Is the NBA Lottery rigged? by Chad Ford 1985. Patrick Ewing was the top prospect in the country. Enter NBA Commish David Stern. With a frozen envelope. In Madison Square Garden. Seventeen years later, the story still lives. Did Stern, in a desperate attempt to resurrect the Knicks, rig the 1985 draft lottery? The questions that swirled around the draft that made Ewing a Knick are back as 7-foot-6 center Yao Ming makes his way to America. Apparently, the folks in charge of Yao's team in China, the Shanghai Sharks, are under the impression that they'll have some say concerning the team that drafts Yao. Wonder where they got that idea? Their criteria: a big market, large Asian American population, ability to compete for a championship in the next few years. Apparently, everyone loves the Lakers in China. Fans in Cleveland and Memphis might as well forget about Yao now. As for Chicago and Golden State. . . in the words of Jim Mora. Playoffs? Playoffs? That leaves the Knicks and the Wizards. Either scenario is a dream one for the NBA. Yao is exactly what the Knicks need to turn around their fortune. Instead of piecing together Marcus Camby with three band-aids and a popsicle stick every season, the team could have a legitimate, durable shot blocker in the middle. The Wizards' scenario may even be sweeter. Yao Ming and Michael Jordan? I can already see the proliferation of Wizards lunch boxes. Michael "Air" Jordan and Yao "the Air up there" Ming. Of course, Stern will have none of it. To him all of this conspiracy talk is just hot air. He says the Chinese must accept the luck of the draw. Wink, wink. "We know what they obviously would like," Stern said. "I've had occasion to meet with the general manager of the Shanghai Sharks [Yao's team], and my question was 'Can you spell Arvydas Sabonis?' " "It's going to be a good thing to have [Yao] in the NBA. I know they're very focused on how their team will do in the World Championships this summer in Indianapolis and in the Beijing Olympics." The big market teams get all of the TV ratings, get all of the calls in close games and have all the beautiful girls. So why can't they get the No. 1 pick in the draft? The Knicks have a 4.3 percent chance of winning the No. 1 pick. That's plausible enough, isn't it? The Knicks have asked former GM Dave DeBusschere, who represented the team at the '85 draft, to be present when the ping pong balls bounce May 19. Does he think something fishy happened 17 years ago? "I've heard that so many times," DeBusschere said. "I'll tell you, I'm not a good-enough actor. If anything happened, I didn't know." Stern keeps a sense of humor about the stories, still rampant in NBA circles, that an NBA employee froze the Knicks' envelope so Stern would know which one to pick. "Now it's ping-pong balls," Stern kidded. "You can't bend the corner [of an envelope] or freeze-dry the cardboard." But you could throw in a couple more ping pong balls for good measure. . . The stakes are likely to increase next Thursday when Yao comes to America to work out. He and Duke's Jason Williams will almost certainly go either 1-2 or 2-1 in the draft. Privately, some NBA teams grumble about the whole lottery system. While they don't believe it's fixed, they do believe it's unfair. The NBA started the lottery to keep teams from tanking games late in the season just to get the worst record in the league. Is there any way that the Warriors would have won their season finale if they knew it would cost them the No. 1 pick in the draft? Probably not, but then again it's the Warriors. The boneheaded move still cost them about 25 ping pong balls. The problem is that the worst team rarely ever wins the lottery. In fact, it's been 12 years, to be exact, since the NBA's worst has nabbed the No. 1 pick. Bad teams might as well be playing Powerball. The Knicks' winning the lottery would actually be less strange than either the Bulls or Warriors taking home the honors. Last year the Bulls had the worst record in the league and ended up with the No. 4 pick. The Warriors had the second-worst record and ended up with the No. 5 pick. In 2000, the Clippers ended with the worst record and the No. 3 pick. The Bulls had the second-worst record and drafted No. 4. The Nets, who got the No. 1 pick, had the seventh-worst record in the NBA. In 1999, the Grizzlies were the worst team in the NBA, but could manage only the No. 2 pick. The Clippers won only nine games, but had to wait until pick No. 4 to take Lamar Odom. In 1998, the Nuggets took home the worst record honors but nabbed only the No. 3 pick. In 1997, the Spurs leapt ahead of the Grizzlies and the Celtics to grab the No. 1 pick and Tim Duncan. In 1993, the Magic grabbed the No. 1 pick with a 41-41 record, best among lottery teams. You have to go back to the 1990 draft, when the Nets took Derrick Coleman, to find the worst team in the league drafting No. 1. With those odds, no wonder the Bulls and Warriors were trying to rack up the wins the last few weeks of the season. Several GM's I talked to believe the whole process is ridiculous. "The draft is thin enough these days that slipping from No. 1 to No. 4 could add a few years to your rebuilding project," one GM told Insider. "Where would the Celtics be if they had gotten Tim Duncan? Or the Grizzlies with Elton Brand? Or the Mavs with Chris Webber? If the Bulls or Warriors slip out the lottery this year, and history says at least one of them will, that's the difference between Jason Williams and Drew Gooden. That's a big difference." "Even if there is some late-season tanking, the lottery is nothing more than another cheap marketing ploy by the league," another GM said. "It adds some drama, makes for some good TV moments, and allows David Stern to parade around in front of a national audience for a few minutes -- but it hurts the game. The worst teams should have the best picks and they rarely do. And all of this conspiracy theory talk grows rampant because the league, at times, does care more about ratings and popularity than they do about the game." Talk about sore losers. So why doesn't the league open up the process, blind fold David Stern and make him pin the tail of Jerry Krause? That would just be too easy, wouldn't it.
<b>The problem is that the worst team rarely ever wins the lottery. In fact, it's been 12 years, to be exact, since the NBA's worst has nabbed the No. 1 pick. Bad teams might as well be playing Powerball. </b> That is surprising...
In case anyone is wondering, below is a link to a pdf file from census.gov on the 2000 state of the asian population by state, city, etc. http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/c2kbr01-16.pdf
The lottery really does help prevent teams from becoming supertankers. However, perhaps the time has come to break the lottery into two lotteries -- one of the worst six teams and one for all the other teams failing to make the playoffs. That would ensure that the really bad teams would definitely have the #1 through #6 picks. Stern could even strut around the stage on TWO nights or Sunday afternoons.
help me with something. as the writer goes through the article, he/she seems to be evalutating each of the lottery teams as to the quality of the match between what they have to offer and what the Chinese want. but there's no mention of Houston. or Denver for that matter. the writer mentions new york, washington, cleveland, memphis, chicago, golden state, etc. but no Houston. why is that? is Houston assumed to have too small an Asian American population? is that possible in the 4th-largest city in America? I'm just wondering what I'm missing. or is it just the same old, tired "Houston is not marketable" crap.
If the Knicks get the first or even the second pick, I will be fully 100% convinced that the lotto is rigged. 1) Their chances of those picks are so slim 2) Yao Ming is here this year 3) Stern is a Knicks fan
Actually, chievious, according to the file that Jayz posted, Houston has the 3rd highest Asian population among the cities in the lottery (behind New York and Chicago). I don't know why the article doesn't at least mention Houston.
I don't think he used Houston because it didn't work for his example. He wanted a small-market team with small Asian populations. Houston is 11th in TV market, 4th in total size and 3rd in Chinese population. Lumping us in with Cleveland or Memphis wouldn't really be a good comparison for his purposes.
Jeff. . . don't you think that kind of exposes the writer's bias? am I just pointing out the obvious? maybe that's what you were saying. if the writer excludes Houston from a piece intended to set up the likelihood of Ming going to New York, then maybe that means Houston poses a realistic threat to Ming ending up in New York. unless, of course, the whole thing really is rigged. I don't know. in OP's thread, he makes it sound like the Rockets aren't even considering Ming. is that because they don't want him or because they're convinced the Powers That Be won't allow it? kidrock8. . . what is your point? what is "LA Clippers. . . GS Warriors. . ." supposed to mean?
it means that behind New York, the largest concentration of Asian people is on the West Coast, mainly in the L.A., San Jose, San Francisco areas.
I don't think he was trying to list every team. I think he was just pointing out that the tiny markets have zero shot, and teams with zero shot of the playoffs (Chicago, GS) have no shot. The "story" markets (NY, Washington) would be the best for David Stern, so if one of those two gets it, the lotto may be rigged.
that's the quote that bothers me. when he writes: "That leaves. . .", it gives the implication that all other possibilities have been considered. whatever. also, does anyone have the actual numbers on Asian population? I know that the perception is that there is a larger number of Asian-Americans on the west coast, but do the numbers support it? I don't know where to google to see what the Asian-American population is in New York, Chicago, Houston, Denver, San Francisco, etc. . . if anyone has those numbers, let's see 'em.
someone, in some other thread posted the 2000 or 2001 census and asian population in different cities but I cant remember where it was
So, who thinks the Vancouver owners are r.e.a.l.l.y. stupid for not moving to San Diego? lol Houston is 8th in Asian population by the census (I think Jeff is remembering the Vietnam population), and we have one of 5 consulates in the US. (Note: no numbers I've seen include Washington DC area, whatever that means.) These writers just are not aware, thinking Houston is a Texas town or sumpin. Don't worry. Stern wants Ming in Houston. Chicago doesn't need him, because they already have marketing ability on the horizon (adding to that their upcoming pick to land a guard). GS causes too much bunching up of talent in the West Division in the West timezone, another Marketing problem. Memphis isn't going to be allowed to get him. And Denver is in a tailspin nightmare praying for Duncan, I guess. New York will not leap frog the pack, and has nothing to trade. Washington has like 8 balls. That leaves Houston. Stern is just being quiet about it. And if the Chinese love the Lakers so much, why is their championship team called "The Rockets?" We will get Ming. Just be prepared to make a blockbuster trade, if need be.
Personally I would love for us to get the first pick and then do a swap of picks with New York where we screw them rotten. Just a dream.
* If the lottery is really a random drawing, then why do the LA Clippers, New Jersey Nets, New York Knicks, San Antonio Spurs and the Chicago Bulls have more No. 1 picks than the Vancouver Grizzlies, Denver Nuggets, Cleveland Cavaliers, Atlanta Hawks and Dallas Mavericks? * If it really is a random lottery, wouldn't some of these teams that have been so bad for so long have tasted a No. 1 by now? Doesn't a random distribution of winners seem reasonable? Can you say game show fix? * If it really is a random drawing, why can't we witness it like every other lottery in this country? The hardest evidence: All of the teams that have won championships since 1985 (except the Lakers) have had at least one pick in the top three picks in the 16 drafts, while the teams with the most chances of having the top pick of the draft during that time (Vancouver, Dallas, and Denver) never have had it. Coincidence? Get real.
barbourdg, your point is well-made. but I have a question: when did the championship Rockets have a top-3 pick? if you mean the Olajuwon/Sampson/McCray years, that was before the lottery was instituted. also, the championship Bulls' top 3 pick [jordan] was also before the institution of the lottery. the Bulls that have had the top pick and top 3 picks recently certainly haven't won any titles. but, outside of that, I think your logic is persuasive, and I agree with you: the lottery is rigged. p.s. david stern is a prick.
