So the position for the odds would be.

Pistons (1st year in the lottery cause they made the play-in); P = 1
Wizards (2nd year in the Lottery); P = 2
Jazz (2nd year in the Lottery); P = 2
Pelicans (2nd year in the Lottery); P = 2

The Pistons reseted their penalty to 0 by reaching the play-in, but increased the penalty by 1 again cause they are still in the lottery. The other teams increase their penalty to 2.

Year 2027

Wizards have the 2nd worst record
Pistons have the 7th worst record
Jazz have the 14th worst record, but make the play-in
Pelicans have th 17th worst record and make the Playoffs

In this case the pistons would still be ahead of the wizards, but the jazz overtake both of them. Pelicans are not in the lottery.

Jazz (1st year in the lottery, because they made the play-in); P = 1
Pistons (2nd year in the Lottery); P = 2
Wizards (3rd year in the Lottery); P = 3
Pelicans (not in the Lottery, because they made the playoffs); P = 0

By reaching the Play-in, the Jazz reseted their Penalty from 2 to 0. But increase it again by 1, cause they still are in the Lottery.
Pistons increase their penalty to 2 and the wizards to 3.
The Pelicans reset their penalty to 0, by reaching the Playoffs, and unlike the Pistons and Jazz dont increase their penalty, because they are not in the Lottery. So they stay at 0.

Year 2028

Wizards have the 10th worst record, but make the play-in
Pistons have the 3rd worst record
Jazz have the 13th worst record, make the playoffs through the play-in
Pelicans have 14th worst record, but make the play-in

In this case the pistons are the only one that are repeating the lottery.

Wizards (1st year in the Lottery, because they made the play-in); P = 1
Pelicans (1st year in the Lottery, because they made the play-in); P = 1
Pistons (3rd year in the Lottery); P = 3
Jazz (not in the Lottery, because the made the playoffs) P = 0

The Wizards reseted their penalty from 3 to 0, but increased again by one because they still are in the lottery.
Pelicans on the other hand already were at 0, so they only increase by one for the lottery.
Pistons, as a repeater, increase their penalty by 1 and stand at 3.
The Jazz made the playoffs and reset their Penalty to 0.


This idea would not completly eliminate tanking, as the first year of the lottery has no ramifications on the draft order, but limit it for every following year as teams would drop in the odds regardless of record. This system would reward playing competitive and punish teams that remain in the lottery for tanking purposes.

But i would increase the odds for the top positions a little, so that they are more likely to draft at the top. Or maybe elimnate the Lottery alltogether as it isnt needed anymore.

#1 20%
#2 18%
#3 16%
#4 14%
etc.

Of course you could limit the penalty to the 5 (or more) worst teams, as not to punish teams that actually try, but come short.
The Penalty still would only reset with the Play-in or Playoffs.

Summary:

- Still gives bad teams the opportunity to draft at the top
- Repeating tanking teams get a penatly for each year they are in the lottery and drop in the odds corrospondently
- reaching the play-in/playoffs resets that penalty to 0
- the draft order is first decided by the penalty (1 picks before 2, 2 before 3 and so forth), and only second by the record
- increased odds for the bad teams, so that it is more likely they draft high (optional)
- teams are more likely to compete if they are already in the penalty (maybe limit the penalty to the 5 worst teams or so as to not punish teams that try to be competitive, but fail; still only resets with Play-in/-off) (optional)

[Indeed]

Wasnt this already discussed less than 2 weeks ago? Said it the lottery isnt exactly the issue, lack of development, while both owners (being cheap) and NBPA (being protective) do not seem to want any changes to it.

[HangTime]

Win percentage after being eliminated from the play-in.

The higher that percentage, the better your odds, and yes, you might get eliminated after game 81. So game game 82, allows you to go all out for the top odds.

-------------
This is something I want to keep track of, so far it looks like this.

Jazz were eliminated on March 10, with 17 games left.
0-2 so far

Pelicans were eliminated on March 13, with 15 games left.


The sooner your Eliminated, the more you'll have to try to win.

It'll force teams to actually try at this point in the season.

[PoundTown]

Interesting concepts here, and I'm open to change, but like an election, no one way will be able to be completely perfect. The NBA at least took a step in right direction by flattening the odds a bit in lottery. We are currently tanking and it's kind of hard to watch for me. Until we started resting guys, stopped playing Boucher, I liked it. We were still prioritizing the young guys in roles they could handle, but now it's just bad, and I get it as teams are being even more shameful than we are. Literally on a 3 game win streak when mgmt is trying to stack the deck against their own team in order to lose is somewhat comical. Playing guys like Rhoden and Castleton pretending to get a look at guys like that, who will never be rotation players in the NBA, is hard to watch. But, at same time we all want a good pick, as we feel it's a little bit deserved at this point.

All of this to say, a little bit more reform is definitely needed, and I definitely like some of the ideas here, but can also see why the league wouldn't like some of them and also why the management teams wouldn't either. At end of day it's easier to be bad then good, but what 10 of the league's teams are doing right now is bad for basketball. Sometimes, teams have good players and still suck, like Philly, New Orleans and Phoenix this year. It's more than just injuries for those teams, it's culture and how they show up to play night to night regardless of who's healthy and who is not.

[Raptorfan2012]

Easiest solution is for those who miss the playoffs, they all get the same odds. No incentive to tank or try to miss the play-in.

[Thaddy]

Incentivize winning with a rising team tournament. Single elimination for the top odds. There can be a slight rule change to make it more exciting: dunks are worth 3pts (4pt opportunity with a foul). The stats aren't counted for regular or playoff stats. Additionally to qualify the teams starters average age must be less than 25, maybe 30 (?) so we don't get a team like the Suns just tossing everyone. Maybe only taking average of the line up of the starters (most starts in regular season).

Basically incentivize winning. No one likes losing basketball. If the worst team is picking late in the lottery every year they should still be able to put together a decent team for the rising teams tournament if not the playoffs.

This definitely incentivizes being a treadmill team.

[douggood]

Easiest solution is for those who miss the playoffs, they all get the same odds. No incentive to tank or try to miss the play-in.

there still might be cases of team like the bulls who in 10 place, tanking out of playoff spot.
make its flat for all 30 teams.

[Raps in 4]

I like this, as well as a lottery tournament.

The current system punishes treadmill teams (like us) that are trying (and failing) to win rather than blatantly tanking. The NBA shouldn't be encouraging tanking anyway.

[knickerbocker2k2]

The point of the lottery is to give bad teams a chance to get better. The thing is we consistently see the same bad teams in the lottery because they are incompetent and the lottery is not going to save them (ie Charlotte). All the current system does is incentivize the good teams to tank to try to take advantage of the system.

The answer is to flatten odds so there is no incentive to tank. Everyone in the lottery has the same odds 1-8. After that make an order of record. Flaw here is the teams that just make the playoffs. To solve that makes it financially worth it to make playoffs. If non playoffs teams lose in like 20% of revenue sharing that will make so every ownership team goes into the year trying to win.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using RealGM mobile app

[YogurtProducer]

Win percentage after being eliminated from the play-in.

The higher that percentage, the better your odds, and yes, you might get eliminated after game 81. So game game 82, allows you to go all out for the top odds.

-------------
This is something I want to keep track of, so far it looks like this.

Jazz were eliminated on March 10, with 17 games left.
0-2 so far

Pelicans were eliminated on March 13, with 15 games left.


The sooner your Eliminated, the more you'll have to try to win.

It'll force teams to actually try at this point in the season.

I like “wins after being eliminated” better. Gives bad teams more opportunity.

[YogurtProducer]

Easiest solution is for those who miss the playoffs, they all get the same odds. No incentive to tank or try to miss the play-in.

there still might be cases of team like the bulls who in 10 place, tanking out of playoff spot.
make its flat for all 30 teams.

Give all teams lottery odds then and just limit how much they move up.

[ontnut]

Easiest solution is for those who miss the playoffs, they all get the same odds. No incentive to tank or try to miss the play-in.

there still might be cases of team like the bulls who in 10 place, tanking out of playoff spot.
make its flat for all 30 teams.

That won't work, just think about it. NBA champs get the same lotto odds as the worst team? Can you see how that might create a league imbalance?

[HangTime]

Win percentage after being eliminated from the play-in.

The higher that percentage, the better your odds, and yes, you might get eliminated after game 81. So game game 82, allows you to go all out for the top odds.

-------------
This is something I want to keep track of, so far it looks like this.

Jazz were eliminated on March 10, with 17 games left.
0-2 so far

Pelicans were eliminated on March 13, with 15 games left.


The sooner your Eliminated, the more you'll have to try to win.

It'll force teams to actually try at this point in the season.

I like “wins after being eliminated” better. Gives bad teams more opportunity.

and have any Head to head tie breakers span the entire season. It could make earlier games more competitive.

[ontnut]

Easiest solution is for those who miss the playoffs, they all get the same odds. No incentive to tank or try to miss the play-in.

there still might be cases of team like the bulls who in 10 place, tanking out of playoff spot.
make its flat for all 30 teams.

Give all teams lottery odds then and just limit how much they move up.

I still like my proposal where the bottom ~1, 2, 3, or however many teams (to be decided), get WORSE odds than the 4th-8th bottom team. Meaning the sweet spot to be is actually not the bottom, but somewhere between the absolute bottom, and the play in. Also the odds at winning 1st overall would be like a moderate bell curve, flattened like a hill, as opposed to a mountain) so the worst team ends up with the same odds as the team that loses out on the play-in. The highest odds would actually be the 25-26th worst team or so, and they'd get around a 10% odd at winning the lotto, with the curve flattening to about 5% for the worst as well as the 14th worst teams.

This would force the bottom feeders to actually try and win games, while not outright punishing the "treadmill" teams that miss the playoffs. The ones on the cusp of the play-in are rewarded for actually trying to make the play-in with slightly higher odds in the lottery should they miss it. This does recreate the situation we had pre-play in, where the 9th-10th seeds might try to tank their way out of the playoffs to get to the higher lottery odds, but it at the very least prevents outright tanking for 7-8 teams every year.

If you're a bottom feeder and make moves to get better, then you get rewarded with higher lottery odds. Conversely, if you push for the play-in, and fail, at least you get a minor reward by getting slightly higher lottery odds vs. the 28-30th teams. It de-incentivizes purposely losing, and incentivizes owners/GM's to actually do something other than sell vets for picks and tank for 3-5 years as if that's supposed to be a winning formula.

Like, in what world are we supposed to be rewarding losing ON PURPOSE? Esp in pro sports?

This also creates a more interesting scenario where the generational type 1st overall picks actually go to teams that have existing player infrastructure in place. Which helps facilitate their development, as opposed to being dropped into an absolutely toxic culture with no support around them, as a rookie.

[Raps in 4]

there still might be cases of team like the bulls who in 10 place, tanking out of playoff spot.
make its flat for all 30 teams.

Give all teams lottery odds then and just limit how much they move up.

I still like my proposal where the bottom ~1, 2, 3, or however many teams (to be decided), get WORSE odds than the 4th-8th bottom team. Meaning the sweet spot to be is actually not the bottom, but somewhere between the absolute bottom, and the play in. Also the odds at winning 1st overall would be like a bell curve, so the worst team ends up with the same odds as the team that loses out on the play-in. The highest odds would actually be the 25-26th worst team or so.

This would force the bottom feeders to actually try and win games, while not outright punishing the "treadmill" teams that miss the playoffs. The ones on the cusp of the play-in are rewarded for actually trying to make the play-in with slightly higher odds in the lottery should they miss it. This does recreate the situation we had pre-play in, where the 9th-10th seeds might try to tank their way out of the playoffs to get to the higher lottery odds, but it at the very least prevents outright tanking for 7-8 teams every year.

If you're a bottom feeder and make moves to get better, then you get rewarded with higher lottery odds. Conversely, if you push for the play-in, and fail, at least you get a minor reward by getting slightly higher lottery odds vs. the 28-30th teams. It de-incentivizes purposely losing, and incentivizes owners/GM's to actually do something other than sell vets for picks and tank for 3-5 years as if that's supposed to be a winning formula.

Like, in what world are we supposed to be rewarding losing ON PURPOSE? Esp in pro sports?

This also creates a more interesting scenario where the generational type 1st overall picks actually go to teams that have existing player infrastructure in place. Which helps facilitate their development, as opposed to being dropped into an absolutely toxic culture with no support around them, as a rookie.

I'd even expand the lottery to include first round playoff losers. That way, teams won't tank to try and avoid the play-in.

[ontnut]

Give all teams lottery odds then and just limit how much they move up.

I still like my proposal where the bottom ~1, 2, 3, or however many teams (to be decided), get WORSE odds than the 4th-8th bottom team. Meaning the sweet spot to be is actually not the bottom, but somewhere between the absolute bottom, and the play in. Also the odds at winning 1st overall would be like a bell curve, so the worst team ends up with the same odds as the team that loses out on the play-in. The highest odds would actually be the 25-26th worst team or so.

This would force the bottom feeders to actually try and win games, while not outright punishing the "treadmill" teams that miss the playoffs. The ones on the cusp of the play-in are rewarded for actually trying to make the play-in with slightly higher odds in the lottery should they miss it. This does recreate the situation we had pre-play in, where the 9th-10th seeds might try to tank their way out of the playoffs to get to the higher lottery odds, but it at the very least prevents outright tanking for 7-8 teams every year.

If you're a bottom feeder and make moves to get better, then you get rewarded with higher lottery odds. Conversely, if you push for the play-in, and fail, at least you get a minor reward by getting slightly higher lottery odds vs. the 28-30th teams. It de-incentivizes purposely losing, and incentivizes owners/GM's to actually do something other than sell vets for picks and tank for 3-5 years as if that's supposed to be a winning formula.

Like, in what world are we supposed to be rewarding losing ON PURPOSE? Esp in pro sports?

This also creates a more interesting scenario where the generational type 1st overall picks actually go to teams that have existing player infrastructure in place. Which helps facilitate their development, as opposed to being dropped into an absolutely toxic culture with no support around them, as a rookie.

I'd even expand the lottery to include first round playoff losers. That way, teams won't tank to try and avoid the play-in.

That's an interesting add-on. I'm for it.

I think anything they can do to reward WINNING or at least, trying to win, is to the benefit of the league as a whole. Like why should the 7th-9th seed be punished for trying to be good? Soccer has relegation. You get punished HARD for sucking. NA sports are too soft with rewarding losers.

[TRik]

Others have said this. But only way to do it to actually keep winning important is to completely flatten the odds for all. If the best team wins the draft you live with it. Otherwise if you completely flatten just for non playoff teams you still have tanking and importantly you probably have tanking for 8-10 seed teams that would probably prefer to get good odds vs getting swept in the first round.

I hate tanking as a concept, but in the current setup it’s the best way for many teams to try and truely compete long term….like the Raptors.

[Landomar]

I think the best solution would be to take all the teams that don't make the second round of the playoffs, and put them all in the lottery. That means the top 8 teams aren't included. The other 22 teams get equal odds for the lottery. Draw for the top 10 picks, then hand out picks 11-22 in reverse order of record. The worst team in the league is guaranteed at least the 11th pick. Nobody is going to tank for that, and the difference between say pick 15 and 20 isn't going to get anybody to tank either. Tanking fixed, while still giving a small advantage in the draft to struggling franchises.

[billy_hoyle]

I posted this in a different thread:

You stratify and randomize.

Teams 1-4 have essentially flat odds but can only win pick 1 or 2.

Coin flip determines if they have a shot at #1 or #2 pick.

Teams 5-8 get a shot at #1 or #2 as well. Essentially flat odds again. Coin flip again determines if they are getting a chance at #1 or pick #2.

Last 6 teams have a flattish odds at pick #3 & #4.

1st round losers have flat odds at #5.

Everything else goes according to record.

Worst team has a 50/50 shot at the #1 pick or #2 pick. Then a relatively slightly higher odds to actually win that pick.

They will get pick #6 if they don't win.

8th worst team now has a 50/50 shot at the #1 pick or #2 pick ,and slightly worse odds than 5-7 at actually winning it.

They will automatically fall to pick 11 If they don't win. So, they get a decent **** at the #1 pick, about the same chance as the worst team.

Teams 9-14 have a 33% chance to get picks #3 or #4, but no chance at #1 or #2.

A 1st round losing playoff team gets a 1/8 chance at pick 5.

Decentivise going for worst, as you might not even qualify for the 1st pick.

Reward 9-12 with decent odds to move into the top 4.
Reward playoffs teams with a 1/8 shot at a top 5 pick if the lose immediately in the playoffs.

[Woodman19]

Easy, when you win #1 you are ineligible to get a top 4 pick for 2 subsequent years. You shouldn't be encouraging decade long losing like the 76ers. One and done