My earlier post is a copy of something Steph Curry's wife tweeted during a game several years ago, I don't remember exactly what the context was but "rigged for money or ratings" is just a funny phrase.
No doubt, and they need matchups on national broadcast days that bring in high ratings. Otherwise they lose out on future tv deals. They need the ratings. I'm sure with revenue sharing all the teams will make a lot off of these "decisions".
Is there a reason they do it behind closed doors other than the fact that they could rig the whole thing?
And teams like us, Charlotte and Sacramento keep getting shafted. We were at least winning and weren't in positions to win lotteries very often but for Charlotte/Sacramento to never win it once in their franchise history compared to teams like San Antonio/Cleveland it's beyond ridiculous. Tell Sac/Charlotte fans why they should care about the NBA any more when the league has turn its back on them so many times.
Yeah, I'm fine with odds, but there should be a limit on how often you qualify to jump up.
In all likelihood put a "1" in front of that "5". Unless we strike gold in the lottery somehow like we did with Gobert and Mitchell odds are we will just never be relevant. The league doesn't need us to be relevant to maximize the money. There is no magic recipe or secret sauce from Ainge that will change anything realistically. This was likely our best shot at a generational talent and franchise cornerstone. The league decided they needed Luka in LA, and for SA and Philly to get better running mates with the other big stars than they needed us to be relevant. Any jazz fans better hunker down for the long haul or start praying we buck the trend and that someone turns into late lottery gold or we'll be play-in at best for the next decade+.
This pattern of teams consistently moving up and teams consistently moving down over the course of 30+ years in NBA lottery history needs to be studied.
