Wanted to get your thoughts on my proposed changes to probabilities of winning the lottery. Here are the current odds which I have plotted on Excel (X-axis represents the 14 lottery teams from worst to best record, Y-axis represents probability of winning 1st pick): My solution to tanking and teams like the Rockets getting stuck in mediocrity for years is to adjust the probabilities to also reward teams that try to make the playoffs, while still giving the worst teams a good chance to win the lottery as well. I would adjust the probabilities to be an inverted bell curve as follows: Here are some advantages: In the absolute worst case for a team (i.e. having 7th/8th best record), the 2% probability of winning is still higher than 6 teams in the current system Currently, the probability of 1 of the 5 worst teams winning the lottery is 81.2%. In this proposed change, it wouldn't even be 50% (45.5% to be exact). This certainly would not promote tanking. Teams already eliminated from the postseason would still have incentive to play hard and get that 14 spot. With the potential of teams narrowly missing the playoffs getting a high pick, you are adding more parity in the league -- something the NBA would benefit from. The thought of a 9 seed adding Andrew Wiggins the next year would scare the 8 playoff teams in that conference. That element currently isn't in the league right now because the 6 best lottery teams combined only have about a 5% chance of getting the 1st pick. In this system, it's almost 50%. Adds more hype and excitement to the lottery selection show since the outcomes will be a lot more random JVG would approve of this Of course this is just one solution. One could propose having all teams in the lottery or at least adding teams that lose in the first round. Thoughts?
The only problem with that is that teams on the cusp of the playoffs would tank at the end of the season. Why be the 8th seed and get swept when you can get the top pick? You'd have to add an incentive for the bottom 5 teams playoffs as well.
Wouldn't this encourage teams in the 7/8th seeds to try and drop out of the playoffs? i.e. the Bucks last year - get swept by the Heat in the 1st round, or try to win the lottery? Doesn't seem like a tough choice.
You're right, but I think there's a big difference between the 7/8 seeds tanking versus teams basically tanking an entire season like we are going to see this year with the Celtics and 76ers. Plus the decision for a 7/8 seed to tank is a lot harder one for a few reasons: 1) It's tougher to make that decision to tank when you've spent the majority of the season trying to make the playoffs. Would really look bad to the players, coaches, and fans to quit last minute. Coach and GM jobs could be on the line and making the playoffs is often used as an important measure in keeping your job. Plus there is a recent history of 8 seeds upsetting a 1 seed (Warriors vs Mavs, Grizzlies vs Spurs). 2) The playoffs (i.e. home games) are essentially free money for the owners and even a single round generates good business for the franchise and the entire city. I don't think NBA owners would approve intentionally missing the playoffs just for a maximum 17% chance of getting the #1 pick. You know Les Alexander wouldn't approve of that for sure.
Good idea but maybe lower the percentage for the playoff strivers The fact is a draft style recruitment system coupled with a single tier division (no relegation for poor performing teams) will always encourage 'rebuilding'
My thoughts were to just give bonus lotto chances to teams who are over .500 and out of the playoffs. The more they are over .500 the more bonus lotto chances they get.
It's only an 18% chance of winning, so it's not like you're guaranteed the top pick if you're dead last or 14th. You have to at least try and be competitive to get to 14th position which is what I can't say for flat out tanking. Why shouldn't teams at are at least trying not be rewarded? I think it would be great for borderline teams to be able to stop being mediocre, get over the hump, and get into the big dance by having a much higher chance at the top guys.
What about the picking, they only pick 1-3, does that stay the same? If so, if #14 lets say doesn't get a top 3 pick, are they picking 14, or 4/5? I would guess with them picking #14 would eliminate some of the teams from wanting to tank to 9th instead of 8th. Essentially they are gambling if they tank to get ~50/50 to get 1-3 or get #14.
No it's horrible. I think this way he proposed is fine...but at in the 7th and 8th seeds to the lottery pool. If you do that I think you'll start finding more and more teams trying to be as competitive as possible.
I would lower the 14 seed/place to about 6% and have the worst record have about a 22.5% chance. I think that solves some of the problems discussed in this thread but improves on the current system.
Should lottery 1-14 with equal opportunity for everyone in the lottery as well as give greater financial rewards to teams that make the playoffs.
You could change how the 2nd round order works by using a lottery for the the bottom 22 teams instead of just reverse order of record and weight the bottom four playoff teams per conference as highly as the bottom eight overall teams. Ergo, the overall 15th worst team would have the same probability of the 31st pick as the absolute worst team, 16th would have the same probability as the 2nd worst and so on ... Not sure if it's enough of an incentive but it might create some reason to fight for a playoff spot (if you have a far more likely high 2nd round pick by making the playoffs than you would if you were just outside).
Instead of determining the first 3 picks, it should determine all 14 picks. At least you have a chance to move up to 9 or 10 instead of having a slim chance at 1, 2, or 3. You get to move up 4 or 5 spaces.
This is how I would prefer. But still adding in the 7th and 8th seeds from each conference. I don't thikn the 6th seed would tank because a lot of times those teams are fighting to try and get up to 4th. A real lottery with 18 teams would completely eliminate tanking AND make the draft lottery one of the most exciting events in the season. Not sure what is taking the NBA so long. Fans shouldn't ever root for their team to be bad. You see this with so many NBA fans. "Why did we get that player! He's good but now we won't suck!" and we Rocket fans were guilty of this...because the reward for sucking can be the next Tim Duncan, Lebron, Durant...then it's worth sucking.
Read somewhere about a tier system, where the teams are group in tiers. Group 1: 10-14 Group 2: 7-9 + Winner of Group 1 Group 3: 4-6 + Winner of Group 2 Group 4: 1-3 + Winner of Group 3 Makes for great TV as every single team have a chance to win the lottery and more movement up and down the board. And teams that are really bad will still get higher picks.
I'm n favour of giving every team not making the play-offs equal chance of picks. Just have all the teams in 1 box and draw for every pick. That avoids tanking, since there is no difference between being dead last and barely not making the play-offs in terms of chances of a high pick.
Maybe if the graph were a reverse nike check. And keep the old odds for the first pick, but the new odds would be for picks 2 and 3.
Too many black numbers. Too much white background. Too many blue-boxy, curvy lines. Too hard to understand. A quick pick lotto ticket costs $1 buck....easy...
I think a better solution could be to (1) expand the lotto to include low seed playoffs teams, lets say a 20 teams lotto and then (2) reward mid lotto teams, i.e. bell curve instead of inverted bell curve. Give the best odds to teams like Detroit and Minnesota last year. It would give a reason not to suck too much and try to at least be mediocre. And it would help mediocre teams to get over the hump.
