http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2814358 Van Gundy doesn't like that lottery rewards losing The Dallas Mavericks with the No. 1 pick in the 2007 NBA draft? If Rockets coach Jeff Van Gundy had his way, that could happen. Van Gundy wants to open up the NBA draft lottery to all 30 NBA teams in an effort to keep teams from losing intentionally to hopefully secure the No. 1 pick. "I think every team should have an equal chance at winning the lottery, from the best team all the way down," Van Gundy told The Houston Chronicle. "I don't want to accuse anyone of anything. I would say to take away any possible conflict of interest, everyone should have an equal chance at the top pick all the way down. That way there would be absolutely no question by anybody about anything. "If it's better for the game, they should do it. I never quite understood why losing is rewarded, other than [for] parity." According to The Chronicle, Van Gundy presented his proposal to the NBA, but wasn't taken seriously. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Didn't see it anywhere. Mods, please lock if already posted.
I like the Chron's idea of weighting all lottery teams equally. At least then the really good teams won't get the top pick. And then, there will be absolutely no incentive for tanking once you are out of the playoffs.
I agree with JVG there is a definate problem when a team takes thier best players out of the last month and a half of the season in hopes that they can lose without looking like they are trying to lose... in order to get more ping pong balls. But the current system is better than simply giving the team with the worst record the automatic first pick and working backwards from there.
They should make it where all lottery teams have the same chance to land the #1 pick. That way, the lesser teams can still get better but it eliminates the need to tank since every lottery team has a chance at #1.
I love JVG. Second only to Almu. But that's kinda like saying: "I never quite understood why cars have brakes, other than [for] stopping." "I never quite understood why people take dumps, other than [for] digestion."
It'll be fun watching all the hypocrites flood into this thread in a chorus of agreement with JVG ... considering what the GARM looked like this time last year.
It's actually not bad idea. I know teams need good players come out of the draft to help improve their teams, but it does seem like few teams may....hmmmm drop a few games to get the number 1 pick. I would have to be some kind of weighted system where the best team and worst team both have a chance to improve their teams. I think all teams should have a chance by given all the teams at lottery pick. Instead of having the worst 13 teams get the automatic 13 picks. Let's just say that get a higher percentage of balls, while the other 18 teams get lower percentages. Out of certain number balls (Percentage system where every team gets at least 1% - 8% chance of winning the 1st pick) Factors to determine positions: 1) Worst Records: Should definitely be the strongest factor, but not the only factor. 2) Strength of Conference & Division Schedule (how well you did compared to the rest of conferences) I think teams that had a tough opponents inside of conference and division should get the benefit of doubt, like the NFL. 3) Margin of Losses or Victories : I think among the worst teams, which ever teams showed to be more competitives within the games throughout most of the season, should get a partial reward for not being complete rollover in every game. 4) Pick in Previous Draft: I don't think a team should be allowed to get #1 pick two years in row, there should be balls deducted from that teams position, if they finish with another poor record in the following year. 5) Winning Percentage over the last two seasons: I've seen cases where good teams have substantial number of all-stars or strong players get injured in a season, and lose games only to end up with a high pick in the draft. I don't think that is really fair either, so winning percentage over seasons should be calculated. (worst five teams would get a better chance of getting strongest players in the draft, but aren't necessarily guaranteed a strong pick) 1. Memphis - 15 balls (tough schedule, low percentage 2. Boston - 15 balls (worst Western team) 3. Milwaukee - 13 balls 4. Seattle - 13 balls 5. Charlotte - 12 Balls (middle of the pack) 14. Orlando - 5 balls 15. New Jersey - 5 balls 16. Minnesota - 4 balls 17. Golden State - 4 balls 18. Denver - 4 balls (strong playoff teams) 27. San Antonio - 2 Balls 28. Phoenix - 2 balls 29. Detroit - 2 balls (two conference defending champs) 30. Dallas - 1 ball 31. Miami - 1 ball (Champion)
No doubt lottery helps parity (tell that to Hawks fans, though), but does the benefit of the parity outweight the disadvantages? Every year, there are teams appearing to be throwing games at the end of the season, that can't be good for business. Also, I kind of wonder if NBA is shortchanging itself and its most talented young players by disproportionately allocate them into bad situations and giving them opportunity to learn from bad coaching, bad teammates, and develop bad habits on and off court.
What a stupid idea. I'd like to see what JVG would say if he was stuck on a bad team and had no chance to get a superstar player in the draft, so would be fired within 3 years.
JVG is such a hypocrite too cause he's only coached on teams that have benefited from the draft. The knicks with ewing and now houston with yao.
No system will ever be perfect, but one that encourages losing or one that doesn't give bad teams a strong chance at future success is going in the wrong direction. I agree with the idea JVG is conveying, although I don't like the end result. Parity is very important in any league. Dynasties should be built through developing players and free agency (in that order), not won with a ping pong ball. I think all 14 teams that do not make the playoffs should get 1 ping pong ball for the number of games they won, then have a lottery. The rest of the draft would be dictated by record so that the 8th place teams would be no worse than 15 and 16 respectively.
I say if a team is going to tank the season, let them. All it does is foster a culture of losing. Only rarely does a high draft pick come along that can single-handledly change the fortunes of a franchise. You can name dozens upon dozens of top picks that have been unable to turn a team into a contender just on individual effort. This holds true even for someone like LBJ. You need a top to bottom culture of winning to make a team an elite team. A team that is willing to tank probably won't be able to fully exploit the talents of someone like Oden, just because they don't have the right culture of winning. I recall something Mark Cuban said when he took over the Mavs. The Mavs at that time were an awful team, and Don Nelson asked, "So, do we tank the season or just keep playing?" Cuban's response was "Keep trying to win, because you have to start at some poing." Look where the Mavs are today.
Remember to JVG, all teams are talented and have more then enough to win. To him what separates the good teams from the bad teams are consistency, dedication and intensity on a nightly basis, not talent. Tanking hurts the integrity of the game, its just pathetic to see teams just mail it in at the end of the season. Season ticket holders and fans in general don't want to see the product that is being put out on the floor. Obviously the elite teams shouldnt be given a chance to get a lottery pick, but the first pick shouldn't go to the team that puts in the least amount of effort into winning. Teams like golden state, the clippers and hornets are stuck in no mans land(teams stuck with mid first rounders because they try to make the playoffs), just because they don't give up at the end of season and try their best to get into the playoffs. These are the teams that should be given higher picks. Giving high picks to the worst teams just rewards the worst GMs in the league, who instead of trying to improve their team, want their team to lose so they have a chance of a quick fix with the number one pick. Bottom line: losing on purpose is bad for the league and the league should so something about it.
There is nothing wrong with the lottery. Its already hard enough to get the #1 pick. The worst team only has a 25% chance to get it. So tanking games doesn't make it any more unfair for the league. If you are tanking games, you are probably a bad team already, so you can only improve your shot at getting the #1 pick by maybe 10% tops. We aren't talking much here. On the other hand, say they make it equal for all teams. Remember how we got Yao when we barely missed the playoffs the year before? Imagine if... say the Lakers got the #1 pick this year. Next year they win a title. How fast do you think they are going to change it back? It would be even worse if it was a better team like the Pistons or the Mavs. The system we have right now works. Most teams when they are bad draft quality players and develop them into hopefully a good team while the good teams are forced to try and stay on top by trading and developing their young talent. Its a nice balance.
why not lock in the Lottery positions at the 41 game mark. No other games count towards the lottery after that. Or weight March and April games less, somehow.
Everyone needs to recognize something. The lottery is already there to help prevent throwing games in a way. I mean could you imagine if this was like the NFl where the worst team was gaurunteed the #1 this season... 5 teams would finish with less then 25 wins.
