The NBA submitted an official proposal to reform the lottery this week at competition committee meetings in Las Vegas, pushing aside the Wheel idea in favor of a revised weighting system that shifts each team’s odds of getting the top pick, per several sources who have seen and reviewed the league’s proposal. The proposal, which dominated the lottery-reform discussion in league meetings this week, is essentially an attempt to squeeze the lottery odds at either extreme toward a more balanced system in which all 14 teams have a relatively similar chance at the no. 1 pick, per sources familiar with the proposal. Under the current system, the team with the worst record has a 25 percent chance of snagging the no. 1 pick, perhaps the most valuable asset in the entire NBA. The team with the second-worst record has a 19.9 percent chance of winning the no. 1 pick, and the third-worst team enters the lottery with a 15.6 percent chance of moving up to the top slot. The odds decline from there, with the final five teams in the lottery — the teams with the five best records — each having a 1.1 percent or worse chance of moving up to no. 1. 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. Read the rest of the article here - http://grantland.com/the-triangle/nba-lottery-reform-is-coming/
I like it, except I would have all 14 spots be assigned via ping pong balls, so although the best record team in the lottery would only have a few percent chance of moving up into the top three, they would have a pretty good shot of moving up into the 11th spot, or something similar.
Hopefully this can discourage tanking, which artificially inflates regular season win/loss for those teams that aren't tanking
I don't see it discouraging tanking, and personally don't see a reason why you have to. If a team is rebuilding, they're rebuilding. Having slightly less odds of a great pick isn't going to make a team like philly this year all of a sudden try to compete and sign marginal guys to help with wins
Jesus, with him being on the Lakers, that's a real fear. Oh well... less opportunity for Lillard to get injured.
If the difference between finishing last goes from 25% chance at the #1 down to 11% chance, and coming in with the second worst record means you still have almost the same odds of getting that #1 (only 1% point drop) then there is much less incentive to tank, so the fans who paid for tickets actually get to see their team try to win.
The playing field drops so a 6th worst team has a pretty good shot at #1. Also, the later teams still have a pretty decent shot too.
That's the thing, players still try to win, the GM tanks the season. Does it make a difference if they tank forlast or whatever?
Honor of the team to have the GM, Coach and the players all try and give the fans a win or at least a competitive game.
Tanking hasn't really worked out that great though. The Cavs have won the lottery twice in three years and they didn't have the worst record.
I hate any system that rewards losing. One lottery, 30 balls, all teams have a 1/30 chance at getting the top pick. I'm so sick of watching shitty organizations squander lottery picks year after year, after year, after year... How many high lottery picks has Minnesota had over the last 10 years? And they still can't fucking make the playoffs, or even win more games than they lose. The Clippers used to be the same way. They were practically a farm system for the rest of the league. Every year they were in the lottery and it was always a crap shoot. If they did luck out and get it right and actually draft a player with talent, that player would leave as soon as they could to go play for a real team. Stop rewarding losing and stop rewarding ineptitude. So what if the best team gets the first pick once every 30 years (on average)? I'd rather see competence rewarded than teams like Minnesota fuck up yet another high lottery pick. It was fun for a while, but now that Kahn's gone, it's just gotten old. BNM
I don't know... if we change the current system, how do small market teams ever get superstar players? Sure, they fuck up from time to time, and I think it's weak that a team like the Cavs can have so many #1 picks, but right now it seems like the only way that some of these teams even get a star player for 4-8 years.
Honor? Meh. A GM is foolish if he"tries to win" with a crap roster. Fans can vote with their dollar of they don't like it.
I'd like to see zero incentive to lose. The wheel is a good idea. Don't like every team having one ball its too random.
Their odds would be exactly the same as a big market team. Or do you assume small market == incompetent, big market == competent? The Clippers are a big market team, but for decades had the most incompetent front office in all of professional sports. The Spurs, conversely, are a small market team, but have an incredibly competent front office. BNM
The wheel would make future pick trades interesting, but I imagine would cut down on them considerably
