View Full Version : NBA: Proposal to Eliminate the Draft
ace3g
12-23-2013, 10:32 AM
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/86940/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel
The Proposal
Grantland obtained a copy of the proposal, which would eliminate the draft lottery entirely and replace it with a system in which each of the 30 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once — and exactly once — every 30 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 30 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 30 years out from the start of every 30-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear; there would never be a Harrison Barnes–Golden State situation again, and it wouldn’t require a law degree to track ownership of every traded pick leaguewide.
The system is simpler to understand in pictorial form. Below is the wheel that outlines the order in which each team would cycle through the draft slots; the graphic highlights the top six slots in red to show that every team would be guaranteed one top-six pick every five seasons, and at least one top-12 pick in every four-year span:
http://i.minus.com/iQ6x8xPmn1LGu.png
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/86940/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel
AchillesHeel
12-23-2013, 10:43 AM
Not bad, but what about trading picks?
DPG21920
12-23-2013, 11:01 AM
.
spurraider21
12-23-2013, 12:29 PM
damn this is an impressive idea. i'm all for it after first glance
Not bad, but what about trading picks?
not sure what's unclear about it, tbh
AchillesHeel
12-23-2013, 12:32 PM
damn this is an impressive idea. i'm all for it after first glance
not sure what's unclear about it, tbh
Oh, missed that part at first glance, my bad bruh
Interesting, just hope the Spurs don't get stuck picking in the late 20s once they go into full suck mode in a few years. Then again, the Spurs would likely put together a decent enough team post Duncan to be in That dreaded 7-10 seed range which would be frustrating to some fans hoping for the team to rebuild through the draft as soon as possible. This would protect team like the Jazz (with he exception of this year), Suns (this year), and Spurs (in the future) against themselves.
I can can see the perpetual shit teams complaining already. Frankly, The shit teams that perpetually can't get their act together like the Cavs, Bobcats, and Wiz will only have their front offices to blame, and the hope is that ownership shows those people out the door ASAP.
If they did this the talent level would be even more lopsided than it already is. Bad teams need the lotto picks tbh
Juggity
12-23-2013, 02:11 PM
What's to stop top college players from waiting an extra year to go pro in order to avoid bad teams with #1 picks and be drafted by good teams with #1 picks?
DeadlyDynasty
12-23-2013, 02:25 PM
Sure, after this last one coming up tho
bluebellmaniac
12-23-2013, 02:42 PM
What's to stop top college players from waiting an extra year to go pro in order to avoid bad teams with #1 picks and be drafted by good teams with #1 picks?
If you are good enough to go #1 overall and you play an extra year in college just to avoid a certain team from drafting you, then you deserve the blown knee you are sure to get by waiting. If you can go #1, you enter the draft. After the first person who waits blows his knee, no one will wait after that.
If you are good enough to go #1 overall and you play an extra year in college just to avoid a certain team from drafting you, then you deserve the blown knee you are sure to get by waiting. If you can go #1, you enter the draft. After the first person who waits blows his knee, no one will wait after that.
But if Portland is taking with 1pick, regardless they suck or not, and you waited a year or not, you`ll blown your knee.
If you are good enough to go #1 overall and you play an extra year in college just to avoid a certain team from drafting you, then you deserve the blown knee you are sure to get by waiting. If you can go #1, you enter the draft. After the first person who waits blows his knee, no one will wait after that.
I don't see that as a bad thing. The NCAA would probably love this proposal. The player can choose (like he can now) and assume the risks associated. My bet is that top college players will take the money now more times than they will pass on it to join a contender in future years (and get less minutes from the start).
I'm all for changing the draft process but it's not easy.
What's to stop top college players from waiting an extra year to go pro in order to avoid bad teams with #1 picks and be drafted by good teams with #1 picks?
This is the big problem. Also, you'll still need luck to land a high pick in a draft with good prospects.
BTW, this proposal isn't to eliminate the draft. It's to eliminate the lottery which causes tanking.
spurraider21
12-23-2013, 03:59 PM
I'm all for changing the draft process but it's not easy.
This is the big problem. Also, you'll still need luck to land a high pick in a draft with good prospects.
BTW, this proposal isn't to eliminate the draft. It's to eliminate the lottery which causes tanking.
i'm not sure how many players will turn away millions of guaranteed dollars when there is a chance of hurting yourself or your draft stock
baseline bum
12-23-2013, 04:43 PM
What's to stop top college players from waiting an extra year to go pro in order to avoid bad teams with #1 picks and be drafted by good teams with #1 picks?
About $5.3 million.
eric365
12-23-2013, 05:41 PM
About $5.3 million.
And superstar don't stay with the team that drafted them anymore.
So I think most of them will go to the bad team, get their millions, their 20/10 years as rookie / sophomore they could never have with a contender and only then go to the Lakers in year 4 of their career
I think this system results in league contraction. Shitty teams who are shitty for management reasons, or they are just in a low interest market, would eventually have to close shop. Right now they get a solid pick, milk him for attendance and then bitch as he leaves for a better team when he's able. Then the team drafts another 1st and start over. All the while they provide shitty teammates for this guy and the worst coaching money can buy.
So sure. I don't have a problem with it.
TampaDude
12-23-2013, 06:36 PM
I think this system results in league contraction. Shitty teams who are shitty for management reasons, or they are just in a low interest market, would eventually have to close shop. Right now they get a solid pick, milk him for attendance and then bitch as he leaves for a better team when he's able. Then the team drafts another 1st and start over. All the while they provide shitty teammates for this guy and the worst coaching money can buy.
So sure. I don't have a problem with it.
Cleveland? :lol
Chinook
12-23-2013, 09:17 PM
It's not a bad suggestion, but they need to offset it with something that helps bad teams. Like, maybe giving "lottery" teams an extra MLE or an extra round of picks.
monosylab1k
12-23-2013, 09:24 PM
This will kill small market bad teams. How exactly is a team like Milwaukee going to gain any attendance if they suck horribly, then their fans know for a certainty they're picking 26th and 22nd the next two years? The high pick every four years sounds good but some teams won't make it four years with bad attendance that becomes even worse when fans know they're absolutely guaranteed to suck at least 2 more years with zero hope.
DUNCANownsKOBE
12-23-2013, 09:28 PM
lol what a stupid idea
monosylab1k
12-23-2013, 09:31 PM
lol i was thinking this sounds like some retarded "i am trying way too hard to sound smarter than i am" type of Grantland article written by Zach lowe or Bill Barnwell. Lo and behold, it's a lowe article.
DUNCANownsKOBE
12-23-2013, 09:32 PM
It's not a bad suggestion, but they need to offset it with something that helps bad teams. Like, maybe giving "lottery" teams an extra MLE or an extra round of picks.
Giving bad teams an extra round of picks after the top 30 players are gone doesn't work in the NBA when there's little to no difference making talent left after the 1st round (for that matter almost all the difference making talent is gone after the first 10 picks).
People will reply with :crybut Gilbert Arenas:cry or :crybut Manu Ginobili:cry as if a slightly better chance at getting the once in a blue moon all star talent in the 2nd round will do enough to keep a shitty small market team competitive ignoring how retarded that argument is.
ElNono
12-23-2013, 09:42 PM
If you connect the red numbers, you get the devil's symbol, so it's entirely plausible this is Stern's idea...
jbspurs
12-23-2013, 10:00 PM
My idea to help balance Nba teams. 1st ten worst finishers will get to draft 2 players within 1st 20 picks. The worst - 10th place will draft the 1st 10 and will go reverse order starting on the 11th pick. Basically, 10th finisher will get to draft 10 pick and 11th pick. After that it can run the existing way.
Chinook
12-23-2013, 10:32 PM
Giving bad teams an extra round of picks after the top 30 players are gone doesn't work in the NBA when there's little to no difference making talent left after the 1st round (for that matter almost all the difference making talent is gone after the first 10 picks).
People will reply with :crybut Gilbert Arenas:cry or :crybut Manu Ginobili:cry as if a slightly better chance at getting the once in a blue moon all star talent in the 2nd round will do enough to keep a shitty small market team competitive ignoring how retarded that argument is.
Yeah, probably. But I guess I believe there still needs to be some way to cycle talent to bad teams. Like the playoff teams need to give up a draft pick to sign RFAs but the lottery teams don't. Or maybe playoff teams have to lose a free agent to sign one.
bluebellmaniac
12-24-2013, 12:03 AM
The new CBA is what will prevent all the top stars from moving to the big markets. Lakers are a prime example of how the new CBA will bring talent parity to the league. LAL will have at most 2 superstars. (Forget for the moment that superstar no longer refers to Kirby) So with KB getting $23M next year and if Melo comes over for another $20M, then there isn't much left for the existing players. Many of them will have to leave because LAL will have to renounce their rights in order to get Melo. This will leave the team with 2 "stars", a resigned player or two for about $3M - $5M each and the rest will be scrubs. Good luck putting a title contender with that.
Teams that succeed will have a balanced payroll.
A new draft system will help kill tanking. Tanking could be the current biggest danger to the league right now. It endangers the integrity of the game and if the integrity is compromised, it becomes a dead sport to a lot of people. The league needs to eliminate tanking and eliminate any "incentives" to not being competitive.
I like the idea because the good it does far outweighs any negatives it does for losing teams. The last time we had a decent pick was a looooong time ago. We built this team with scouting and development. That should be the goal of the other teams as well. It should not be the goal to get a winning team by buying the perfect team with an unlimited wallet and not by being in the lottery for years on end.
Rogue
12-24-2013, 12:47 AM
The league just give the goddamn pick to whoever they wanna give it to, they just fool you people into thinking it was a legit lottery when the "lottery" is just as much rigged as the game itself is. It's kinda like the "lottery" in The Island, where the winner gets to move to "The Island", while every human being that's not a fucking moronic clone knows it's a total fake scam tbh.
Holden_Caulfield
12-24-2013, 12:56 AM
The league just give the goddamn pick to whoever they wanna give it to, they just fool you people into thinking it was a legit lottery when the "lottery" is just as much rigged as the game itself is. It's kinda like the "lottery" in The Island, where the winner gets to move to "The Island", while every human being that's not a fucking moronic clone knows it's a total fake scam tbh.
lol you actually watched that movie :lmao
It's not a bad suggestion, but they need to offset it with something that helps bad teams. Like, maybe giving "lottery" teams an extra MLE or an extra round of picks.
That defeats the purpose. Don't reward "lottery" teams. Otherwise you're just diluting the advantage of tanking.
This will kill small market bad teams. How exactly is a team like Milwaukee going to gain any attendance if they suck horribly, then their fans know for a certainty they're picking 26th and 22nd the next two years? The high pick every four years sounds good but some teams won't make it four years with bad attendance that becomes even worse when fans know they're absolutely guaranteed to suck at least 2 more years with zero hope.
The league could use a bit of that. I wouldn't mind seeing Milwaukee or Minnesota go tits up tbh. Same for Charlotte and Washington (and Cleveland). They've historically fielded shitty teams. I know Washington did ok when they had Arenas, but even that was one of the worst contracts in the history of contracts. Businesses that make bad decisions should close, not be rewarded with the latest, greatest discovery so they can become profitable again. I get it that they need each other else there's no competition, but the league needs to contract and players like Ayres and Blair need to be carrying out my fucking groceries at HEB.
The new CBA is what will prevent all the top stars from moving to the big markets. Lakers are a prime example of how the new CBA will bring talent parity to the league. LAL will have at most 2 superstars. (Forget for the moment that superstar no longer refers to Kirby) So with KB getting $23M next year and if Melo comes over for another $20M, then there isn't much left for the existing players. Many of them will have to leave because LAL will have to renounce their rights in order to get Melo. This will leave the team with 2 "stars", a resigned player or two for about $3M - $5M each and the rest will be scrubs. Good luck putting a title contender with that.
Teams that succeed will have a balanced payroll.
A new draft system will help kill tanking. Tanking could be the current biggest danger to the league right now. It endangers the integrity of the game and if the integrity is compromised, it becomes a dead sport to a lot of people. The league needs to eliminate tanking and eliminate any "incentives" to not being competitive.
I like the idea because the good it does far outweighs any negatives it does for losing teams. The last time we had a decent pick was a looooong time ago. We built this team with scouting and development. That should be the goal of the other teams as well. It should not be the goal to get a winning team by buying the perfect team with an unlimited wallet and not by being in the lottery for years on end.
You mean like how Miami has all those scrubs outside of Wade and James. You know, Allen, Bosh, Battier... those scrubs?
Let's cut the shit and be honest: The Spurs have success because they had 2 of the greatest 1st overall picks ever. That doesn't explain longevity, but the Bulls won 6 in less years than the Spurs have taken to win 4. That's because the talent was diluted after David retired. We won 2 more, but it took some goings on and fortunate events to get there.
Without the 1st overall pick of Tim Duncan due to a shitty season record, the Spurs are 0 and forever I am sure.
Rogue
12-24-2013, 01:27 AM
lol you actually watched that movie :lmao
I've watched every single film our goddess has acted in tbh (movies she played significant roles in, to be more accurate), even including the earliest ones like Manny & Lo and The horse Whisperer, each of which took me like a week something to download. Maybe Perfect Score is the only exception, because it'd piss me off to see an Asian dick hovering around with our goddess tbh.
Chinook
12-24-2013, 01:33 AM
That defeats the purpose. Don't reward "lottery" teams. Otherwise you're just diluting the advantage of tanking.
The intent behind giving the worst teams the first shots at good players is a good one. But in practice it is too big of an incentive to tank. So of you decrease the amount of aid given to bad teams, the incentive to tank decreases as well. It's one thing to tank for a high draft pick in a loaded class. It's another to tank for a third-round selection or an extra MLE. No one is going to purposefully suck for that. Also, it would completely remove the incentive to really tank, since there would be no advantage to being last place over being 14th place.
bluebellmaniac
12-24-2013, 01:45 AM
You mean like how Miami has all those scrubs outside of Wade and James. You know, Allen, Bosh, Battier... those scrubs?
Let's cut the shit and be honest: The Spurs have success because they had 2 of the greatest 1st overall picks ever. That doesn't explain longevity, but the Bulls won 6 in less years than the Spurs have taken to win 4. That's because the talent was diluted after David retired. We won 2 more, but it took some goings on and fortunate events to get there.
Without the 1st overall pick of Tim Duncan due to a shitty season record, the Spurs are 0 and forever I am sure.
We also haven't had a decent pick since we nabbed TD. Image how good we'd be if we had the occassional top 12 pick or better.
And Bosh was part of the original big 3 that Miami was able to pull together under the old CBA. They also kept decent $ contracts that have been useful to attracting additional talent for cheap. Miami will eventually have to compete on the same terms, but that will come in time.
JMarkJohns
12-24-2013, 01:46 AM
Only benefit here is it means no additional expansion teams for 30, tbh...
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 01:53 AM
As far as I can tell, nfl teams don't tank. Falcs played hard against those faggot niners today, surely losing was better for their draft prospects
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 01:54 AM
We also haven't had a decent pick since we nabbed TD. Image how good we'd be if we had the occassional top 12 pick or better.
And Bosh was part of the original big 3 that Miami was able to pull together under the old CBA. They also kept decent $ contracts that have been useful to attracting additional talent for cheap. Miami will eventually have to compete on the same terms, but that will come in time.
:lol spurfan who probably nutted over splitter
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 01:56 AM
If you connect the red numbers, you get the devil's symbol, so it's entirely plausible this is Stern's idea...
You mean the Star of David?
:lol jews
We also haven't had a decent pick since we nabbed TD. Image how good we'd be if we had the occassional top 12 pick or better.
And Bosh was part of the original big 3 that Miami was able to pull together under the old CBA. They also kept decent $ contracts that have been useful to attracting additional talent for cheap. Miami will eventually have to compete on the same terms, but that will come in time.
Without TD, Manu doesn't come to SA.
Tim is the cornerstone, undeniably so, for the Spurs franchise since his arrival. If you wanted to change the Spurs to a zero ring team, just miss drafting Tim. You cannot just remove Tim from the equation and leave all those guys who came to play with Tim. Superstars, especially juggernauts like Tim, Shaq and Lebron, people want to play with them. We've gotten some good foreign talent because of it. If Tim was drafted by LA instead of SA, they'd probably be 8 rings richer from all the people wanting to go there.
The intent behind giving the worst teams the first shots at good players is a good one. But in practice it is too big of an incentive to tank. So of you decrease the amount of aid given to bad teams, the incentive to tank decreases as well. It's one thing to tank for a high draft pick in a loaded class. It's another to tank for a third-round selection or an extra MLE. No one is going to purposefully suck for that. Also, it would completely remove the incentive to really tank, since there would be no advantage to being last place over being 14th place.
And then what's the advantage to being 14th instead of dead last?
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 02:03 AM
Without TD, Manu doesn't come to SA.
Tim is the cornerstone, undeniably so, for the Spurs franchise since his arrival. If you wanted to change the Spurs to a zero ring team, just miss drafting Tim. You cannot just remove Tim from the equation and leave all those guys who came to play with Tim. Superstars, especially juggernauts like Tim, Shaq and Lebron, people want to play with them. We've gotten some good foreign talent because of it. If Tim was drafted by LA instead of SA, they'd probably be 8 rings richer from all the people wanting to go there.
Yeah. NBA players love a pussy cucked teammate
Bill_Brasky
12-24-2013, 02:15 AM
Would definitely force teams to be smarter FO wise in order to be competitive. The problem is, is there enough talent to go around for this to work? I'm not so sure.
Chinook
12-24-2013, 02:23 AM
And then what's the advantage to being 14th instead of dead last?
You're a better team? You don't have to trade away your talent to suck badly enough to get the benefit. It's not like front offices like having terrible rosters. That leads to coaching turnover and general discontent. Right now, teams only tank because there's an incentive to be truly terrible. In this scenario, it wouldn't really be an incentive to miss the playoffs, but rather a way to mildly help struggling teams. It's like compensatory picks in the NFL. No football team purposefully avoids re-signing star free agents just to get some mid-to-late round draft choice.
bluebellmaniac
12-24-2013, 02:25 AM
Without TD, Manu doesn't come to SA.
Tim is the cornerstone, undeniably so, for the Spurs franchise since his arrival. If you wanted to change the Spurs to a zero ring team, just miss drafting Tim. You cannot just remove Tim from the equation and leave all those guys who came to play with Tim. Superstars, especially juggernauts like Tim, Shaq and Lebron, people want to play with them. We've gotten some good foreign talent because of it. If Tim was drafted by LA instead of SA, they'd probably be 8 rings richer from all the people wanting to go there.
Maybe we would have had the #1 the year TD entered the draft, who knows? What we do know is that in this "circle" draft proposal, we'd have had a lot better drafting position for the past 10+ years. As for Manu, I'm sure that since we owned Manu's draft rights, he would have come anyways. We'd have additional talent for him to play with in any case.
Would LAL be 8 rings richer? They'd have at least 3 more if Shaq had stayed, but Kirby was so caustic, no one wanted to play with him. Why haven't they loaded up on talent like Miami? Everyone hates Kirby. He kills careers!
Under the "circle" draft proposal, I think we go from a "mediocre" team in a few years to potentially staying a top tier team for as long as Pop stays.
TheyCallMePro
12-24-2013, 04:17 PM
Still like my idea better. Keep the regular season exciting throughout by guaranteeing that the last 4 teams in the standings get the last 4 picks in the draft. That way there will be a bloodbath for even the non-playoff teams to win games throughout the regular season. It will eliminate tanking and create drama at both the top and bottom of the standings. The only difference will be that the lottery will start with teams in the standings ranked 5-18 instead of 1-14. Problem solved.
Bill_Brasky
12-24-2013, 04:46 PM
Also its pretty fucking lame watching teams like Utah and Cleveland fuck up lottery picks year after year.
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 04:51 PM
Also its pretty fucking lame watching teams like Utah and Cleveland fuck up lottery picks year after year.
errr, jazz were conference semis a few years ago
The problem with any system is that it doesn't take into account the human tendency to find loopholes and exploit that system. The draft lottery, as constructed, is fine except that it doesn't take into account tanking to get that pick. It says a lot about the overall talent in the league when a college or HS player will cause a team to lose it's season just for a chance to acquire him. That means there's too many shitty players on too many teams. If the league contracted, we could get good players throughout the roster, and those guys coming out of college or HS would have a hard row to hoe getting into the league. Right now a HS kid gets more buzz than a 5 year vet.
ElNono
12-24-2013, 05:29 PM
You mean the Star of David?
:lol jews
Not into religious stuff, but isn't the devils pentagram like that too?
rayjayjohnson
12-24-2013, 05:45 PM
Not into religious stuff, but isn't the devils pentagram like that too?
Not quite, pentagram is five points, like a goat head, Star of David is six.
jews are evil tho
ElNono
12-24-2013, 05:47 PM
Not quite, pentagram is five points, like a goat head, Star of David is six.
jews are evil tho
ray
DUNCANownsKOBE
12-24-2013, 05:47 PM
The new CBA is what will prevent all the top stars from moving to the big markets. Lakers are a prime example of how the new CBA will bring talent parity to the league. LAL will have at most 2 superstars. (Forget for the moment that superstar no longer refers to Kirby) So with KB getting $23M next year and if Melo comes over for another $20M, then there isn't much left for the existing players. Many of them will have to leave because LAL will have to renounce their rights in order to get Melo. This will leave the team with 2 "stars", a resigned player or two for about $3M - $5M each and the rest will be scrubs. Good luck putting a title contender with that.
Teams that succeed will have a balanced payroll.
A new draft system will help kill tanking. Tanking could be the current biggest danger to the league right now. It endangers the integrity of the game and if the integrity is compromised, it becomes a dead sport to a lot of people. The league needs to eliminate tanking and eliminate any "incentives" to not being competitive.
I like the idea because the good it does far outweighs any negatives it does for losing teams. The last time we had a decent pick was a looooong time ago. We built this team with scouting and development. That should be the goal of the other teams as well. It should not be the goal to get a winning team by buying the perfect team with an unlimited wallet and not by being in the lottery for years on end.
:lmao "built this team with scouting and development". The Spurs are still built around a former first overall pick the Spurs got by sucking.
HarlemHeat37
12-24-2013, 06:00 PM
:lol even last year, when the Spurs should have won the title, it was because Duncan was their best player in the playoffs and had a resurgence, tbh..
I don't have a problem with tanking or the draft, I don't know why fans and media are so obsessed with this topic, tbh..the current system is fine, there will always be teams tanking, and they should be allowed to choose whatever strategy they want to follow..
Tanking doesn't guarantee a top pick, and having a top pick doesn't guarantee a great player..if teams want to risk their season by tanking, that's cool with me..
The NBA usually has 2-3 contenders per year, a few dark horses, a bunch of playoff fodder followed by the shitty teams..it's never going to change, tbh..this league is built around stars + there's the perpetual recycling of shitty ex-player coaches kills teams..
DUNCANownsKOBE
12-24-2013, 06:00 PM
The league could use a bit of that. I wouldn't mind seeing Milwaukee or Minnesota go tits up tbh. Same for Charlotte and Washington (and Cleveland). They've historically fielded shitty teams. I know Washington did ok when they had Arenas, but even that was one of the worst contracts in the history of contracts. Businesses that make bad decisions should close, not be rewarded with the latest, greatest discovery so they can become profitable again. I get it that they need each other else there's no competition, but the league needs to contract and players like Ayres and Blair need to be carrying out my fucking groceries at HEB.
I agree completely that we need contraction, but I doubt this would do it. The league won't contract as long as smaller, shitty cities like Milwaukee and Minneapolis are willing to subsidize the shit out of NBA teams by either pouring money into an arena the team owns, or in the event the city owns the arena, giving away a sweetheart lease deal where the city still loses money as the landlord.
Just look at what happens every time New Orleans is about to lose a pro team. Tom Benson bends the city over a table and gets shit like the $6M "retention fee" the city gives him for keeping the Saints in New Orleans every year. It's a joke to pretend pro-sports teams are totally independent private enterprises.
What's to stop top college players from waiting an extra year to go pro in order to avoid bad teams with #1 picks and be drafted by good teams with #1 picks?
Good point. Or, teams can actually scout a young player at an early age and take care of him until he is ready to be drafted 15-20 years down the road.
Chinook
07-31-2014, 01:07 PM
Another update.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11284856/philadelphia-76ers-fighting-nba-push-change-lottery-system
The NBA is pushing toward changes to the draft lottery system by next season but is facing a strong objection from the Philadelphia 76ers, the franchise that could suffer the most from it, multiple sources told ESPN.com.
Lottery-reform measures were introduced earlier this month at league meetings in Las Vegas, and the NBA Board of Governors could vote changes into place at its preseason meeting in October. Although there are several facets and the proposals haven't been finalized, the goal of commissioner Adam Silver is to balance out the lottery odds so the worst team or teams wouldn't have the highest chances of landing the top pick, sources said.
Currently, the team with the worst record has a 25 percent chance of landing the top pick and the team with the fifth-worst record has an 8.8 percent chance of winning it. In a new format, the bottom five or six teams could have an equal chance.
Grantland's Zach Lowe reported earlier this month on the NBA's proposed changes, which are 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.
Although the NBA likely would not frame the changes this way, they could be seen as an anti-tanking measure, as teams with the worst records might not earn significantly higher lottery odds.
Interesting. I don't feel sorry for the Sixers at all.
lefty
07-31-2014, 01:22 PM
Another update.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11284856/philadelphia-76ers-fighting-nba-push-change-lottery-system
Interesting. I don't feel sorry for the Sixers at all.
I agree
But I really felt sorry for the Spurs at the end of the 96-97 season
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.