PDA

View Full Version : Should the worst teams battle for the #1 pick?



shep33
02-09-2011, 07:03 PM
Lets get away from the Melo talk for a second...I'm just at home sick and bored. What would you guys think of this proposal. Take the top 4 worst teams in the league when all is said and done, play each other to determine who gets the #1 pick in the draft. Now, although the lottery gives you a higher chance to get the #1 pick, it doesn't guarantee you that spot. So basically the 4 worst teams play each other in a mini tournament to see who gets that spot.

4th place= 4th pick plus a trade exception
3rd place= 3rd pick plus a trade exception
2nd place= 2nd pick plus a trade exception
1st place= 1st pick plus a trade exception

Now with the trade exceptions, the 4th place team gets the highest valued one, while the first place team gets the lowest one. So that way the truly worst team gets something that the other 4 won't have, while also getting a solid pick. Or I mean maybe the league increases the cap for these teams if they choose (worst team gets more cap space).

Haha I know i'll probably get destroyed for this idea, but why the heck not? I understand that it'll never happen, most likely cause it'd be embarassing for the organizations, but it'd make getting that #1 pick more interesting.

NYKalltheway
02-09-2011, 07:19 PM
I don't see why the players would be motivated for this... At least only 1-2 would actually be motivated for that, since those who are not as good as the upcoming rookies want to feature regularly in the coming season.

shep33
02-09-2011, 07:24 PM
I don't see why the players would be motivated for this... At least only 1-2 would actually be motivated for that, since those who are not as good as the upcoming rookies want to feature regularly in the coming season.

Yeah I mean, that'd be the biggest thing, getting them motivated to actually play, and obviously it wouldn't work. But I mean if these guys actually want their team to get better and care about the process of getting better players you'd think they'd be for it... but then again its the NBA. Or unless you pay the players to play in these games... say like...

The winning team gets money that goes toward the salary of the players.

Flash3
02-09-2011, 07:25 PM
the players on the team who dont want to be replaced by a young stud who plays the same position would probably tank.

shep33
02-09-2011, 07:29 PM
the players on the team who dont want to be replaced by a young stud who plays the same position would probably tank.

What if they payed the players for the tournament, nothing like huge, but the further you go kinda thing, the more money you get as a bonus. I think it'd be a way by which the league could give an advantage to the worse teams. Whether it be in the form of like trade exceptions, cash, extra cap room, something to that nature. I know its kinda out there as an idea, but it atleast adds some competition to it.

Bornknick73
02-09-2011, 07:32 PM
I think the lottery is stupid. The standings based system works fine in every other sport. And as much as im not a fan of their fans, the Nets should have gotten John Wall.

Is the lottery supposed to stop teams from tanking games? This system has been in place for a very long time and teams are still finishing with 12 wins. I dont think they were tanking. And I dont think the system helps them. It also feeds into the conspiracies like Rose to Chicago.

I think the worst team should get the first pick. It works fine in every other sport.

Giraffes Rule
02-09-2011, 07:32 PM
I say just get rid of the lottery or any gimmicks. Worst team gets the number one pick. That's how it works in every other sport, and it makes sense.

shep33
02-09-2011, 07:37 PM
I say just get rid of the lottery or any gimmicks. Worst team gets the number one pick. That's how it works in every other sport, and it makes sense.

That's fair, I dislike the lottery too. But at the same time, I think the worse teams should get more than just a draft pick. The reason I say that now is that with the NBA seemingly trending towards powerhouse teams gaining all the best players. Why not give the worse teams some extra tools to get better, whether it be extra cap space, trade exeption, extra cash etc. .

Smash
02-09-2011, 07:39 PM
Just leave it how it is.

dtmagnet
02-09-2011, 07:41 PM
Ummm, no.

pd7631
02-09-2011, 07:47 PM
I actually love this idea. Only changes I would make would be:

Worst 4 teams battle for picks 1-4

Next 4 worst teams battle for picks 5-8

Remaining teams battle for picks 9-14


If the players really want to win so badly, then they can go out and compete to get a guy that can help turn them into winners.

This would never happen, but it would be pretty interesting to say the least.

shep33
02-09-2011, 07:54 PM
I actually love this idea. Only changes I would make would be:

Worst 4 teams battle for picks 1-4

Next 4 worst teams battle for picks 5-8

Remaining teams battle for picks 9-14


If the players really want to win so badly, then they can go out and compete to get a guy that can help turn them into winners.

This would never happen, but it would be pretty interesting to say the least.

I agree haha, I mean we talk about players wanting to win, so might as well go out there and prove it. We always get players complaining about how they want to win, what better way then to get your team some cap relief, a trade exception, and a good pick, plus like I said before... the team that goes furtherst gets more money for its players.

Haha I like your addition too

Bluffmasta
02-09-2011, 07:57 PM
the worst team prolly wouldnt win the battle anyways lol

shep33
02-09-2011, 08:01 PM
the worst team prolly wouldnt win the battle anyways lol

Yeah but I mean the bottom 4 are all pretty bad, and like I mentioned, the team with the worst outcome gets the highest trade exception, and still the #4 pick, but lose out at the #1 pick it could root out the teams that can play hard but kinda just settle to be bad.

llemon
02-09-2011, 08:06 PM
Top 3 teams should be given better odds, teams 4 & 5 slightly better odds, and the rest of the field less odds, however those mathematics may work out.

crewfan13
02-09-2011, 08:15 PM
I actually like the lotto system and I hate this idea, no offense. If a team truly is the "worst" team and they really are terrible, then they would, in theory, finish 4th in this thing, leaving them really no shot at the top pick. At least the lotto still gives you a shot at the top pick, without handing it to them.

The reason I don't like the worst gets the first idea like other sports is because one player makes a bigger difference in basketball than it does in other sports. I'm not saying you can win with only one stud in basketball, but one elite player makes a much bigger difference in basketball than in other sports so I honestly see a team tanking a season intentionally if there was going to be a special player in the draft.

shep33
02-09-2011, 08:18 PM
I actually like the lotto system and I hate this idea, no offense. If a team truly is the "worst" team and they really are terrible, then they would, in theory, finish 4th in this thing, leaving them really no shot at the top pick. At least the lotto still gives you a shot at the top pick, without handing it to them.

The reason I don't like the worst gets the first idea like other sports is because one player makes a bigger difference in basketball than it does in other sports. I'm not saying you can win with only one stud in basketball, but one elite player makes a much bigger difference in basketball than in other sports so I honestly see a team tanking a season intentionally if there was going to be a special player in the draft.

Haha none taken. Again I was just really bored, but its not necessarily the team that gets 4th ultimately gets screwed over. Like i said in the OP they'd get the 4th pick but also cap space or a trade exception that would be higher then the other teams.

LongWayFromHome
02-09-2011, 08:25 PM
They should remove the lottery and go str8 1-14

BUT - they should have NBA staff that investigate tanking and teams should be penalized for tanking by being moved down. Teams still tank. The Celtics tanked the year Oden and Durant came out, and the basketball gods took care of penalizing them with the 4th pick................... oh wait.

Hawkeye15
02-09-2011, 09:33 PM
I still think it should be the following.

The bottom 3 teams have a mini lottery, regardless of record, weighted with percentages.
Teams 4-8 have a mini lottery, regardless of record, weight with percentages.
Teams 11-14 stay right there.

If there is a tie for the 3rd worst for example, they enter the top 3, and it becomes 4. Same for the #10-11 teams.

I am sorry (and I am not trying to pick a fight with Bulls fans), but there is NO WAY IN HELL at team should jump 11-12 teams and get the #1 pick. That is ridiculous.

This prevents tanking to a degree, because there is usually clear seperation between the bottom feeders and those teams in the 4-10 position, and teams 11-14 are waaaaay better usually than the bottom feeders.

The lottery should also be shown publically.

The Jokemaker
02-09-2011, 11:57 PM
I like the lottery myself, makes things exciting.

However a true battle for the #1 pick would be awesome. Picture this: Wizards Owner vs Nets owner, each has a paintball gun and will duel Wild West style. They start back to back, walk 15 paces, turn and fire. If you hit the other person, your team gets the #1 pick. If both hits miss, due one more duel and if they miss again, team with the 3rd worst record gets the pick. Now THAT would get ratings.

210Don
02-10-2011, 02:12 AM
the worse teams should fight to the death.

Iggz53
02-10-2011, 04:19 AM
One representative from each team should 2K it up for the #1 pick

cchrisc773
02-10-2011, 04:32 AM
I think what can make this work is. The 10 worse records in the league have the same number of lotto balls. ( That way 1-10 they all have the same odds of winning) Tanking happens every single season... Lastly, teams that just miss the playoffs, add a few more lotto balls for them. ( Increases teams that just missed odds of landing a top pick)

I remember the year Orlando went 41-41 and won the lotto. ( There own pick) I bet that pissed of teams that tanked that year in hopes to land Penny or Weber at the number 1 spot.

Which Orlando drafted Chris Weber for GSW so the 76ers could not grab him with the 2nd pick. Remember the great player the 76ers got that season? Shawn Bradley. LOL....

Orlando ended up getting Penny in a trade for Weber and a bunch of future round 1 picks. Which could have been the start of a nice Dynasty; however, Shaq ended that by leaving.. :(

LongWayFromHome
02-10-2011, 01:59 PM
Orlando ended up getting Penny in a trade for Weber and a bunch of future round 1 picks. Which could have been the start of a nice Dynasty; however, Shaq ended that by leaving.. :(

Is there any doubt that if shaq stays they become a dynasty? At least two rings post-Jordan. I guess two rings probably isn't a dynasty.

pedrofan45
02-10-2011, 03:27 PM
hate the lottery.... the celtics got screwed and should have gotten Durant... then again, we did win the championship the next year so i guess it was worth it... but the thought of having durant :drool:

ttam68
02-10-2011, 03:32 PM
It would just further encourage tanking.


Bad teams with moderate talent would have every incentive in he world to drop back into that bottom four.

ttam68
02-10-2011, 03:34 PM
I like the lottery myself, makes things exciting.

However a true battle for the #1 pick would be awesome. Picture this: Wizards Owner vs Nets owner, each has a paintball gun and will duel Wild West style. They start back to back, walk 15 paces, turn and fire. If you hit the other person, your team gets the #1 pick. If both hits miss, due one more duel and if they miss again, team with the 3rd worst record gets the pick. Now THAT would get ratings.

I'd rather let them play paintball until one quits - i.e. no elimination when hit. Lets see how bad you really want it Dan Gilbert

Kyben36
02-10-2011, 03:46 PM
no, becuase if you have a guy like Iggy, he would try to loose and get the 4th pick. this is just IMO dumb, I think the lotery is the best way to protect the NBA, becuase it prevents teams from just trying to loose.

Giraffes Rule
02-10-2011, 04:58 PM
Another problem with this kind of mini-playoff is that I doubt any of these players on awful teams want to play more games then they have to. Especially soon to be free agents. Why should they work their *** off to improve a team that they won't be with next season?

JasonJohnHorn
02-10-2011, 10:06 PM
I've talked about this with friends in the past, and while I do like the lottery system, I think it woudl be interesting to have the four worst teams do a playoff for the top pick. Having each team that missed the playoffs would favour teams that are already good and make it hard for bad teams to get better, but if its the four worst teams, I think that would be fair. But I dont have a problem with the lottery either.