What's new
By:

Butterfly effect

S

silesian

Well-Known Member
2022 Prediction Contest Winner
On March 25 and 26 Cleveland won two games by a total of three points.
-----------------
Imagine that Cleveland misses one 3-point shot in each of these 2 games and lost both.
----------------
Result: Pelicans rise to 9 seed, get the first pick (versus no pick currently), the Sixers lose their tenth pick, and the Cavaliers drop for first to tenth pick. Just crazy.
-----------------

Do we really want the future of the NBA determined by such randomness?

Discuss.....
 
silesian said:
On March 25 and 26 Cleveland won two games by a total of three points.
-----------------
Imagine that Cleveland misses one 3-point shot in each of these 2 games and lost both.
----------------
Result: Pelicans rise to 9 seed, get the first pick (versus no pick currently), the Sixers lose their tenth pick, and the Cavaliers drop for first to tenth pick. Just crazy.
-----------------

Do we really want the future of the NBA determined by such randomness?

Discuss.....
Click to expand...

Imagine if San Antonio hadn't tanked in order to draft Tim Duncan or if the Jazz had drafted Tony Parker instead of Raul Lopez. It's easy to play the what if game.
 
Imagine if Trey hadn't hit his game-winning shot against Orlando, or Detroit hadn't won consecutive close games in April, or New Orleans had not rallied from a 13-pt deficit to defeat Cleveland by 4 pts back in November. Yes, any number of random games can be looked at as the "key" points in a team's record or where they landed in the standings.

So what is your suggestion for the draft? The bizarre wheel proposal? What if it's SA's or Miami's turn to pick #1 in the year the draft is this strong? Then the rich get richer and no one else has a chance in the next several years of winning a championship. Meanwhile, seeing that the Jazz have the 1st pick in 2014, Wiggins, Parker and Embiid decide to remain in school because the Lakers get the #1 pick in 2015.

I like the idea of the lottery. The only "tweak" I might suggest is that no team can win a top-3 pick in consecutive years.
 
the point

homeytennis said:
Imagine if San Antonio hadn't tanked in order to draft Tim Duncan or if the Jazz had drafted Tony Parker instead of Raul Lopez. It's easy to play the what if game.
Click to expand...

You may be slightly missing the point. You are talking about how team choices change the NBA (who to draft, whether to tank). Life is obviously full of these types of banal choices that lead to predictably different situations (where would you be if you chose a different college? Quit your job, dump your girl, etc.) Each choice takes you on very different paths.


Butterfly effect has more to do with randomness. In this example (which is pretty interesting but certainly not uniquely improbable), out of ~200,000 field goal attempts in a season two shots create a completely different NBA (could have been one shot and a coin flip for tiebreaker). Could have been a drop of perspiration in the eye that affected a shot, a 1 mm mechanical error, tape loosened on a finger on the shooting hand, etc.
 
Last edited:
Draft system

Core4 said:
So what is your suggestion for the draft? .
Click to expand...

The goal is parity but no tanking

The first round is 6 picks only.
Each team gets a first round pick every 5 years.
Who gets which first round pick is predetermined randomly before the 30 year cycle begins (everyone gets one #1, one #2, etc)
Round two is set by total team record over past 5 years, worst record first, best last, all 30 teams get one pick in round 2.
Round three is same order as round 2, but the teams with a top 6 pick do not get a third round pick, so everyone gets 2 picks.


Benefits:
1. Parity is driven by bad teams generally getting better picks. (maybe not as much as now)
2. The first round draft order will be pretty well set before the fifth season, making tanking in the current year relatively worthless (plus/ minus one or two spots)
3. Nobody will tank for a number 7 pick.
4. Added benefit: much higher certainty on the value of future draft picks (none of this top 5 protected, etc)
 
What if Utah's #1 pick falls on the year they extend the college age requirement to 2 years. Lets pretend it falls in 2015. Congratulations Utah on your #1 pick, Willie Cauley Stein, come back in another 30 years for your next chance at a superstar.
 
silesian said:
The goal is parity but no tanking

The first round is 6 picks only.
Each team gets a first round pick every 5 years.
Who gets which first round pick is predetermined randomly before the 30 year cycle begins (everyone gets one #1, one #2, etc)
Round two is set by total team record over past 5 years, worst record first, best last, all 30 teams get one pick in round 2.
Round three is same order as round 2, but the teams with a top 6 pick do not get a third round pick, so everyone gets 2 picks.


Benefits:
1. Parity is driven by bad teams generally getting better picks. (maybe not as much as now)
2. The first round draft order will be pretty well set before the fifth season, making tanking in the current year relatively worthless (plus/ minus one or two spots)
3. Nobody will tank for a number 7 pick.
4. Added benefit: much higher certainty on the value of future draft picks (none of this top 5 protected, etc)
Click to expand...

Hate it. You would have really good teams getting a top 5 every year. This will not lead to parity. Also players will wait for a big market team that needs their position. On top of that organizations will know which years they have and so will begin courting players at an inappropriate age.

A 9th team like cleveland winning the lotto is good for anti-tanking but the next 3 being Bucks, sixers, Orlando in that order is bad. I would:

1. Do reverse lotto order in the second round. ie Suns would pick 31st and cavs would pick 44th. It's not a lot but it's a decent bone considering 2nd round contracts are not guaranteed.

2. Expand the lotto to 7 picks. Currently if you finish 1st in the tank the very worst you could pick is 4 and that is highly unlikely. The possibility of picking 8th muddies the water a bit.

3. Lotto order by conference. Instead of awarding numbers league wide give each conference a 50/50 shot and award lotto to bottom 7 teams. This would have given the Bucks equal odds to the Jazz, Sixers & Lakers, Magic and kings, Celtics and Pellies.

4. Adjust the odds The difference between the Bucks 25% and the Jazz 10.4% is an invitation to tank.

Better odds

1. 16
2. 12
3. 10
4. 7
5. 3
6. 1
7. .5

Anyone of these things taken alone would be insufficient but taken in concert I think they would have a dramatic effect.
 
Last edited:
I wish I could transport to the '98 finals, buy a ticket way in the lower bowl, and scream at Karl to watch his back.
 
homeytennis said:
Imagine if San Antonio hadn't tanked in order to draft Tim Duncan or if the Jazz had drafted Tony Parker instead of Raul Lopez. It's easy to play the what if game.
Click to expand...

What if the Jazz hadn't traded away the pick that became Magic Johnson. Now there's the game changer.
 
LogGrad98 said:
What if the Jazz hadn't traded away the pick that became Magic Johnson. Now there's the game changer.
Click to expand...

Yeah we could have traded him for Worthy. SRS Magic was not as great as many say. People that put him in their top 5 all time are nuts, imo. He was the 3rd best player on his team.
 
heyhey said:
Yeah we could have traded him for Worthy. SRS Magic was not as great as many say. People that put him in their top 5 all time are nuts, imo. He was the 3rd best player on his team.
Click to expand...

Not sure if serious.

Also not sure if 3 of his teammates could have done this:

Magic fills in at center
Los Angeles Lakers captain Kareem Abdul-Jabbar suffered from a sprained ankle in the previous game and could not play. Magic Johnson, who was a rookie at the time, stepped in for Abdul-Jabbar. Though he was a point guard, he eventually played all five positions throughout the game, including Abdul-Jabbar's center position. In the end, he had 42 points, 15 rebounds and 7 assists as the Lakers defeated the Philadelphia 76ers 123–107 to win the NBA championship.[5]
Click to expand...
 
LogGrad98 said:
Not sure if serious.

Also not sure if 3 of his teammates could have done this:
Click to expand...

Yeah I know he did that. I also don't think he would be a pg in todays NBA. Having two great scorers in Worthy and Kareem made it possible for him to play there imo. If he was coming into the NBA today he would be a really good 3 but a guy like Lebron would tear him up. Don't get me wrong I think he is an all star in any era but he isn't on the goat tier everyone puts him in. Yes I would take Kareem or Worthy over him.
 
heyhey said:
Yeah I know he did that. I also don't think he would be a pg in todays NBA. Having two great scorers in Worthy and Kareem made it possible for him to play there imo. If he was coming into the NBA today he would be a really good 3 but a guy like Lebron would tear him up. Don't get me wrong I think he is an all star in any era but he isn't on the goat tier everyone puts him in. Yes I would take Kareem or Worthy over him.
Click to expand...

Eh, I get the feeling this is just a setup for other-forum shenanigans. We can agree to disagree.
 
heyhey said:
Yeah I know he did that. I also don't think he would be a pg in todays NBA. Having two great scorers in Worthy and Kareem made it possible for him to play there imo. If he was coming into the NBA today he would be a really good 3 but a guy like Lebron would tear him up. Don't get me wrong I think he is an all star in any era but he isn't on the goat tier everyone puts him in. Yes I would take Kareem or Worthy over him.
Click to expand...
Did you ever see Magic play?
I was in my "prime" at the same time as Magic. He was DOMINANT!
The others were scorers but Magic was the best on that team. Kareem in his prime, perhaps you take him over Magic because great bigs always have more value. Johnson was the greatest PG of all-time. My apologies to Stockton, who was the greatest "pass-first" PG. But Johnson was able to assist or simply take over games with his scoring. And his size allowed him to guard anyone.

And my praise is DESPITE the fact I hate Magic with a passion. Can't stand the man.
 
Compared to. .....

Jazz4ever said:
What if Utah's #1 pick falls on the year they extend the college age requirement to 2 years. Lets pretend it falls in 2015. Congratulations Utah on your #1 pick, Willie Cauley Stein, come back in another 30 years for your next chance at a superstar.
Click to expand...

So you think there is no chance of their 2 3 4 picks becoming superstars?

This is no different than the luck of having a high draft pick in good or bad drafts in the current system


How many number 1 one draft choices have the jazz received on the 20 years of the current system
 
You make tanking worse

heyhey said:
Hate it. You would have really good teams getting a top 5 every year. This will not lead to parity. Also players will wait for a big market team that needs their position. On top of that organizations will know which years they have and so will begin courting players at an inappropriate age.

A 9th team like cleveland winning the lotto is good for anti-tanking but the next 3 being Bucks, sixers, Orlando in that order is bad. I would:

1. Do reverse lotto order in the second round. ie Suns would pick 31st and cavs would pick 44th. It's not a lot but it's a decent bone considering 2nd round contracts are not guaranteed.

2. Expand the lotto to 7 picks. Currently if you finish 1st in the tank the very worst you could pick is 4 and that is highly unlikely. The possibility of picking 8th muddies the water a bit.

3. Lotto order by conference. Instead of awarding numbers league wide give each conference a 50/50 shot and award lotto to bottom 7 teams. This would have given the Bucks equal odds to the Jazz, Sixers & Lakers, Magic and kings, Celtics and Pellies.

4. Adjust the odds The difference between the Bucks 25% and the Jazz 10.4% is an invitation to tank.

Better odds

1. 16
2. 12
3. 10
4. 7
5. 3
6. 1
7. .5

Anyone of these things taken alone would be insufficient but taken in concert I think they would have a dramatic effect.
Click to expand...

Thus would have no affect on tanking or even make it worse

You think teams are tanking for second round picks? Seriously?

Your system actually increases the difference in probability between picks, increasing the incentive to tank.

And by splitting by conference you just create a race to the bottom by conference instead of by league. How does this help?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top