PDA

View Full Version : Lottery Limit



magichatnumber9
02-21-2012, 06:17 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

JasonJohnHorn
02-21-2012, 06:19 PM
If you suck that bad, you NEED the high picks. I cant see any way of doing this that wont make the rebuilding process ten times harder for teams that suck all the time.

JeffG20
02-21-2012, 06:36 PM
so let me get this straight, the only legit way some of these teams have to compete is through the lottery and you want to limit these teams who are already struggling to compete?

North Yorker
02-21-2012, 06:43 PM
Quest que le fook?

crewfan13
02-21-2012, 06:44 PM
I would like to add to the original proposal. I say we start limiting the number of consecutive years teams can make the playoffs. If your team makes the playoffs 3 straight years, you have to trade starting lineups with one of the teams who were in the lottery 3 straight years.

JeffG20
02-21-2012, 06:47 PM
I would like to add to the original proposal. I say we start limiting the number of consecutive years teams can make the playoffs. If your team makes the playoffs 3 straight years, you have to trade starting lineups with one of the teams who were in the lottery 3 straight years.

deal!

Corey
02-21-2012, 06:50 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

''Hogging'' the lottery?

They're in the lottery because they aren't in the playoffs. The lottery is a means to give a poor team a talented player to help them rebuild.

Good teams shouldn't be in the lottery. That would ruin any chance at competitive balance.

whitemamba33
02-21-2012, 06:55 PM
Well it does kind of have a built in limit. It's called winning.

Sota4Ever
02-21-2012, 06:57 PM
Haha this is the dumbest idea I have ever heard. You want to penalize teams for struggling.
This on the other hand is a great idea
I would like to add to the original proposal. I say we start limiting the number of consecutive years teams can make the playoffs. If your team makes the playoffs 3 straight years, you have to trade starting lineups with one of the teams who were in the lottery 3 straight years.

lvlheaded
02-21-2012, 06:58 PM
Personally I don't think there should even be a lottery and the team that sucked the worst should get the worst pick. That's how teams can get out of the lottery. Instead of a team that won 17 games picking 6th and a team that won 28 picking first, make it so the order goes based on record and not this stupid lottery BS

Rego247
02-21-2012, 07:01 PM
One of the dumbest ideas I've ever read in this forum.

tcav701
02-21-2012, 07:02 PM
If the lottery winner wasnt hand picked every year, the same teams wouldnt be screwed repeatedly.

thekmp211
02-21-2012, 07:03 PM
uhh so then what?

THE MTL
02-21-2012, 07:06 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

Threads these days? Hogging the lottery??? What does that even mean lol. Im pretty sure NO NBA team goes into the season anticipating getting a good lottery pick

C_Mund
02-21-2012, 07:15 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

Ok, but only if teams that keep "hogging" free agents are only allowed to sign players once every three years. It just seems that the same ****ing powerhouses keep getting all of the decent free agents.

Gators123
02-21-2012, 07:16 PM
One of the dumbest ideas I've ever read in this forum.

This.

Iodine
02-21-2012, 07:16 PM
Personally I don't think there should even be a lottery and the team that sucked the worst should get the worst pick. That's how teams can get out of the lottery. Instead of a team that won 17 games picking 6th and a team that won 28 picking first, make it so the order goes based on record and not this stupid lottery BS

You realize the worst you can pick is 4th if you have the worst record right?

dtmagnet
02-21-2012, 07:21 PM
Is this a troll thread?

lvlheaded
02-21-2012, 07:32 PM
You realize the worst you can pick is 4th if you have the worst record right?

I was exaggerating for effect. The point is, in drafts that aren't deep like last years, the worst team needs that top pick. When a team with a 1.9% chance of getting the top pick gets it over a team that had a 30% chance of getting it, more likely than not the team with a 1.9% chance of getting that pick is gonna fall out of the lottery and get better while the team with a 30% chance that really needed that top pick to start building is still gonna be picking toward the top of the lottery. They should just adopt the NFL system, worst record gets top pick and go from there

cdnsportsfan
02-21-2012, 07:36 PM
THE dumbest idea I've ever read in this forum.

*Fixed

UPRock
02-21-2012, 07:45 PM
This thread doesn't make sense.

Iodine
02-21-2012, 07:47 PM
So we should encourage tanking?

crewfan13
02-21-2012, 07:52 PM
I was exaggerating for effect. The point is, in drafts that aren't deep like last years, the worst team needs that top pick. When a team with a 1.9% chance of getting the top pick gets it over a team that had a 30% chance of getting it, more likely than not the team with a 1.9% chance of getting that pick is gonna fall out of the lottery and get better while the team with a 30% chance that really needed that top pick to start building is still gonna be picking toward the top of the lottery. They should just adopt the NFL system, worst record gets top pick and go from there

I think the whole general idea is to prevent teams from intentionally tanking as much as they might. I know it seems ridiculous, but in a sport like basketball, where one player can make a much bigger impact than in other sports, teams might be more likely to tank late in the year. I know teams still do it, but its not as bad as it might be, especially in years in which the potential top pick is a can't miss prospect like Lebron was.

SteveNash
02-21-2012, 08:01 PM
It's amazing how liberal this board is.

Team keeps failing, so lets continue rewarding them? The problem is bad management and it's why teams like Minnesota and Toronto remain the welfare queens of the NBA.

Build up the NBDL into a proper league. Have a promotion/relegation system.

xILLN355
02-21-2012, 09:00 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

next couple of years you'd be upset your team isn't in the lottery :confused:

SmartestGuyHere
02-21-2012, 09:03 PM
Here's a simple question. Should teams have a limit of how many consecutive years they are in the Lottery? It just seems like the same group of **** teams keep hogging the Lottery. I'm thinking 2 to 3 years then the next year your automatically bumped out.

Michael Jordan will not be happy, seeing his team will be there for the next 10-20 years. Depending on how long he stays as an owner.

beasted86
02-21-2012, 09:11 PM
The original proposal is absurd... but it should be common practice among owners to fire their GM after 3 consecutive lottery seasons.

ManRam
02-21-2012, 09:18 PM
not at all.

why would we try to give small market/bad teams more of a disadvantage than they already have? makes no sense.

Birdmannn
02-22-2012, 01:18 AM
Stupid thread. Stupid poster.

kenzo400
02-22-2012, 01:24 AM
One of the dumbest ideas I've ever read in this forum.

+1 lol The trading starting lineups idea was ******** as well.

kenzo400
02-22-2012, 01:26 AM
Threads these days? Hogging the lottery??? What does that even mean lol. Im pretty sure NO NBA team goes into the season anticipating getting a good lottery pick

lol oh i beg to differ. The Raptors went into this season knowing full well were gonna have one of the top picks next draft.

kenzo400
02-22-2012, 01:28 AM
It's amazing how liberal this board is.

Team keeps failing, so lets continue rewarding them? The problem is bad management and it's why teams like Minnesota and Toronto remain the welfare queens of the NBA.

Build up the NBDL into a proper league. Have a promotion/relegation system.

How is Toronto a welfare team? We are 12th in NBA team worth and are top 10 in income production.

AceMan
02-22-2012, 01:31 AM
I don't like this idea, but I do think the lottery needs to be revised a bit. First of all, I don't think a team like the Bulls in '09 or the Magic in '93 should ever have a chance to win the lottery. Here's what I'm proposing. Two separate lotteries. The five worst teams have a lottery with even odds for the first pick. That keeps tanking to at least a reasonable level since you'd only have to get into the bottom 5 rather than going all out for the worst record. Then the other lottery teams have a lottery with odds. Just throwing it out there.

davids22
02-22-2012, 01:35 AM
The lottery is already a dumb idea anyway. The worst team should get the 1st pick overall.

But yeah, if the OP wants this to become into effect, then if a team makes the playoffs for 3 straight years, they should get bumped out to make room for the other teams. That, or the big markets should stop hogging all the free agents. YA DIG???

Tmath
02-22-2012, 01:40 AM
One of the dumbest ideas I've ever read in this forum.

this.

topdog
02-22-2012, 01:43 AM
I can't help but notice that it looks like the OP is a Warriors fan i.e. his team always finishes in mediocrity i.e. no high picks, no playoffs.

BigBongTheory
02-22-2012, 01:46 AM
They don't need to have a lottery exist in the first place, the worst team should acquire the #1 pick, It's ignorant that a struggling team that was the obvious "worst" team in the league ends up picking 4th or 5th. Pardon me if someone has said this before me, don't feel like reading a whole lot right now.

netsgiantsyanks
02-22-2012, 01:52 AM
there shouldn't be a lottery at all. remember when the 12-70 nets got the #3 pick? remember when the 08 bulls got the #1 pick with a .001 chance? like someone else said, they should have 2 separate lotteries.

Sssmush
02-22-2012, 01:52 AM
The lottery should be for all the teams. The idea of dumbing it down and making sure that the worst 7 teams get the top seven picks or whatever is weak.

Give the worst teams a couple extra ping pong balls or whatever. In terms of probability, that gives them a huge edge over time.

And that way it isn't an automatic that the worst teams, in the most low coverage cities get all the hot prospects every year. League lucked out with Blake Griffin to the Clippers. Usually BG would be in Toronto or Milwaukee or Charlotte for all this time, and barely on the radar.

Also, with this system, weak teams won't try to lose their way to the lottery as they are known to do, which in fact was the whole reason for the lottery in the first place, historically, if you know the facts. The lottery was introduced to prevent the bad teams from intentionally losing all their games to try and get higher picks in the draft. But it seems like they still do it, just for a chance to get into the lottery.

Sssmush
02-22-2012, 01:55 AM
Like for instance if you are in Charlotte, New Orleans or Toronto, the teams were only like ten games into the regular season and they are already talking about "if they get the number one pick in the draft this year"

Baller1
02-22-2012, 02:00 AM
I would like to add to the original proposal. I say we start limiting the number of consecutive years teams can make the playoffs. If your team makes the playoffs 3 straight years, you have to trade starting lineups with one of the teams who were in the lottery 3 straight years.

Not sure why, but this was extremely funny to me. I think the condescending tone was a nice touch.

greg_ory_2005
02-22-2012, 02:23 AM
The lottery should be for all the teams. The idea of dumbing it down and making sure that the worst 7 teams get the top seven picks or whatever is weak.

Give the worst teams a couple extra ping pong balls or whatever. In terms of probability, that gives them a huge edge over time.

And that way it isn't an automatic that the worst teams, in the most low coverage cities get all the hot prospects every year. League lucked out with Blake Griffin to the Clippers. Usually BG would be in Toronto or Milwaukee or Charlotte for all this time, and barely on the radar.

Also, with this system, weak teams won't try to lose their way to the lottery as they are known to do, which in fact was the whole reason for the lottery in the first place, historically, if you know the facts. The lottery was introduced to prevent the bad teams from intentionally losing all their games to try and get higher picks in the draft. But it seems like they still do it, just for a chance to get into the lottery.

Griffin on the Raptors. :drool:

Hellcrooner
02-22-2012, 02:42 AM
Ncaa/Draft/Player for Player trades/SalaryCap/MaxSalarys/ Max Lenghts/Franchises Moving/ Only one League with limited number of teams.

All this crap needs to stop.

Refoundation on Free Market, Pro teams for every city and town in USa in vertical divisions with the promise to maybe one day reach the main league by being promoted.
You are a poor team out of a town nowhere and you raise a Lebron james? too good!!!!! you can sell it to Knicks for 100 million dollars, and invest to buy players that get your nowhere town team into the first division!!!!.
Youth academys of the teams to create BONDS between the kids in teh city and the team in the city and the players because htey develop tehre since being 8 years old, loyalty.TEams dont move, you create loyalty from the fanbase, incentives, being relegated /being promoted, there is always a reason to go wathc and root for your team.


Refoundation now!!!!!!!!

ManningToTyree
02-22-2012, 02:45 AM
This is downright stupid.

greg_ory_2005
02-22-2012, 02:52 AM
Ncaa/Draft/Player for Player trades/SalaryCap/MaxSalarys/ Max Lenghts/Franchises Moving/ Only one League with limited number of teams.

All this crap needs to stop.

Refoundation on Free Market, Pro teams for every city and town in USa in vertical divisions with the promise to maybe one day reach the main league by being promoted.
You are a poor team out of a town nowhere and you raise a Lebron james? too good!!!!! you can sell it to Knicks for 100 million dollars, and invest to buy players that get your nowhere town team into the first division!!!!.
Youth academys of the teams to create BONDS between the kids in teh city and the team in the city and the players because htey develop tehre since being 8 years old, loyalty.TEams dont move, you create loyalty from the fanbase, incentives, being relegated /being promoted, there is always a reason to go wathc and root for your team.


Refoundation now!!!!!!!!

WTF are you saying?

*Silver&Black*
02-22-2012, 03:22 AM
Who cares anymore? After the rookie contract is over (and sometimes before that) 90% of the good players will always leave for the big markets anyways.

Might as well give the big markets the top picks every year and make Stern and the NBA's job easy. But then again, if they do that, the small market team wouldn't be used like the "development" team they are used like now.

abe_froman
02-22-2012, 03:31 AM
dont get how anyone can hog the lottery

utl768
02-22-2012, 03:31 AM
punishing teams for sucking?

this place gets better and better every day

KingPosey
02-22-2012, 03:43 AM
I think you ask a petty good question. I think there should be more to it than just years in a row in the lottery. You should be forced to try and make your team better to stay elligible, like spending more on talent, whatever you want to decide. If you try, and still suck, then you need more help.

I just cant stand teams that refuse to spend, are continually bottom feeders, and just tank hoping to land a cheap centerpiece. They gut their rosters, keep payroll to a bare minimum, and hope to land a cheap DWade or LBJ to sit on for 5 years. Its ****ing disgusting.

The Maloofs have purposely been doing this for over half a decade now, and people wonder why ALL THE SUDDEN Sacramento wasnt supporting their team. After 20 years, we all the sudden were a city that didnt support their team. The Maloofs fooled a lot of people.

*Silver&Black*
02-22-2012, 03:46 AM
Most small market teams just plays a "development" role to me and they like it that way. They draft a top guy, sell enough jerseys to make some profit, have the fans pay to see that player, then that player leaves, rinse and repeat.

Other small market teams (like Orlando for example) gets pulled around by the players and is forced to become a "development" team for a player just to jump ship to a bigger city (one that couldn't draft him #1 because they were busy being at the top of the league).

LakersIn5
02-22-2012, 10:27 AM
bad/weak teams/management should not continuously be awarded top picks.

tcav701
02-22-2012, 10:49 AM
Well when top rookies are just showcasing in these small markets to only walk to larger market what do you expect?

Rockice_8
02-22-2012, 12:25 PM
This idea is the reason we have this icon

:facepalm:

richiesaurus310
02-22-2012, 01:05 PM
I say teams that get out of the first round of the playoffs shouldn't have first round picks, which would give the nba's worst 8 teams a 2nd first round pick basically. And make a third round of the draft for the 8 teams who lost their first round pick. This would hopefully help teams get out of the cellar faster, and maybe it would help small market teams get better faster so their stars wouldn't be so anxious to leave to a more sucessful big market team.

magichatnumber9
02-22-2012, 01:22 PM
I wrote this early in the morning and it didn't come out the way I planned. My idea was that one team can be in the lottery 3 consecutive years and then the 4th there bumped to the 11th pick. The more I've thought about it the more the lottery system is stupid overall.

kozelkid
02-22-2012, 01:26 PM
What we really need is a relegation system like in Europe.That would stop the tanking crap. Unfortunately, our minor system is so significantly worse compared to lower leagues in europe.

Hellcrooner
02-22-2012, 02:01 PM
What we really need is a relegation system like in Europe.That would stop the tanking crap. Unfortunately, our minor system is so significantly worse compared to lower leagues in europe.

thats what i was talking bout earlier.

But it would need a complete change of the system, because it wouldnt fit with Ncaa, draft withouth making the system too complicate.

a sistem with vertical divisions allows for EVERY city to have a team ( or more than one in the big ones) and adust their budget to what they can expend.

If it means that say North plate can only make enough money to dwindle between 5th and 4th division, then be it.

there are More than 20 citys that can sustaion a 1st division one, so there would be heavy fun on the fights to not get relegated and to get promoted.

Teams wouldnt relocate EVER, wich woudl mean more attached fanbases win or lose.

But as i said is very difficutl to adjust for america, because Ncaa and draft should be subbed by Youth academys from teh teams ( there are ways to mantain salary cap and max salarys , so the transformation wouldnt need to be complete)

Its also more likely for the core of your team to STAY if they have been playing trough your Jr rankings since they were 8 years old.

cdnsportsfan
02-22-2012, 02:06 PM
It's amazing how liberal this board is.

Team keeps failing, so lets continue rewarding them? The problem is bad management and it's why teams like Minnesota and Toronto remain the welfare queens of the NBA.

Build up the NBDL into a proper league. Have a promotion/relegation system.

I wouldn't say Toronto is a perpetual loser, they have made the playoffs 4x in the past decade. But they're part of the majority of the league - outside of a very few teams - that has to rebuild, they aren't a strong enough franchise or brand really to simply attract the players necessary to reload and continue on winning.

I'd lump the Raptors into the same category as teams like the Pacers, Sixers, Nuggets, Suns, Pistons, and I'm sure many others as well who make good runs with a stud player or set of players but once those players leave, for other teams or due to retirement, the team starts fresh.

There's only a handful of teams with playoff appearances that are on par with the likes of the Kansas City Royals, and in the NBA they would be the Clippers (before this season anyways), the TWolves, and I guess you could say the Warriors as well.

Anyways point being the reason this thread is so dumb is that there really are only a couple teams that are always on top, always in the playoffs, the rest of the teams are just trying to build to contend whatever way they can - if they can't attract the best athletes via free agency, the draft is the way to go. Putting a cap on the number of times a team can receive a lottery draft pick is therefore just ridiculous.

Corey
02-22-2012, 02:11 PM
I wrote this early in the morning and it didn't come out the way I planned. My idea was that one team can be in the lottery 3 consecutive years and then the 4th there bumped to the 11th pick. The more I've thought about it the more the lottery system is stupid overall.
..still a bad idea

uprightciti
02-22-2012, 02:15 PM
Personally I think that teams should be limited to how many picks they can trade from there first round
IE: your team can trade either a first or second round pick but not in consecutive years

that way it keeps the league young and entertaining

IceMan360
02-22-2012, 02:15 PM
Well it does kind of have a built in limit. It's called winning.

/thread :clap:

Iodine
02-22-2012, 02:16 PM
Ncaa/Draft/Player for Player trades/SalaryCap/MaxSalarys/ Max Lenghts/Franchises Moving/ Only one League with limited number of teams.

All this crap needs to stop.

Refoundation on Free Market, Pro teams for every city and town in USa in vertical divisions with the promise to maybe one day reach the main league by being promoted.
You are a poor team out of a town nowhere and you raise a Lebron james? too good!!!!! you can sell it to Knicks for 100 million dollars, and invest to buy players that get your nowhere town team into the first division!!!!.
Youth academys of the teams to create BONDS between the kids in teh city and the team in the city and the players because htey develop tehre since being 8 years old, loyalty.TEams dont move, you create loyalty from the fanbase, incentives, being relegated /being promoted, there is always a reason to go wathc and root for your team.


Refoundation now!!!!!!!!
Stop

Iodine
02-22-2012, 02:18 PM
Personally I think that teams should be limited to how many picks they can trade from there first round
IE: your team can trade either a first or second round pick but not in consecutive years

that way it keeps the league young and entertaining

http://basketball.about.com/od/collegebasketballglossary/g/ted-stepien-rule.htm

kenzo400
02-22-2012, 02:18 PM
WTF are you saying?

lol i think he's trolling.

Iodine
02-22-2012, 02:23 PM
lol i think he's trolling.

No, he actually means this.

uprightciti
02-22-2012, 02:34 PM
http://basketball.about.com/od/collegebasketballglossary/g/ted-stepien-rule.htm

What i ment by that was that even though you can not trade consecutive years of first or second rounders was that when involving a team in a trade for another player you can only include 1 draft pick and you can not trade another draft pick the following year

uprightciti
02-22-2012, 02:38 PM
like with the mcgrady trade from the knicks they traded there 2010 pick and there 2012 pick what i am saying is that you should only be able to include 1 pick total in the entire trade

elizur
02-22-2012, 03:01 PM
+1 lol The trading starting lineups idea was ******** as well.

Sarcasm big guy

KingPosey
02-24-2012, 12:27 PM
thats what i was talking bout earlier.

But it would need a complete change of the system, because it wouldnt fit with Ncaa, draft withouth making the system too complicate.

a sistem with vertical divisions allows for EVERY city to have a team ( or more than one in the big ones) and adust their budget to what they can expend.

If it means that say North plate can only make enough money to dwindle between 5th and 4th division, then be it.

there are More than 20 citys that can sustaion a 1st division one, so there would be heavy fun on the fights to not get relegated and to get promoted.

Teams wouldnt relocate EVER, wich woudl mean more attached fanbases win or lose.

But as i said is very difficutl to adjust for america, because Ncaa and draft should be subbed by Youth academys from teh teams ( there are ways to mantain salary cap and max salarys , so the transformation wouldnt need to be complete)

Its also more likely for the core of your team to STAY if they have been playing trough your Jr rankings since they were 8 years old.

Ill pass.

Why dont you just watch the Euroleague lol? Its obviously what you want the NBA to be, based on everything you ever say ever when it comes to adjusting any type of rule.

JWO35
02-24-2012, 03:47 PM
There shouldn't even be a lottery system to start with, it already screws the worst team..the draft order should be like it is for every other sport(ex. Worst team gets 1st, 2nd worst gets 2nd, etc)

FriedTofuz
02-24-2012, 05:02 PM
This thread makes no sense whatsoever. You're upset that its the same teams that are bad and hogging the draft picks? If the team is bad they will have a higher pick. Why would better teams get high draft picks. This honestly, isnt even a question or statement to be made.

Kucka
02-24-2012, 05:40 PM
I think the lottery aspect of the draft should be eliminated and the teams with the worse records get the guaranteed higher picks. What is the point of having a slight variable that an average team can land the #1 pick...aka Bulls landing Rose. It's unfair to teams that suck every year and it gives the NBA that leeway to manipulate the draft.

papipapsmanny
02-24-2012, 06:53 PM
the lottery needs to be shrunk

It should only involve the bottom 5 teams, its so dumb how a team can literally suck balls, and than end up with like the 8th pick. How exactly is that supposed to work out

Hawkeye15
02-24-2012, 08:28 PM
Well it does kind of have a built in limit. It's called winning.

this.

By the way, anyone who thinks the same teams are ALWAYS in the lottery is either 18 and hasn't watched basketball more than 4 years, or not paying attention. If you look at teams like Minnesota, Sacramento, Detroit, Golden State, Toronto, and many of the others that have been there the past few years, way up high, they were well out of the lottery a number of years ago. Many of the teams that have had top 5 picks over the past few years were once contenders.

Hawkeye15
02-24-2012, 08:29 PM
http://basketball.about.com/od/collegebasketballglossary/g/ted-stepien-rule.htm

thank you for saving me time there.

You can not trade consecutive first round picks.

Hawkeye15
02-24-2012, 08:31 PM
the lottery needs to be shrunk

It should only involve the bottom 5 teams, its so dumb how a team can literally suck balls, and than end up with like the 8th pick. How exactly is that supposed to work out

My proposal that I have offered the last 3 years.

Bottom 3 teams have a mini-lottery, 33% chance each.
Teams 4-10 have the same thing, weighted.
Teams 11-14 pick where they are, they have no business jumping that many teams (I am looking at you Chicago).

Iodine
02-24-2012, 08:33 PM
Your idea actually works really well

Hawkeye15
02-24-2012, 08:41 PM
Your idea actually works really well

If I were GM, I would be the baby of Jackie Moon and Daryl Morey.