The ultimate anti-tank solution?

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Some may recall some conversation a year or two or three ago (?) that centered on some ideas put forth by fivethirtyeight's writers:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-stop-nba-tanking-tie-your-fate-to-another-teams-record/

Well...

How's this for an improvement on that improvement? (And yes, I ask because I'm always interested in troubleshooting, not just attaboys.)

Tie your fate to another team's.... not record, as-in regular season record.... but PLAYOFF RECORD.

So, it's this simple.

The 14 non-qualifying teams' lottery slot is set according to the success of that team that slots at their mirror opposite number based on the regular season finish.

For example... if implemented right now...

#30 NYK's draft slot would be determined ultimately by #1 MIL's playoff fate... and so on...

(#29) CLE = TOR (#2)
(#28) PHX = GSW (#3)
(#27) CHI = DEN (#4)
(#26) ATL = POR (#5)... etc, etc

More specifically...

After each round of the playoffs, the fate of the losers establishes their associated team in the draft order. So, conventionally-speaking, if you have playoff seeds #5-#8 in both conferences all go down to defeat, then CHA, MIA, SAC, LAL, MIN, MEM, DAL, and NOP are solidified in their current #7-#14 slots. If DET were to upset MIL, though, then NYK would be part of that first slotted group, and since they have the worst record of those 8, they would be slotted at #7.

The same model holds with each succeeding round.

And ultimately, the non-playoff team tied to the NBA champ is the team that wins the #1 slot in the draft.

Here's the real novelty of this from where the NBA sits...

It gives ALL OF US NON-PLAYOFF TEAM FANS new and significant reason to watch the NBA playoffs.

As an Atlanta fan, I'm going to be feverishly watching and cheering for those Portland Trailblazer all the way through... as opposed to maybe casually watching if nothing else is on, and maybe not even caring a whit until the NBA Finals.

So, that's it. Interested in your reactions here.

[Atlanta Hawk Fan]

Appreciate the creativity but have zero interest in this and feel it would lead to some super arbitrary results. Would rather see a tournament among the non-playoff teams if we are going with post-season play.

[jayu70]

I'd pass. I can't imagine having to root for a team like Boston and have the Hawks fate tied to them.
Yuck!

[macd-gm]

That's a new one for sure! I actually think it's simpler. Your lottery odds should be tied to your last 3 season's records.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Appreciate the creativity but have zero interest in this and feel it would lead to some super arbitrary results. Would rather see a tournament among the non-playoff teams if we are going with post-season play.

Super arbitrary?

hehe

Your present system is the essence of super arbitrary, but it's so familiar that it's difficult sometimes for people to even think about it.

Am I wrong? Who, after all, is the arbiter of whether the worst team record in the league OUGHT TO have a 10 percent chance... a 20 percent chance... a 50 percent... 90 percent... who is that person or persons, and on what OBJECTIVE STANDARD do they base their rationale?

It's ALL subjective. It's ALL random. It's ALL arbitrary. HENCE THE REASON why there's this CONTINUAL tweaking of the odds to reach some predetermined Draft Lottery Nirvana.

Think again.

Not so, this.

With this, you probably for the most part end up with something similar to what we're used to... it's rare that seeds 5-8 defeat seeds 1-4, after all, and that on its own sets half the draft slot field.

BUT... to the point, it's not as-if there is some predetermined stationary target... rather, it is a moving target.

You can set out at the beginning of the season knowing with certainty what the lottery nirvana gods have said are your odds having "achieved" the worst record. You cannot with any certainty target the W/L record of even the presumptive best team in the league, and whether that record might not actually have them finishing somewhere like 2nd or 3rd or 4th... so, it's a significantly more complicated thing to target from the git-go, and discourages even trying.

Even better, trying to look at it from the NBA as a business point of view, not that of a fan that has certain teams on her/his sheet-list...

Why wouldn't you want to drive more interest in your post-season?

As Yoda once said, and maybe Yogi Berra too...

A business the NBA is.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

That's a new one for sure! I actually think it's simpler. Your lottery odds should be tied to your last 3 season's records.

I could go for that.

In fact, I could go for that regardless. And have said so before, iirc.

But all the better, if you can do it while increasing reason for more casual NBA fans of non-playoff teams to take interest in the playoffs.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Appreciate the creativity but have zero interest in this and feel it would lead to some super arbitrary results.

Super arbitrary?

hehe

Your present system is the essence of super arbitrary, but it's so familiar that it's difficult sometimes for people to even think about it.

Am I wrong? Who, after all, is the arbiter of whether the worst team record in the league OUGHT TO have a 10 percent chance... a 20 percent chance... a 50 percent... 90 percent... who is that person or persons, and on what OBJECTIVE STANDARD do they base their rationale?

It's ALL subjective. It's ALL random. It's ALL arbitrary. HENCE THE REASON why there's this CONTINUAL tweaking of the odds to reach some predetermined Draft Lottery Nirvana.

Think again.

Not so, this.

With this, you probably for the most part end up with something similar to what we're used to... it's rare that seeds 5-8 defeat seeds 1-4, after all, and that on its own sets half the draft slot field.

BUT... to the point, it's not as-if there is some predetermined stationary target... rather, it is a moving target.

You can set out at the beginning of the season knowing with certainty what the lottery nirvana gods have said are your odds having "achieved" the worst record. You cannot with any certainty target the W/L record of even the presumptive best team in the league, and whether that record might not actually have them finishing somewhere like 2nd or 3rd or 4th... so, it's a significantly more complicated thing to target from the git-go, and discourages even trying.

Even better, trying to look at it from the NBA as a business point of view, not that of a fan that has certain teams on her/his sheet-list...

Why wouldn't you want to drive more interest in your post-season?

As Yoda once said, and maybe Yogi Berra too...

A business the NBA is.

Would rather see a tournament among the non-playoff teams if we are going with post-season play.

So, if that's what you'd rather, then what you'd rather is see the best of the non-playoff teams actually have a better chance at #1 than the worst of the non-playoff teams.

If that's the case, then I think we have a very fundamental difference of opinion. It's a widely accepted premise across all professional sports leagues that the worst teams are deserving of the most opportunity to improve.

And importantly, it's not just a matter of "deserving," but a matter of what's best for business... to the degree that you give fans hope, that's good for business, and to the degree your system cinches off hope, it's not so much.

[Atlanta Hawk Fan]

I think your system is more arbitrary because the current system is neutral math with a weighting based on record. That is a predictable system with a known and neutral random element.

Tying your team's lottery position to the playoff performance of another team introduces all kinds of factors that are unknown and unpredictable. Is another team going to suffer injuries during the playoffs or did they suffer them near the end of the season? Does a particular player get really hot and swing a series? Does a player get really cold or badly choke and swing a series? Does a ref make a bad call and swing a series?

For me it is one thing to just get unlucky in a lottery pull. It is another to have my pick fall because the Sacramento Kings get screw jobbed by the refs against the Lakers or to see your team no longer have any chance at a ring because your team lost both Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving to injuries in the playoffs.

So I think those are fundamentally different.

[Atlanta Hawk Fan]

That's a new one for sure! I actually think it's simpler. Your lottery odds should be tied to your last 3 season's records.

This is something I actually like a lot.

[Jamaaliver]

That's a new one for sure! I actually think it's simpler. Your lottery odds should be tied to your last 3 season's records.

This is something I actually like a lot.

Perhaps with a caveat that limits repeated cellar dwellers from gaining multiple top-3 selections.

Maybe something like, "No more than two top-3 selections in any three year period."

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I think your system is more arbitrary because the current system is neutral math with a weighting based on record. That is a predictable system with a known and neutral random element.

Let's talk.

The current system is "neutral," in the fact that it is a pre-set standard.

But that is part of its problem... it is pre-set... it is a stationary element with an increased certainty that a given competitor can on their own decide to rig their roster among other things to produce a desired outcome.

In that way, then, it is only helping promote the aspiration to target that best place on that pre-set standard from which to launch an attempt to manipulate the system and allow your team to catapult to the top.



Let's talk further... and get back to the critical... fundamental... aspect I didn't see you address...

Who is to say what the price of milk should be? Who is that authority? Who is that legitimate arbiter of what is the "right" price?

Who is to say what the right odds should be for the worst team in the league to have the #1 pick? Who is that authority? And on what basis can they assert that the "right" odds should be 5%, or 10%, or 25%, or 90%....?

There is none. It's all subjective. It's all random. It's matter of momentary popularity, momentary satisfaction among that momentary set of draft gods deciding what is "right."

Let the competing market forces, rather, frame that picture, instead of Basketball Big Brother.

Tying your team's lottery position to the playoff performance of another team introduces all kinds of factors that are unknown and unpredictable. Is another team going to suffer injuries during the playoffs or did they suffer them near the end of the season? Does a particular player get really hot and swing a series? Does a player get really cold or badly choke and swing a series? Does a ref make a bad call and swing a series?

Right. Exactly. Yes. Absolutely.

Read the FiveThirtyEight article if you ever have time.

They make a lot of sense. They have it right.

This just has it "righter," I honestly believe.

[Hazer]

Gross

[peoriabird]

Go back to the old system and unweight the lottery

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

That's a new one for sure! I actually think it's simpler. Your lottery odds should be tied to your last 3 season's records.

This is something I actually like a lot.

Perhaps with a caveat that limits repeated cellar dwellers from gaining multiple top-3 selections.

Maybe something like, "No more than two top-3 selections in any three year period.

Why no more than 2? Why top 3 not top 5?

I'm with AHF... I hate arbitrary. Get arbitrary out. And at the same time, eliminate the stationary target... make it so the deer is running across the field, not just sitting there grazing in it... make it so you have to swat the fly in-flight, not just right there on the table



This "adopted post-season twin" concept... which is what I'll call it for now but am open to ideas... makes draft jockeying positioning too hap-hazard, which is the entire reason we have this convoluted lottery system that we have now, ie, we wanted to make it all too hap-hazard...

Good motive... convoluted, arbitrary execution. By employing the lottery, it necessarily introduces all this subjectivity... arbitrary numbers from the NBA draft gods on-high, not unlike the government deciding what the price of milk ought to be.

Kill off the subjectivity. Replace it with a very straightforward, simple, objective mechanism.

And. One that offers this exceptional upside to stimulate non-playoff fans' interest and enthusiasm in the post-season.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Go back to the old system and unweight the lottery

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Gross

Okay. Need a little more.

Why?

I'm listening.

(But only to reason.)

[Jamaaliver]

This is something I actually like a lot.

Perhaps with a caveat that limits repeated cellar dwellers from gaining multiple top-3 selections.

Maybe something like, "No more than two top-3 selections in any three year period.

Why no more than 2? Why top 3 not top 5?

I'm with AHF... I hate arbitrary.

1) Damn, you use a lot of words.




2)'Perhaps' and 'Maybe' indicate it's a very fluid proposition.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

1) I think clarity is important. I think, not just making a statement, but supporting whatever it was with some reason, is hardly something to need to apologize for.

And you post a whole, whole lot.

Is that a reason to say, "You post too much."

What's the point of saying that. It's irrelevant. Not to mention, it's your business how often you want to post here, none of mine.



2) That's kinda the point that it is fluid... arbitrary... whatever numbers you decide to use, that's the case... did I mention I hate arbitrary?

[Jamaaliver]

Lots of words don't equal clarity.

Pretentiousness, yes.

Clarity...less, so.

The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do.

Spoiler:

Note: I can be brief and pretentious.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

You post a lot. A lot.

That doesn't make you [insert insult here].

It's not inherently pretentious to explain oneself. That's nonsense. And probably deflection.

General statement: When people start into the insult contest thing, it's an indication they have no substance to offer a conversation. And as a result, they just have to find some way of expressing their own superiority and/or the other person's inferiority.