VFX wrote:sp6r=underrated wrote:VFX wrote: 
 
1. To answer your question, as a non-believer in the conspiracy theory I would need circumstantial or direct evidence for the conspiracy. Retroactive X won the lottery and this is due to the NBA awarding them for Y.
2. As best I can tell conspiracy theorists believe the NBA fixes things for monetary reasons. The NBA has no financial incententives to want a good team in New Orleans is an irrelevant tv market.
 
After what just happened if you NEED them to directly tell you it IS rigged then there is no convincing you.
I called this months ago with a 1.3% chance of them winning and I was 100% correct. Lol.
 
I told you what it would take to convince me circumstantial or direct evidence that could be admitted in a court of law.
Direct Evidence: eyewitness to the conspiracy, co-conspiracy confession
Indirect Evidence: paper records of the conspiracy, suspicious bank transactions.
If a major newspaper wrote an article with any of the above I would give the conspiracy theory credence. But that never happens 
BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY