PDA

View Full Version : Delete the NBA lottery?



heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 03:30 PM
Would removing the NBA lottery be a good idea?
It would remove all the conspiracy theories, and allow the truly worst team in the NBA to have its own pick; however, it might promote tanking on purpose to achieve a lock on the #1 pick.

shep33
05-29-2012, 03:36 PM
I think the lottery is stupid. I know a lot of people think it's a good thing, but the reality is teams have to tank in order to rebuild. There aren't enough stars to go around. If Charlotte doesn't get the #1 pick, I mean they're screwed for a good while.

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 03:36 PM
whoops, meant to say "delete the NBA lottery"

PleaseBeNice
05-29-2012, 03:37 PM
We've gone through this before. Teams will purposefully tank to get the pick

Slug3
05-29-2012, 03:38 PM
I am not sure why their are therioes anyway. Doesnt every single team have someone in the room when the balls are being picked? I sure if there was something upsetting to them we would know.

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 03:39 PM
I am not sure why their are therioes anyway. Doesnt every single team have someone in the room when the balls are being picked? I sure if there was something upsetting to them we would know.

nope, hence all the ridiculous conspiracies. Having a team member in the room though would be a solution

ManRam
05-29-2012, 03:45 PM
Getting rid of something to stop conspiracy theories is an awful reason to do so. Let the conspiracy theorists have their fun...it doesn't actually hurt the league or anything. I'm sure they'd develop new conspiracies to worry about even if there was no lottery.

The lotto in theory helps curb tanking. Though, there's still obviously huge insentive to tank. You might not be 100% assured of the top pick, but you'll still be the statistical favorite if you have the worst record.

I tend to think it's silly too. But I don't think the cons really matter too much. If the biggest con is conspiracy theories, well, that's nothing to worry about.

sixer04fan
05-29-2012, 03:46 PM
I think the problem is that the lottery odd are too severe. Like, Charlotte should have better than a 1 in 4 chance to get the first pick.

The odds used to be even worse, when the worst team would have a 1 in 6 chance. I still think it needs to be improved further.

DaSeba5
05-29-2012, 03:47 PM
I think the problem is that the lottery odd are too severe. Like, Charlotte should have better than a 1 in 4 chance to get the first pick.

The odds used to be even worse, when the worst team would have a 1 in 6 chance. I still think it needs to be improved further.

This. The odds should be better for the worst team.

Mile High Champ
05-29-2012, 03:49 PM
Are you kidding me. By removing the lottery it will bring on tanking to a whole new level. This is a brutal idea.

Kyben36
05-29-2012, 03:50 PM
I think the lotery does alot though, it prevents teams form just purpusly loosing so that they can get high picks, like number ones year after year till they have a combo of Durrant/Rose/Wall/ and all these beastly players.

jrm2054
05-29-2012, 03:51 PM
I like how they are found it this year wig only the top 3 picks being decided by the lottery and the rest by record it doesn't promote tanking and is sort if fair

Mile High Champ
05-29-2012, 03:58 PM
I like how they are found it this year wig only the top 3 picks being decided by the lottery and the rest by record it doesn't promote tanking and is sort if fair

What are you trying to say?

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 03:58 PM
well another argument against the lottery is that a mediocre team gets the #1 pick (ex: Rose on Bulls), thus through the luck of the draft, they just added a #1 pick to their team despite not being even close to the worst team in the league
however, I still believe the league is better with the lottery than without it

ManRam
05-29-2012, 03:59 PM
I think the problem is that the lottery odd are too severe. Like, Charlotte should have better than a 1 in 4 chance to get the first pick.

The odds used to be even worse, when the worst team would have a 1 in 6 chance. I still think it needs to be improved further.

I agree. And again, the logic of having it at 25% is to make it less necessary to completely tank it, and potentially rewards teams who kept fighting until the end. But I think it should at least be a 1 in 3 chance. Not sure it should jump to 50%, but 25% is probably too low. The Bobcats were clearly just an awful team. You can say they tanked, but it's clear they were the worst. Give them more than a 25% chance of winning it. Usually the worst teams are truly the worst...

And again, rewarding the 5th worst team with about a 10% chance to win it gives minor incentive for them to not tank it, because they still have a shot even with a good record. I just think it's too much of a chance. I think the odds need to favor the absolute worst teams just a little more than they do. Not a lot, but a little at least.

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 04:03 PM
I agree. And again, the logic of having it at 25% is to make it less necessary to completely tank it, and potentially rewards teams who kept fighting until the end. But I think it should at least be a 1 in 3 chance. Not sure it should jump to 50%, but 25% is probably too low. The Bobcats were clearly just an awful team. You can say they tanked, but it's clear they were the worst. Give them more than a 25% chance of winning it. Usually the worst teams are truly the worst...

And again, rewarding the 5th worst team with about a 10% chance to win it gives minor incentive for them to not tank it, because they still have a shot even with a good record. I just think it's too much of a chance. I think the odds need to favor the absolute worst teams just a little more than they do. Not a lot, but a little at least.

well put. agree completely

bigsams50
05-29-2012, 04:10 PM
Could you imagine how different the league would be now if the lottery never existed? Rose would be a member of the Heat with Wade, Blake Griffin would be in Sacramento, Durant would probably be a Celtic, Yao would have been a Warrior or Bull, Charlotte would have had either CP3 or Deron Williams

Jint.
05-29-2012, 04:11 PM
maybe have the 3 worst teams in a lottery for the 1st pick

NYMetros
05-29-2012, 04:12 PM
No, I like the lottery. Getting rid of it would be a horrible idea. The tanking would get out of control. Teams still tank even with the lottery, imagine if there wasn't a lottery. The last three and a half months of every season would be terrible.

ry31walsh
05-29-2012, 04:12 PM
I think the lottery is horrible. While there are exceptions most of the elite guys come from the first couple of picks.

I also don't buy the whole well they will tank talk. Teams don't really tank it in the NFL or every other sport were the worst team gets the top pick. I also think the NBA more then any other sport 1 player can factor into a team winning or loosing. So if you have the top picks, odds are you wouldn't be the worst team the next year

naps
05-29-2012, 04:19 PM
I think the lottery is stupid. I know a lot of people think it's a good thing, but the reality is teams have to tank in order to rebuild. There aren't enough stars to go around. If Charlotte doesn't get the #1 pick, I mean they're screwed for a good while.

Can you imagine how messed up the regular season will be with at least 12 teams taking hard? Regular season will lose it's appeal and honestly who wants to watch so many pointless games when you'll know the outcome?

killersweet
05-29-2012, 04:23 PM
I think the lottery is horrible. While there are exceptions most of the elite guys come from the first couple of picks.

I also don't buy the whole well they will tank talk. Teams don't really tank it in the NFL or every other sport were the worst team gets the top pick. I also think the NBA more then any other sport 1 player can factor into a team winning or loosing. So if you have the top picks, odds are you wouldn't be the worst team the next year
Were you paying attention to the games last season in March and April? Non-Playoff teams were fighting hard to lose. Some games were really ugly.

theLgndKllr35
05-29-2012, 04:35 PM
Maybe it's a crazy idea, but have a group of GM's/Coaches/etc. vote on who gets the top pick, but you can't vote for yourself. Then use those odds in the lottery.

You would think the top teams would want to give the best talent to the worst team to keep themselves as the best, so it's pretty much guaranteed that the worst team ends up with the best player.

It might be a crazy idea, and I'm not even sold on it myself, but just thought I'd throw it out there for discussion.

MJL80
05-29-2012, 04:40 PM
maybe have the 3 worst teams in a lottery for the 1st pick

I agree with this 100%.... have the 3 worst teams in a lottery for the top 3 picks, and the rest of the selections based upon record.

JasonJohnHorn
05-29-2012, 04:42 PM
For some reason, I like the lottery. I think it does work in discouraging teams from tanking on purpose, especially teams that have traded protected picks.

I like the idea that while the really bad teams will still get high picks, they aren't being rewarded for sucking.

I like to that every team that misses the lottery has the hope of getting the number one pick. It gives fans something to be excited for.

8kobe24
05-29-2012, 04:53 PM
Teams would tank and you would have 4-5 teams going 0-82 just to get that same chance for the #1 pick.:badidea:

LongIslandIcedZ
05-29-2012, 04:54 PM
The fact that the Bobcats might not even get a top 3 pick is completely ridiculous. I understand that not having a lottery may give teams an incentive to tank, but its not like teams wont tank with the lottery system. It works for the NFL and should absolutely be implemented in the NBA. The fact that Houston/Phoenix/Milwaukee can end up with the first pick is a little ridiculous.

JWO35
05-29-2012, 04:57 PM
I don't get how people say teams will take worse...you think current NBA Players will purposely lose just to get replaced by the guy they are tanking for? :confused:

DR_1
05-29-2012, 05:01 PM
Getting rid of something to stop conspiracy theories is an awful reason to do so. Let the conspiracy theorists have their fun...it doesn't actually hurt the league or anything. I'm sure they'd develop new conspiracies to worry about even if there was no lottery.

The lotto in theory helps curb tanking. Though, there's still obviously huge insentive to tank. You might not be 100% assured of the top pick, but you'll still be the statistical favorite if you have the worst record.

I tend to think it's silly too. But I don't think the cons really matter too much. If the biggest con is conspiracy theories, well, that's nothing to worry about.

I agree. While the worst teams won't always get the highest picks, it does allow them a good chance. My point is that a team can tank if it wants to, but it runs the risk of not getting the high pick it wanted, which could set the franchise back a bit.

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 05:01 PM
I don't get how people say teams will take worse...you think current NBA Players will purposely lose just to get replaced by the guy they are tanking for? :confused:

no, but coaches might bench their best players late in games to lose

Cal827
05-29-2012, 05:08 PM
I don't think so, as some teams might tank in order to move ahead in the line.. E.g. New Jersey and Toronto went into the final game of this year with the same record, and NJ decided to rest their guys, and start Deshawn Stevenson as PF.

I however, think things should be changed... as in not only should the worst team have a much higher chance than 25% of getting the pick (I'm looking more at 50ish). I also think in the special cases where a team is incredibly bad, they should automatically get the first overall pick and the lotto should take place from 2nd overall on. Like Charlotte is a good example.. we have heard of teams tanking to get higher picks, but 7-59 isn't tanking, that's just plain bad.

JLynn943
05-29-2012, 05:18 PM
I hate the lottery as is, but I understand the need for it I guess. Still, the fact that Charlotte could pick 4th is horrible. Maybe make it such that only the top 2 or 3 spots are in the lottery (which all non-playoff teams could still qualify for) and then have the teams that don't get those spots pick in order?

shep33
05-29-2012, 05:25 PM
Can you imagine how messed up the regular season will be with at least 12 teams taking hard? Regular season will lose it's appeal and honestly who wants to watch so many pointless games when you'll know the outcome?

You know what though. That's the problem with the NBA itself. There are not enough stars to go around, and players are now trying to group together to form super teams (which is their right). Honestly, contraction makes so much sense, and lets be real, if a team doesn't get that superstar via the draft (top 1-2 pick), and they continue going on mediocrity, what's the point? It's nice to get into the post season, but if stars won't sign there via free agency, your only bet is to get talent through the draft.


I agree with what your saying, but if Charlotte doesn't get Anthony Davis, nobody will want to ever go sign there (referring to stars and great role players)

BSardogan
05-29-2012, 05:50 PM
Are you kidding me. By removing the lottery it will bring on tanking to a whole new level. This is a brutal idea.

:cheers: That sig.

And the lottery may be unfair, it may be harsh on some teams, heck it might even be rigged. But reallly I don't think that totally getting rid of it and reward the worst team/best tanker with potential stars every year would make things better. In fact it would suck even harder than the current system.

Can you imagine 5 to 6 teams trying to lose as often as possible to land a potential superstar with the no. 1 pick? Heck, even a really good team could tank and get a guaranteed top 3 pick in order to **** on everyone else for the next years to come. No thanks.

JasonJohnHorn
05-29-2012, 06:23 PM
Honestly... if the worst team got the first pick, Washington would have been running their offence through McGee on purpose! And the Wizards and the Bobcats would have been competing for the worst record in NBA history.

Teams do this on purpose whether they admit it or not. Like this season, when the playoffs were out of reach Minny just held Love out of the remaining games because they didn't want risk him getting injured in a losing effort. That team, intentionally put out less than the best for the remainder of the season. They intentionally put out a product inferior to the one they could have put out.

And this is a team that had nothing to gain? can you imagine what happens if you start rewarding this kind of behaviour? SMH.

greg_ory_2005
05-29-2012, 06:26 PM
This would make tanking even worse.

tcav701
05-29-2012, 06:37 PM
So they same people that say the lottery is fair and that officials are not instructed to call a game a certain way, claim that tanking would be an issue.

How do you convince the most selfish people walking the planet earth (professional athletes) to lower their value by under performing and losing games.

"Hey Kris Humphries go out there and play like **** so nobody signs you when your contract is up at the end of the year. Sure you'll make 3MIL less a year based on your drop in performance but you'll be helping us secure your replacement!"

kmo429
05-29-2012, 06:41 PM
Absolutely not, youd have 3 or 4 teams every year from halfway on in the season having a competition to suck the most. The lottery is more fair beause a ****** team will get the #1 overall pick yet it avoids teams trying to be ******, to get the #1 pick, causetheres no guarantee you will get it if you finish last

HOZ THE KNICK
05-29-2012, 06:48 PM
the NBA does what they want to do the nets didnt tank but watch they win the lottery...sad but true.

beasted86
05-29-2012, 06:51 PM
I have no problem with the lottery to prevent teams from tanking, but dislike that idea any team from basically 8-14 can get the #1-3 pick.

They should alter the lottery where only the top 7 picks are ordered through the lottery. Picks 8-14 will fall exactly how they finished the season record wise, the same as playoff teams are ordered.

HoopsMachine
05-29-2012, 06:54 PM
I would love to see this so we can see at the end of the season games where neither team wants to win.

scaramantula
05-29-2012, 06:56 PM
why should there be a prize for finishing last? we should not make it any easier for the worst teams in the league to get the best player, look at the teams that just miss out, after the off season they are in a worse spot then the worst team in the league. keep the lottery, make it public and give each team an equal opportunity to win, maybe playoff teams get 1 ball for the lottery non playoff teams get 2

beasted86
05-29-2012, 06:56 PM
Or another idea is have 2 lottery drafts.. one for teams 1-7 and another for teams 8-14, but definitely anytime anything like the Bulls happens everyone in their mind is only naturally going to think something fishy happen. No hate against Chicago or anything, but every single basketball fan everywhere scratched their head wondering how a 12th ranked team not only moved into the top 3, but suspiciously won the lottery.

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 07:11 PM
Or another idea is have 2 lottery drafts.. one for teams 1-7 and another for teams 8-14

That's an idea, but a counter point would be that teams just out of the playoff race will tank so they can move into that 7 spot.

BKLYNpigeon
05-29-2012, 07:35 PM
regardless of what system you have, teams will tank. the warriors tanked this season, so they could secure their pick this season, because it was owed to utah.

Baller1
05-29-2012, 07:38 PM
Let people see the lottery balls live. Simple as that.

I like the lottery though.

BKLYNpigeon
05-29-2012, 07:38 PM
if you know that theres a talent like Lebron in the draft, you're tanking the season, its worth it.

The Knicks were awful for about 3 seasons so they could shed salary cap to spend in free agency a few years ago.

BKLYNpigeon
05-29-2012, 07:39 PM
Let people see the lottery balls live. Simple as that.

I like the lottery though.



they stream it online I think.

scaramantula
05-29-2012, 07:39 PM
regardless of what system you have, teams will tank. the warriors tanked this season, so they could secure their pick this season, because it was owed to utah.

i dunno my system up there wouldn't let people tank, they could, but it would not help them

Baller1
05-29-2012, 07:39 PM
Or another idea is have 2 lottery drafts.. one for teams 1-7 and another for teams 8-14, but definitely anytime anything like the Bulls happens everyone in their mind is only naturally going to think something fishy happen. No hate against Chicago or anything, but every single basketball fan everywhere scratched their head wondering how a 12th ranked team not only moved into the top 3, but suspiciously won the lottery.

I think this would just take tanking to an entirely different level, just my opinion though.

scaramantula
05-29-2012, 07:40 PM
Let people see the lottery balls live. Simple as that.

I like the lottery though.

yes. this

Baller1
05-29-2012, 07:40 PM
they stream it online I think.

Are you sure? I've never heard of that... I could very well be wrong though of course.

scaramantula
05-29-2012, 07:40 PM
they stream it online I think.

only the results, the actual lottery is behind closed doors

Jint.
05-29-2012, 07:46 PM
what if the NFL had a lottery..?... turrible idea

scaramantula
05-29-2012, 07:57 PM
what if the NFL had a lottery..?... turrible idea

what if the nfl had a lottery?

it would still be terrible, lol

only real sports have lotteries

raiderposting
05-29-2012, 09:18 PM
no this is ****ing stupid. if a guy like shaq or lebron comes out again 28 out of 30 teams will be tanking. only the heat and thunder will play all other teams will tank to get them. the lottery makes sure that doesn't happen. it really reduces tanking.

Wolfman01
05-29-2012, 09:30 PM
Would removing the NBA lottery be a good idea?
It would remove all the conspiracy theories, and allow the truly worst team in the NBA to have its own pick; however, it might promote tanking on purpose to achieve a lock on the #1 pick.

I say no, removing the NBA lottery will only help big salary team like the Lakers and Knicks get more better players then other team. All players wants to play for the best team and for that no one will want to play for a bad team. Imagine this the all the top 10 pick from this year decided that they all want to play for the Lakers only. I'm not a Lakers fan and I'm just using this as a example. How will the bad team ever get better when all the good prospect only want to go to a good team? Back in the days there wasn't a NBA lottery and for that teams like the Lakers and Celtics won so many championship.

KnicksorBust
05-29-2012, 09:48 PM
Almost half of NBA games would become unwatchable that last month of the season as exaggerated injuries and bs lineups ruled the league in the (fill in the blank college player) sweepstakes.

phoenix_bladen
05-29-2012, 11:07 PM
I say no, removing the NBA lottery will only help big salary team like the Lakers and Knicks get more better players then other team. All players wants to play for the best team and for that no one will want to play for a bad team. Imagine this the all the top 10 pick from this year decided that they all want to play for the Lakers only. I'm not a Lakers fan and I'm just using this as a example. How will the bad team ever get better when all the good prospect only want to go to a good team? Back in the days there wasn't a NBA lottery and for that teams like the Lakers and Celtics won so many championship.

I don't get it

So ur saying if the lottery is removed all the players will play for lakers and Knicks? U make no sense how are players able to choose where they want to go?

Unless ur saying the lakers or Knicks are tanking

If that was the case everyone would tank

Although the management may want to tank it might be harder than u think

What incentives do coaches and players have by losing purposely? If the team ends up being one of the worst records the players either get traded or coach gets fired and their value around the league is lowered especially if they are playing for a contract

If anything wouldn't players and coaches not want to tank?

heattiltheend94
05-29-2012, 11:21 PM
Let people see the lottery balls live. Simple as that.

I like the lottery though.

best solution imo. it might actually garner some more ratings than just the announcement

SportsAndrew25
05-29-2012, 11:45 PM
Get rid of this load of crap they call a draft lottery. If you are the worst team in baseball and football, you get the number #1 pick. Why does basketball have to be different? How can you have parity in a sport when the worst team in the sport MAY NOT EVEN GET THE FIRST PICK IN THE DRAFT????!!!! If you suck and have the worst record in the league, you must given the first pick in the draft. This is what will lead to parity in basketball, not raping teams like the Lakers, Heat and Knicks out of money if they go over the salary limit.

MintBerryCrunch
05-29-2012, 11:58 PM
The lottery is ******** . There's a reason why no other main sport does it

Whomewhome
05-30-2012, 01:43 AM
The lottery is dumb the way it is set up.

The odds of getting the pick are way too slim. 2 teams with the worst record have ever gotten to pick 1st.

Don't delete it but give better odds.

M.Bibby2.0
05-30-2012, 02:04 AM
lol I could see playoff calibre teams tanking if another LeBron or Duncan was entering the draft. tbh I think the solution to everything is simple: televise the entire lottery process on live TV, it'd be more exciting, probably get higher ratings and we wouldn't have to worry about the conspiracies (although I'm sure some would still be sceptical)

Whomewhome
05-30-2012, 02:22 AM
lol I could see playoff calibre teams tanking if another LeBron or Duncan was entering the draft. tbh I think the solution to everything is simple: televise the entire lottery process on live TV, it'd be more exciting, probably get higher ratings and we wouldn't have to worry about the conspiracies (although I'm sure some would still be sceptical)
BINGO televise the damn thing. People really don't care if it's long.

Cfrey
05-30-2012, 02:44 AM
lol at all the people saying teams would just tank.. let them tank then.. it has shown that its very ineffective

tcav701
05-30-2012, 05:16 AM
The Bobcats had the worst winning percentage in NBA history.

How can you tank worse than that?

heattiltheend94
05-30-2012, 08:47 AM
The Bobcats had the worst winning percentage in NBA history.

How can you tank worse than that?

tbh, i just really thought they were that bad...tanking wasn't on purpose

Gram
05-30-2012, 09:00 AM
regardless of what system you have, teams will tank. the warriors tanked this season, so they could secure their pick this season, because it was owed to utah.

I still hope they don't get their pick.

pebloemer
05-30-2012, 09:18 AM
Let people see the lottery balls live. Simple as that.

I like the lottery though.

Representatives from the media woudl tell you that it is a horribly boring process that involves lots of preample to ensure everyone feels comfortable that it is being done fairly and has very little entertainment value. Hence why they do it by announcing the picks after (creates better suspense). There are team representatives in the room when they do it. That is enough for me.

I actually looked up the blog from a media representative who was in teh room last year if you are interested:


All right, here’s why they don’t put the actual drawing of the lottery balls on TV for those who were wondering yesterday.

It’s mind-numbingly boring and fast. And done with such necessary solemnity that it probably has to be done behind closed doors. I’m talking, for the most part, a snorefest.

Really.

A league official goes over the process in painstaking detail including what would happen in the “disaster scenarios” of the power going off (draw by hand), the machine spewing balls everywhere (draw by hand) or balls getting jammed (reset the machine).

Now, if the balls had started spewing from the machine and flying all over the room, that would have been cool.

http://thestar.blogs.com/raptors/2011/05/lists-and-hirings-and-a-little-bit-of-bulls-heat.html


So, what’s it like in there?

Mind-numbingly boring for the most part but kind of cool.

We’re shepherded into the room about 7 p.m., reps of the 14 teams, a handful of league officials, three very large security guards and five members of the media to act as witnesses, or hostages.

You walk in the boardroom and they want you’re blackberries or phones or whatever you have, as expected, although we could keep tape recorders if we wanted and could use laptops, as it turns out, because they had blocked any wireless access to the room.

But the speed with which it came together was stunning.

A dude from Ernst and Young walked everyone through the process, the balls were dropped one-by-one into the hopper (which looks like a toned-down version of any old lottery machine and was built specifically for the event) and then it started.

Three draws, each taking a minute and it was all over and done with by 7:23 p.m. if the chicken scratch in the notebook can be trusted.

Then? Then we stood around nibbling on cold cuts and cookies and drinking coffee and soda, chatting with the likes of Ernie Grunfeld and Billy McKinny, Marc Eversley and a handful of others.

Nice talks, very long wait while watching the whole process on TV like many of you were.

But you need to trust me on this: It so above-board and impossible to rig and witnessed by so many people with so much vested interest in the process that there’s no way it could be anything but legit.

I’m sure that won’t appease everyone but I really don’t care

http://thestar.blogs.com/raptors/2011/05/a-rather-interesting-day-all-around.html

tcav701
05-30-2012, 09:35 AM
Representatives from the media woudl tell you that it is a horribly boring process that involves lots of preample to ensure everyone feels comfortable that it is being done fairly and has very little entertainment value. Hence why they do it by announcing the picks after (creates better suspense). There are team representatives in the room when they do it. That is enough for me.

I actually looked up the blog from a media representative who was in teh room last year if you are interested:



http://thestar.blogs.com/raptors/2011/05/lists-and-hirings-and-a-little-bit-of-bulls-heat.html



There is still no reason why a video of the process can't be avaiable to the public online. After the lottery show of course so it doesn't affect tv ratings.


http://thestar.blogs.com/raptors/2011/05/a-rather-interesting-day-all-around.html

So then dont show it on tv.

There is still no reason why they cant make a video of the process avaiable to the public on NBA.com.

pebloemer
05-30-2012, 09:45 AM
So then dont show it on tv.

There is still no reason why they cant make a video of the process avaiable to the public on NBA.com.

I personally don't care either way, as I wouldn't watch it and am not in the boat that feels there are any conspiracies. But if the teams/owners (the people that have millions upon millions of dollars invested in the process) are content with the process, they probably don't feel a need to.

People will still have their conspiracies, I just figured I'd post this to clarify some of the erroneous information that is spread around (ie. someone stating there aren't team representatives in the room... yes there are...).

tcav701
05-30-2012, 09:58 AM
I personally don't care either way, as I wouldn't watch it and am not in the boat that feels there are any conspiracies. But if the teams/owners (the people that have millions upon millions of dollars invested in the process) are content with the process, they probably don't feel a need to.

People will still have their conspiracies, I just figured I'd post this to clarify some of the erroneous information that is spread around (ie. someone stating there aren't team representatives in the room... yes there are...).

But according to who?

Seeing is believing and the fact that the NBA has never made the real process available to their consumers is curious at least.

pebloemer
05-30-2012, 10:15 AM
But according to who?

Seeing is believing and the fact that the NBA has never made the real process available to their consumers is curious at least.

According to who? I'm not sure what part of my post you are responding to here.

According to the various media members they invite into the room each year to cover the lottery (which is how they get make the process available to their consumers) this is how it runs. The media is how the get any NBA information out to the consumers... I'm not sure what you are asking...

tcav701
05-30-2012, 10:19 AM
According to who? I'm not sure what part of my post you are responding to here.

According to the various media members they invite into the room each year to cover the lottery (which is how they get make the process available to their consumers) this is how it runs. The media is how the get any NBA information out to the consumers... I'm not sure what you are asking...

So it's not out of the realm of possibility that these reporters will tweet out the order before being revealed on tv?

It's not good enough for me that I as a consumer have to put my trust into a reporter and their presence in the room. Maybe I'm not as trusting as I should be but reporters aren't exactly know for keeping secrets or being beacons of truth.

I am fully aware as to why TNT may not air the actual lottery. However, there is no logical reason as to why a veiwing of the process isn't made available to the public.

Unless of course, they flat out do not want us to see.

pebloemer
05-30-2012, 10:30 AM
So it's not out of the realm of possibility that these reporters will tweet out the order before being revealed on tv?

It's not good enough for me that I as a consumer have to put my trust into a reporter and their presence in the room. Maybe I'm not as trusting as I should be but reporters aren't exactly know for keeping secrets or being beacons of truth.

I am fully aware as to why TNT may not air the actual lottery. However, there is no logical reason as to why a veiwing of the process isn't made available to the public.

Unless of course, they flat out do not want us to see.

Again, I'm not against the idea of airing the actual event as a stream on NBA.com after their "show" is done, I just don't care about it. I imagine most fairweather fans wouldn't care and most die hard fans are going to continue to support the NBA anyways so I can't see why they feel a need to.

If the owners of multimillion dollar businesses that are affected by the process aren't concerned with how the process takes place, I'm not sure why I need to be as the fan. They have far far more to lose than I do from the process and it is their business that I am supporting.

ie. (I'm sure Mikhael Prokhorov will be 100% certain there was no foul play as he has tons to lose if the Nets don't land in the Top 3). If I'm a Nets fan, that's consolation for me.

heattiltheend94
05-30-2012, 11:06 AM
If the owners of multimillion dollar businesses that are affected by the process aren't concerned with how the process takes place, I'm not sure why I need to be as the fan. They have far far more to lose than I do from the process and it is their business that I am supporting.


while you probably are right, they would never say something like that for if they did feel some uncertainty about the process as a whole, they would be fined severely by the league.

ManRam
05-30-2012, 04:02 PM
Don't know if it's said...

The Bobcats have a 36% chance of getting the 4th pick, compared to a 25% chance of getting the first, 20% chance of getting the second and an 18% chance of getting the third. The odds of them getting #1 should be the highest. I understand why it's like that how how the system works, but that just is counterintuitive to me.

I agree that the lottery should be slimmed down too. After the 8th or 9th worst team, they shouldn't have a shot...

tcav701
05-30-2012, 05:17 PM
Don't know if it's said...

The Bobcats have a 36% chance of getting the 4th pick, compared to a 25% chance of getting the first, 20% chance of getting the second and an 18% chance of getting the third. The odds of them getting #1 should be the highest. I understand why it's like that how how the system works, but that just is counterintuitive to me.

I agree that the lottery should be slimmed down too. After the 8th or 9th worst team, they shouldn't have a shot...

If Brooklyn mysteriously gets the #1 pick......wink wink.......do you think they will trade it to Orlando like the reports say?

I wonder what ppl would say if/when that happens lol.

scaramantula
05-30-2012, 05:44 PM
Don't know if it's said...

The Bobcats have a 36% chance of getting the 4th pick, compared to a 25% chance of getting the first, 20% chance of getting the second and an 18% chance of getting the third. The odds of them getting #1 should be the highest. I understand why it's like that how how the system works, but that just is counterintuitive to me.

I agree that the lottery should be slimmed down too. After the 8th or 9th worst team, they shouldn't have a shot...

why does being the worst team in the league mean you win the best player in the draft, if anything they should lower Charlotte's chances,

you are the reason that tanking is acceptable, complaining that the worst team in the league isn't being treated fairly is ridiculous, why shouldnt a higher ranked team get the higher pick, all teams start the year with the same record and because Charlotte doesn't give a **** about their games or their fans they get a top pick, teams that go out at the beginning of the year and try to win get punished

dont get rid of the lottery, make it more fair give all the teams a chance to win

JLynn943
05-30-2012, 06:16 PM
If Brooklyn mysteriously gets the #1 pick......wink wink.......do you think they will trade it to Orlando like the reports say?

I wonder what ppl would say if/when that happens lol.

That will make conspiracy theorists so much worse, haha.


why does being the worst team in the league mean you win the best player in the draft, if anything they should lower Charlotte's chances,

you are the reason that tanking is acceptable, complaining that the worst team in the league isn't being treated fairly is ridiculous, why shouldnt a higher ranked team get the higher pick, all teams start the year with the same record and because Charlotte doesn't give a **** about their games or their fans they get a top pick, teams that go out at the beginning of the year and try to win get punished

dont get rid of the lottery, make it more fair give all the teams a chance to win

:facepalm: The NBA is insanely talent-dependent. Charlotte has far worse talent on their roster than any other team in the NBA. THAT is what drafts are meant to address. Punishing them because they can't compete with what they have is ridiculous. It will just continue the current trend. Do you honestly think those players wanted to have the worst record in NBA history? No. They just suck.

scaramantula
05-30-2012, 07:00 PM
That will make conspiracy theorists so much worse, haha.



:facepalm: The NBA is insanely talent-dependent. Charlotte has far worse talent on their roster than any other team in the NBA. THAT is what drafts are meant to address. Punishing them because they can't compete with what they have is ridiculous. It will just continue the current trend. Do you honestly think those players wanted to have the worst record in NBA history? No. They just suck.

they suck so they deserve a number 1 pick? and whose fault is it that charlotte has no talent, is it the other 29 teams in the league? nope its charlottes management,

it really makes me mad when tanking to get a top pick is considered a legitimate strategy to rebuild a team, i mean how does San Antonio keep drafting all these good players? they haven't had a top pick in so long, maybe charlotte should stop reading the scouting reports of the internet and get some good scouts so they don't need to rely on a number 1 pick to save there team.

and if there players are so bad why are they in the nba?

JLynn943
05-30-2012, 07:48 PM
they suck so they deserve a number 1 pick? and whose fault is it that charlotte has no talent, is it the other 29 teams in the league? nope its charlottes management,

it really makes me mad when tanking to get a top pick is considered a legitimate strategy to rebuild a team, i mean how does San Antonio keep drafting all these good players? they haven't had a top pick in so long, maybe charlotte should stop reading the scouting reports of the internet and get some good scouts so they don't need to rely on a number 1 pick to save there team.

and if there players are so bad why are they in the nba?

It's funny that people think that tanking is this great strategy. Does no one realize what it involves? First, it is a horrible statement to your fans. Why would anyone want to go to a game if the team is tanking? The loss in attendance is incredibly damaging to the team. On top of that, other players in the league are not going to want to join a team that has shown no signs of growth. And then what about the players on the team? Surely they don't want to tank just to draft their own replacement. If the coach pulls the players that give them the best chance to win, those players will not want to stay, thus making the team even worse.

The draft is not about "rewarding" losing. It is meant to stock the league with talent to balance the league as much as possible. Charlotte's players are mostly NBA talent, but a collection of players where none are especially good (as of yet). Is it Charlotte's management's fault that they aren't stocked with talent when they haven't had the fortune of winning the lottery to get the top talent? Not completely. That's also the lottery's fault. They couldn't benefit from it like a Chicago or LAC did. They also maintained a borderline competitive team in the East for a couple of years which put them in draft hell (aka, right outside or just inside the lottery), where talent is historically less available.

tcav701
05-30-2012, 08:11 PM
It's funny that people think that tanking is this great strategy. Does no one realize what it involves? First, it is a horrible statement to your fans. Why would anyone want to go to a game if the team is tanking? The loss in attendance is incredibly damaging to the team. On top of that, other players in the league are not going to want to join a team that has shown no signs of growth. And then what about the players on the team? Surely they don't want to tank just to draft their own replacement. If the coach pulls the players that give them the best chance to win, those players will not want to stay, thus making the team even worse.

The draft is not about "rewarding" losing. It is meant to stock the league with talent to balance the league as much as possible. Charlotte's players are mostly NBA talent, but a collection of players where none are especially good (as of yet). Is it Charlotte's management's fault that they aren't stocked with talent when they haven't had the fortune of winning the lottery to get the top talent? Not completely. That's also the lottery's fault. They couldn't benefit from it like a Chicago or LAC did. They also maintained a borderline competitive team in the East for a couple of years which put them in draft hell (aka, right outside or just inside the lottery), where talent is historically less available.

Great post.

scaramantula
05-30-2012, 08:49 PM
It's funny that people think that tanking is this great strategy. Does no one realize what it involves? First, it is a horrible statement to your fans. Why would anyone want to go to a game if the team is tanking? The loss in attendance is incredibly damaging to the team. On top of that, other players in the league are not going to want to join a team that has shown no signs of growth. And then what about the players on the team? Surely they don't want to tank just to draft their own replacement. If the coach pulls the players that give them the best chance to win, those players will not want to stay, thus making the team even worse.

The draft is not about "rewarding" losing. It is meant to stock the league with talent to balance the league as much as possible. Charlotte's players are mostly NBA talent, but a collection of players where none are especially good (as of yet). Is it Charlotte's management's fault that they aren't stocked with talent when they haven't had the fortune of winning the lottery to get the top talent? Not completely. That's also the lottery's fault. They couldn't benefit from it like a Chicago or LAC did. They also maintained a borderline competitive team in the East for a couple of years which put them in draft hell (aka, right outside or just inside the lottery), where talent is historically less available.

the flaws you pointed out with the lottery would not exist in my lottery, cause those semi competitive bobcats teams would have had a chance to get a better draft pick. also i never said i liked the idea of tanking or even thought it was a good strategy,

im just saying what kind of league is it that almost every year we have multiple teams tanking on purpose