Revised Lottery Framework (5 Viewers)

[RR7]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/48619907/sources-nba-eyes-new-anti-tanking-proposal-draft-lottery

The "3-2-1 lottery" proposal, named to represent the number of lottery balls per team, would expand the lottery from 14 to 16 teams. Teams that do not qualify for the playoffs or play-in tournament but stay out of the relegation zone (spots four through 10) would receive three lottery balls each. Teams with a bottom-three record -- the relegation area -- would have just two lottery balls but have a floor of the 12th pick while the rest of the 13 lottery teams could fall as far as the 16th pick.

The 9th and 10th play-in seeds in each conference receive two lottery balls each while the losers of the 7-8 play-in games receive one lottery ball each.

In addition, no team would be able to win the top pick in consecutive years or be able to win three consecutive top-five picks. Teams also would not be able to protect picks in the 12 to 15 slots going forward.

The league would also have expanded disciplinary authority to regulate tanking and have the option to reduce teams' lottery odds and/or modify teams' draft positions under the proposal.

 

[JfizzleBlazer]

 

[Samuel]

lots of unintended consequences in here.

don't see this boosting the late-season TV product, or helping with load management and injury issues related to scheduling.

(we're gonna get regular season national tv games with the thunder holding their starters out against the spurs again)

how will free agency be boosted as a path to team building?

trades?

the draft is how teams get rare, cost-controlled talent. the higher the pick, historically, the better.

 

[blazerfan11]

The situation is: Do we want the draft to help teams with the worst records? (like all professional leagues in the USA I believe).
If the answer is YES, there really is no way to dis-incentivize losing.
If being BAD is not rewarded, the whole purpose of the draft is destroyed.

You can't have it both ways.

It has been said that the current lottery system actually incentivizes MORE tanking because teams try to improve their odds in the lottery by dropping a few spots in the standings. Like the Trail Blazers have done in past seasons.

If we want to help the worst teams, maybe the answer is to have the lottery only for the 4 or 5 worst team in the NBA, then have another lottery for teams 5-14 to determine the 5th through 14 spots.

Then either you are really bad/ tank like crazy, or there is no benefit at all to dropping a few spots in the standings.

This solution would quiet the We Must Intentionally Tank crowd, because it would mean ruining the whole season, or gaining nothing at all by being 5th from the bottom. That would be a tough sell.

 

[julius]

So what do they do about the situation in Portland where potentially the Bucks picks lose value now

 

[RR7]

So what do they do about the situation in Portland where potentially the Bucks picks lose value now

What's there to do? We still have the right to swap picks with them. There's always the risk with a swap that it wont convey. Whether that's through unluck in the lottery or just overall play.

It does alter the chances, I suppose, of conveyance for some picks out there that are lottery protected, because now there's a slightly larger lottery window.

 

[BigGameDamian]

 

[blazerfan11]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/48619907/sources-nba-eyes-new-anti-tanking-proposal-draft-lottery

That's really complicated. I'd like to see that Tankathon odds for that (or just the odds someone puts together.)

 

[wizenheimer]

stupid is as stupid does

 

[blazerkor]

So is this proposal that seems likely to be adopted for the next two draft after this one, is it saything that it will determine picks 1-16 all via lottery?

 

[wizenheimer]

in other words, teams will still tank but tank for 4-10

 

[Quatro44]

 

[blazerkor]

It's a convoluted way to determine the draft and it could see some franchises being left out of the playoffs for decades at a time just based on luck.

 

[Samuel]

That's really complicated. I'd like to see that Tankathon odds for that (or just the odds someone puts together.)

no, it's less lottery balls now! much simpler! /s

in a sport where you're already (spurs) rewarded for (spurs) being lucky (spurs), now it's 'really' going to feel like that.

 

[RR7]

That's really complicated. I'd like to see that Tankathon odds for that (or just the odds someone puts together.)

The way I read it,
teams 1-3(reverse standings) get 2 balls each = 6
4-10 get 3 balls each = 21
11-14 get 2 = 8
15 and 16 get 1 = 2

A total of 37 ping pong balls for the top pick.

So for reverse standing odds just for the top pick

1 - 5.4%
2 - 5.4%
3 - 5.4%
4 - 8.1%
5 - 8.1%
6 - 8.1%
7 - 8.1%
8 - 8.1%
9 - 8.1%
10 - 8.1%
11 - 5.4%
12 - 5.4%
13 - 5.4%
14 - 5.4%
15 - 2.7%
16 - 2.7%

 

[julius]

What's there to do? We still have the right to swap picks with them. There's always the risk with a swap that it wont convey. Whether that's through unluck in the lottery or just overall play.

It does alter the chances, I suppose, of conveyance for some picks out there that are lottery protected, because now there's a slightly larger lottery window.

it evens out their chances, I think.

 

[AldoTrapani]

Our bucks picks are completely useless now

 

[blazerkor]

Our bucks picks are completely useless now

They're still unrestricted FRPs... so definitely not useless and I'm pretty sure they aren't even degraded by much value to be honest.

Did you expect them to be the first pick?

I'm pretty sure the pick that's the best out of ours, the Bucks and the Celtics in 2029 would still carry the same value... the worst of those three as well. Having the best of our pick, the Magics pick and the Bucks pick in 2028 still has a shit ton of value. We still get the better of our pick and the Bucks pick in 2030 as well.

I don't really know how this degrades the value of any of those picks. They weren't even guaranteed to be lotto picks.