It's time for a flat (non-playoff team) draft lottery

[Strutter]

I wouldn't mind a system similar to the current one, except that A) when you don't win the lottery (for the first 3-4 picks like current system) you bring your ping pong balls to future drafts, until you finally cash out. B) you can not "win" the lottery in back to back years.

I think this doesn't require as large of a change as other approaches, although it also doesn't fully solve the root issue either--just makes the highs and lows less steep, IMO.

 

[The Jazz Wonderbra]

The crux of the issue is that the middle ground is no man's land. So, teams are rewarded for a fire sale and a restart.

The solution has to lie in removing this incentive. If a fire sale makes sense, then the system is broken. If losing is incentivized then the system is broken.

I would be down for extending the trend the league made regarding the lottery odds balance by equalizing it so the midlevel teams have a greater shot at the lottery. I would also make it so the lottery includes the top 5 picks and not the top 3. By doing so, a mid-tier team that just misses out on the playoffs has greater chance of leapfrogging. Let's say the incentive for the best pick goes as follows:

10% chance for the worst team
10% for the next team
10% for the third worst
...8%
...7%
...7%
...6%
...6%
...6%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5% for the 15th worst team that just missed out on the playoffs.

Now what is the incentive to lose? A 5% increased chance at the lottery? Super not worth it.

Those odds all increase a bit with each pick. Now make 5 total picks into lottery selections and you have yourself little incentive to tank. Teams that suck will just need to build from the ground up. But why would a team like New Orleans tank? For a 5% increased chance? No way.

Surely you could play with these numbers a bit but ultimately if the top 5 picks are up for grabs AND the weighted values aren't there, mid-tier doesn't look so bad.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

This isn't going to be popular, but the other way to decentivise tanking is to encourage free agency. Right now it feels impossible to land a star player in any other way than the draft. Encourage more player movement and more teams might have a chance at getting a top player.

Remove the number of years of team control for draft picks, get rid of max contracts, create a true hard cap, make it easier to get off bad money, etc.

 

[hgb]

The crux of the issue is that the middle ground is no man's land. So, teams are rewarded for a fire sale and a restart.

The solution has to lie in removing this incentive. If a fire sale makes sense, then the system is broken. If losing is incentivized then the system is broken.

I would be down for extending the trend the league made regarding the lottery odds balance by equalizing it so the midlevel teams have a greater shot at the lottery. I would also make it so the lottery includes the top 5 picks and not the top 3. By doing so, a mid-tier team that just misses out on the playoffs has greater chance of leapfrogging. Let's say the incentive for the best pick goes as follows:

10% chance for the worst team
10% for the next team
10% for the third worst
...8%
...7%
...7%
...6%
...6%
...6%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5%
...5% for the 15th worst team that just missed out on the playoffs.

Now what is the incentive to lose? A 5% increased chance at the lottery? Super not worth it.

Those odds all increase a bit with each pick. Now make 5 total picks into lottery selections and you have yourself little incentive to tank. Teams that suck will just need to build from the ground up. But why would a team like New Orleans tank? For a 5% increased chance? No way.

Surely you could play with these numbers a bit but ultimately if the top 5 picks are up for grabs AND the weighted values aren't there, mid-tier doesn't look so bad.

The problem is that with 4 or 5 top picks up for grabs, your chance isn't 5%, but closer to 20%. Also a flat lottery would be 6.66% per team, so not so different from 5%.

 

[Hedda Gambler]

A suggestion from a years back I find intriguing, is to wiat until a team is mathematically out of the play offs and then start counting wins. Whoever racks up the most wins after they are automatically out, gets the number one pick. This would add so much fun to the last third of the season and the trade deadline would be insane as the worst teams would go after win now-players alongside the top teams.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

A suggestion from a years back I find intriguing, is to wiat until a team is mathematically out of the play offs and then start counting wins. Whoever racks up the most wins after they are automatically out, gets the number one pick. This would add so much fun to the last third of the season and the trade deadline would be insane as the worst teams would go after win now-players alongside the top teams.

Terrible suggestion, but I get why it sounds good.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Maybe kind of goofy, but have odds determined by both losses and point differential.

You get a certain % of odds based on your losses (like the way it's currently done) but you also get a certain % of odds based on having a good point differential. So there will still be an incentive to lose, but also an incentive to not be pathetic and make late season basketball unwatchable..

 

[Hedda Gambler]

Terrible suggestion, but I get why it sounds good.

Yeah, it would most likely be a **** show, but still a fun concept.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Yeah, it would most likely be a **** show, but still a fun concept.

It's just everyone gets eliminated at different point and with the conferences it would be very uneven. So like if you get "lucky" and have a super hard first half then easy 2nd half, yo get a high lottery pick.

 

[KqWIN]

I still think the lack of incentive to win is as important is the incentive to lose. NBA players/teams spit in the face of their fans. The don’t play just for the sake of competition and playing, it doesn’t matter to them because the checks keep rolling in and keep getting bigger. I think they need to add a competitive advantage (besides the draft) that at least makes it more beneficial when you make the playoffs.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

I still think the lack of incentive to win is as important is the incentive to lose. NBA players/teams spit in the face of their fans. The don’t play just for the sake of competition and playing, it doesn’t matter to them because the checks keep rolling in and keep getting bigger. I think they need to add a competitive advantage (besides the draft) that at least makes it more beneficial when you make the playoffs.

You could tie in a greater portion of revenue sharing based on winning percentage. Tanking happens at the FO level and if it was significantly effecting an owner's pocket book, they might reconsider.

If something like that happened though, the fans would be even more upset than they are now. Can you imagine the anger on this website if we won some meaningless games that dropped our lotter odds, but helped put more money in Ryan Smith's pocket?

 

[KqWIN]

You could tie in a greater portion of revenue sharing based on winning percentage. Tanking happens at the FO level and if it was significantly effecting an owner's pocket book, they might reconsider.

If something like that happened though, the fans would be even more upset than they are now. Can you imagine the anger on this website if we won some meaningless games that dropped our lotter odds, but helped put more money in Ryan Smith's pocket?

Yeah…I don’t think money is the solution here. Maybe something along the lines of granting a team an additional FA exception or increasing the aprons? I guess that is also money in a way, but it’s via increased spending power.

 

[David Hume]

This isn't going to be popular, but the other way to decentivise tanking is to encourage free agency. Right now it feels impossible to land a star player in any other way than the draft. Encourage more player movement and more teams might have a chance at getting a top player.

Remove the number of years of team control for draft picks, get rid of max contracts, create a true hard cap, make it easier to get off bad money, etc.

Lessening the number of years a team controls a draft pick makes me nervous because I remember when Shaq bolted from Orlando and went to the Lakers to win 3 titles while the Magic became little more than a farm team/Washington Generals. Hard cap, yes, l could consider that.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

Lessening the number of years a team controls a draft pick makes me nervous because I remember when Shaq bolted from Orlando and went to the Lakers to win 3 titles while the Magic became little more than a farm team/Washington Generals. Hard cap, yes, l could consider that.

Yes, that's why most fans won't like the idea, but it's one way deemphasize the draft. If you get rid of max contracts and have a hard cap then small markets would still be able to compete with large markets for stars based on giving them more money.

 

[framer]

The worst team automatically gets the 4 pick with no chance of getting the top pick. Or lock worst record to the 3 pick and second worst to the 4th pick. That should put an end to the shameless tanking.

It would be like relegation lite. Make the last two teams play for the 3rd and 4th pick.

 

[David Hume]

Yes, that's why most fans won't like the idea, but it's one way deemphasize the draft. If you get rid of max contracts and have a hard cap then small markets would still be able to compete with large markets for stars based on giving them more money.

Sober, thanks for the thoughtful reply. I’ll think about it.

 

[LogGrad98]

The worst team automatically gets the 4 pick with no chance of getting the top pick. Or lock worst record to the 3 pick and second worst to the 4th pick. That should put an end to the shameless tanking.

It would be like relegation lite. Make the last two teams play for the 3rd and 4th pick.

They could make the bottom 4 teams play for the top 4 picks. Like the play-in. Best of the worst 4 gets the top pick. Could be interesting. Could even expand that to 6 or 8 teams. Then the challenge is how to tank but be good enough to beat the other 7 bottom teams.