Ideas for Re-Working the NBA Draft Lottery

Your first idea seems to be the best one, as it just slightly alters the odds to not promote tanking.

Your second idea.. I can't get behind. Yes, it is highly unlikely a top 3 team would not get a top 8 pick.. but what if they didn't? Under your idea, the worst team in the NBA could conceivably be forced to pick at 14.. I just don't think that's fair, no matter how slim the odds are that, that will happen (there's always a chance).

 

A few ideas:

1. Equal Opportunity for all: Have all 30 teams with equal shot at lotto for top, say, 5 picks. Then go by record in inverse order.


I remember that expansion teams typically are not eligible for picks above #6 in their first couple years. I think the same should apply to crap teams, too.

A #6-ish pick is still valuable, and "helps" a team in a down market, but would be less of a incentive to tank a whole season for.


2. Delayed Gratification: Under whatever lotto system you want to run, have the lotto drawing decide not the pick you get in the upcoming draft, but the next one maybe even the one after.

So, for example, lets say we keep the Kings end up winning the lotto this year and get the #1 pick, it will be the #1 pick of the 2011 draft (maybe even the 2012 draft).

This way, struggling teams do get help, and their fans do get some hope. However, (1) there's less incentive to tank as the payoff comes later and you'll have to tell your fans to wait 2 or 3 years for your tanking to bear fruit, and (2) hopefully, putting a distance between when a team stinks and when the talented prospect arrive on the team will give the team some time to get a bit better before the arrival of the guy.... so that good talent doesn't get wasted by horrible managment/coaching. (I know, some teams are just bad year after year, but at least there is some hope they'll get better).


3. Mandatory pick switching: You have two lotteries.

First, At the end of each season, divide teams into, say, 5 groups by record. Top 6, 7-12, 12th-18th, etc. Then make a lotto drawing to within each group to determine whose pick you have for NEXT YEAR's draft (note: Not the draft coming up, but the one for the year after).

For example, both Clippers and Pistons are among the bottom 6 teams this year. Lets say the result of the drawing has the Clippers with the Piston's pick for 2011 (and the Pistons may have, say, the Nets pick for 2011). It's a mandatory trade of pick rights.

Then, at the end of 2011, where the Clips pick is determined by the Piston's record. If Pistons are the best team in the league in 2010-11, Clips are out of luck and get the 30th pick. If Pistons finish out of the playoffs, then you have the Piston's pick position (traded to the Clips) determined by lottery. The Clips will win a top pick only if the Pistons win the lotto.

This system sitll roughly gives bad teams a "leg up" since I'd rather the Rockets end up with, say, the Clips pick or the pick from a team that's currently bad, than, a team with a better record. A bad team may turn it around, but teams mostly don't change too rapidly (and if your "secret Santa" does have a great year... tough.).

More important, this still gives the fans of a bad teams some hope of getting a good pick next year and your team eventually turning it around.

One benefit is there is less incentive to tank because a bad record doesn't guarantee you anything, and whatever it brings you comes on a delayed basis.

The other benefit is that now Clips fans can spend the 2010-2011 rooting against the Pistons rather than the Clips.

I'll enjoy rooting for Knicks next year, and I think all NBA fans should have the same right.

 

The point is to bring down the gap of the mathematical expectation of draft positions between non-playoff teams so that teams that are out of the playoff picture won't feel the urge to tank because their chances of moving up in draft position doesn't get significantly better everytime they lose a game. The mathematical expectation of the draft position for the Nets this year is 1*0.25+2*0.75*0.25+3*0.75*0.75*0.25+4*(1-0.25-0.75*0.25-0.75*0.75*0.25)=2.7

Still too high imo.

 

Personally I like your 2nd idea, but I say increase the actual lottery pick to 14. It doesn't matter that the worst team could eventually end up with the #14 pick, because mathematically speaking that chance is slim to none.

 

I haven't calculated the number, but I'm sure the final draft positions would look more random if every position is actually determined by lottery.

 

Carl your 3rd idea doesn't sound feasible to me. Let's say the Lakers and the Clippers both end up at the bottom 6 this year. Lakers sucks due of injuries to its players while Clippers sucks because it really is a crappy franchise. And the drawing result comes as the two teams swapping their picks in the next draft. The lakers get significantly better next season when Kobe/Gasol/Odom are all healthy while Clippers continues to suck.

That is not fair for the Clippers. :grin:

 

Why is this not fair? Who says you are entitled to good prospects whose careers that your franchise usually end up destroying just because you suck?


NBA gives bad team lotto pick not because it is "fair" but because it's in the league's interest to give these teams some hope to dupe their fans with.

 

You're viewing this way too subjectively. Does wiping out all those sucky franchise with bad management sound good to you? There are always good and bad in the business, why do the bad deserve to stay in this league? The Clippers exists because it brings profit. Get over it. If you don't like that team don't be a fan of it and you can boycott it with those who share the same thoughts.

 

Yeah that's what I thought. His 1st idea is doable though.

 

Of course it is fair. All that losings gets you is a better chance at increasing talent than otherwise you would have. Bad things can still happen even if you do get a pick. Just ask Milwaukee how much Yi Jianlian and Joe Alexander are helping them right now.

I think you'll be fine as long as there is some increase in expected value of picks for struggling teams. Yeah, the whole Clips ends up with the 30th pick thing can happen, but won't happen often enough. Most of the time, they'll still get a pick in their own neighborhood.

Good question. Lets say we start next year... then you run two lottos this year based on the 2010-2011 record, once for the 2011 draft and one for the 2012 draft. Then next year, you run a lotto based on the 2011-2012 reecord for the 2013 draft and so on.

As for the other point (i.e. my idea #1) I think we can always tweak the weight however we like, as long it's doesn't too severly punish teams for winning or for making the playoffs. Maybe some weighing system that doesn't depend on playoffs but give lessor chance only for top playoff teams.

Maybe something like:

Top 6 teams in the league: 2 balls each.
Everyone else: 4 balls each.

 

No one is wiping them out. The Clips are doing good business despite never have enough talent. So how would losing a pick or two in a few years when something weird happens (i.e. Lakers get into lottery then immediately become great a gain and Clips happened to draw their pick), change that?

I am guessing that the "Clips/Lakers" scenario might happen, say, 10 or 15 % of the time. The Clips will still generally get a pick where their record say they would, 85-90% of the teime. The issue is you make the odds more indirect so tanking for a pick becomes a more opaque process.

 

They used to do this exact system, but then Orlando won the lottery for the 2nd year in a row despite having only 1 ping pong ball. Then they changed to the "4 digit combinations" method that supposedly smooths out the probabilities and prevents anomalies.

 

So franchises with bad management should be punished? How about the Rockets in the Francis era? Had they been deprived of the 1st pick in 2002 (it could happen in your system), how much more time would they have needed to turn the franchise around? How do you tell the difference between greedy owners (Clipper) and owners that make poor decision (Knicks)? Do you need a jury for that?

 

Question on topic:

Which teams tanked this year? And what did they do to make you think they were tanking? Is tanking as serious of a problem as we try to make it out to be?

 

Nope. Just some ranting on Bima's part because the Rockets we love would almost certainly have a #14 pick, which is bad in a time when we need talent desperately. :grin: That's not fair for our Rockets fan!!!

 

I don't think my proposal is arbitrary. Arbitrary would be to run a lottery for all picks with equal odds. My proposal still favors teams that are bad, but just introduces an element of chance that they won't get it, thus removing the ability to count on what you can get or to tank for a specific player. A bad team still generally has a better shot at getting #1, but it won't happen until a year later, and it may not happen at all.

Well, all the help that the lotto give them sure helped the Clippers turn things around, eh?

Besides, I am not proposing to "punish them," any more than Bimathug is. They are simply being favored a bit less than before.

About the Rockets: When they were bad, sure, a system as proposed by me or Bima would have reduced their chances at getting a Yao, but if they are smart, and act like Morey did this year, they can still get a team up to "somewhat decent" and then under a more "flat" system, they would have a better chance at taking the next step than before.

I don't get your Clips vs Knicks question. Why do we need to tell the difference?



Anyhow, all I want is a system which (1) provide roughly equal opporutnities for everyone and teams can rise and fall by the quality of their decisions, (2) does not result in a bunch of games in April and March in which teams have incentive to lose. It's not good for the league, and not good for any of the teams, to have a good chunk of your season being perceived as not genuine competition.