ESPN: Draft implications of a lost season

where u going to post this? or ask someone to?

 

nvm, I see you snuck in request there.

 

Thanks Clutch.

I would be okay with gaining the 9th pick but losing the 17th pick.

Guys like Austin Rivers, Terrance Jones, Jeremy Lamb, and John Henson project to be available around then.

 

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/blog?...-draft-lottery

NBA owners and representatives from the National Basketball Players Association met last week and failed to make significant headway on a new collective bargaining agreement.



The good news is that both sides are still talking. The bad news is that they seem to be at a tough impasse on the question of a hard salary cap. The owners are still pushing for it and the players are uniformly against it.



There is some optimism among both players and owners that an agreement can be reached soon. However, there are several league sources -- among both ownership and the players -- who continue to maintain that if a deal isn't reached soon, there's a good possibility that the entire season could be lost.



If the lockout takes away the entire season, it will undoubtedly have a number of devastating ramifications. One that I'm asked about on a daily basis is: What happens to the 2012 NBA draft if there is no season? Can there still be a draft? Who would get the No. 1 pick?




There are no clear answers to that question. League spokesman Tim Frank told ESPN.com that the 2012 NBA draft is "not something that is even a focus right now. All efforts are being put towards reaching a deal."



That's the public, on-the-record response. But privately, league sources say it's accurate. As of right now, the league does not have a 2012 NBA draft contingency plan in place should the NBA season be canceled.



To make matters even more complicated, any change in the date, current draft system or order would have to be negotiated with the union. We all know how well that's going. One league source said that if things progress to the point that the season is canceled, there's a chance the draft could be lost, too.



Why would the NBA have to cancel the draft?



Currently the league has very strict protocols in place banning NBA personnel from talking to or interacting with players. That protocol affects the draft as well. While NBA scouts and personnel always have been banned from speaking with college players until they officially enter the draft, the league has taken more stringent measures to prevent contact. As long as the lockout is in force, NBA scouts are banned from attending college practices this year -- they can only go to games. And it could get worse.



"I can't really see a scenario where the league would let us do stuff like the pre-draft camp, individual workouts or interviews if the lockout is still under way," one prominent GM told ESPN Insider. "I think the ban of contacting NBA players would probably spread to future NBA players as well. Unless we worked something out with the union specifically, it will be a giant mess."

Of course, contact isn't the only issue. Even if the league were to allow GMs and scouts to contact college players, conduct workouts, etc., a number of GMs are chewing on an equally thorny problem -- if there is no season, how do you determine the draft order?



While the league has yet to take up this issue, it hasn't stopped GMs and prominent agents from chiming in with their solutions to the problem. Their solutions range from the status quo to a radical restructuring of the draft.



Here are three scenarios that could happen if the league loses the season, but decides to go ahead with the draft.



1. Just redo the lottery


Several GMs say the easiest and fairest thing to do is to just redo the 2012 lottery with the same odds that decided the 2011 lottery.



"The draft is there for the worst teams to improve," another GM said. "The teams that were in the lottery in 2011 are still the worst teams in the league. It makes sense that they'd have the best odds of landing the best players in the draft."



But not everyone agrees.



"That would be totally unfair to a number of teams," a GM from a Western Conference team counters. "Most of the worst teams in the league would improve with the players they collected in the 2011 draft. Also, with a whole season lost, a number of teams will be left with a pretty depleted roster. Why should teams be rewarded twice for mediocrity? Most of the teams that are in the lottery are the ones that are also going to be responsible for us losing the season. The most poorly run franchises are the ones that need the hard cap. They're the same ones that need revenue sharing. Should we just give them extra draft picks, too?"



2. Have a league-wide lottery


Other GMs (most notably from traditional non-lottery teams) have another idea. Why doesn't the NBA just throw 30 pingpong balls into the hopper -- one for every team? Every team would have a 1-in-30 shot of winning the lottery.



"It's simple. It's fair and no one team is given an advantage because of the lockout. I also think it would make for great TV and drama for the league," another GM said.



A few agents I spoke with also love the idea.



"I always feel like bad teams win the lottery, but good players lose it," one prominent agent said. "Why do the best players in college basketball have to go to the most messed-up franchises where they spend years squandering their careers? I've never had an elite client who really wants to play for the Minnesota Timberwolves or Memphis Grizzlies. They want to win, and they want to be with a quality team."



As you can imagine, GMs of current lottery teams don't love that idea.



"How is it fair that teams like the Lakers or Mavericks or Heat have an equal shot of winning the lottery?" another GM said. "You're saying LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh need the No. 1 pick the same way a depleted team like the Cleveland Cavaliers do? I don't think so."



3. Meet halfway


Among the more level-headed GMs, a different sort of mantra emerges.



"I don't think either system is totally fair. I'm not sure any system will make everyone happy. But I think if the league took a five-year average for each team and then seeded them that way, you'd do the most good. Sure, [Cavaliers owner] Dan Gilbert would scream, but I think most GMs would feel it's fair. So would the fans."



Here's the idea: The league would aggregate team records for the past five years and then give teams draft picks based off those aggregate records. The team with the worst record in the past five years would draft first. The team with the best would draft last.



No, it doesn't address every need. Up-and-coming teams like the Oklahoma City Thunder would draft too high, and recently down-on-their-luck franchises like the Pistons would draft too low.



But at least it would be some attempt at parity.



Regardless of the solution, every GM will be watching this year's college basketball season closely.



"With no NBA season to conduct and follow, all of us will be turning our energy to scouting for new players," one GM said. "The players in this year's draft will be under the most scrutiny of any players ever if we lose the season."

 

I think the most fair proposal is to do the lottery with the 2011 odds. No one really expects any of those lottery teams to turn it around with the weak talent from that draft class. They're still all relatively bad.

 

I think they should do the last two years worth of records because it favors us!

 

?? uh no..? it favors us in getting another 14th pick basically

 

How about the teams in the lottery in 2011 have an equal chance lottery and the the play-off teams pick it in reverse order?

 

Sold!

Seriously, the Rockets should be on that like a fat kid on a bowl of ice cream.

 

I don't know, I have the feeling that in that scenario the Lakers would end up with the 1st overall, the Heat with the 2nd overall, Boston with the third, and New York with the fourth.

 

I like this one.

 

Why? There'd be such a high chance of us getting an even worse pick than 14th.