Author Topic: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.  (Read 10481 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #60 on: October 22, 2014, 04:28:58 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239

Getting rid of draft pick protections would go further to solve the 'tanking' phenomenon than changing the lottery, TBH.

That's a pretty interesting idea, actually.  Would also cut down on those sham non-trades if applied to 2nd rounders too.

The only problem is that it's literally impossible to implement if there are existing picks with protections on them, and you'd have 29 teams crying about the terrible disadvantage they were forced to endure.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #61 on: October 22, 2014, 04:30:21 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
Past results have 0 predictive value for future results; I'm pretty sure most front offices know that and I'm positive that you do.

Of course.  That doesn't change my point that even under the current odds, the worst team has a 75% chance of not winning the lottery, yet we still see teams tanking.  A better chance is a better chance and a positive, non-zero percent chance is better than a zero percent chance.

Quote
Sure, but again, "missing the playoffs" isn't nearly the same thing as "having the ability to make the playoffs but deliberately trying to miss them".  I don't think Suns fans would be elated if they had the 8 spot down the stretch but management dumped Dragic for peanuts or invented a bogus injury to make sure they didn't get in.

Sure, but I never said they'd have to sell Dragic for peanuts or invent a bogus injury. ;D My point is that fanbases aren't universally upset at the notion of their team missing the playoffs in any given season; there are a multitude of factors that come into play. One fanbase might consider it a blessing, whereas another might be very disappointed.

Quote
And this is sidestepping the other issues of how the media would cover it, how the players would react, and why the owners would be willing to deliberately give up millions in playoff revenue for a 2% chance (I looked up the proposal), but not for the current .5% chance.

If the team is the Hawks and they're looking for a way to drum up fan interest, they might be willing to punt a season of playoff revenue for the chance of landing a transformative player in the draft.

Quote
Your point was "you'd have the middle class fighting their way out of the playoffs much like Golden State did in 2012."  The Warriors didn't fight their way out of the playoffs, they were never in the playoffs.  Their peak winning percentage in the 2nd half of the season was 46%; the worst playoff teams in the west finished at 55%.  Even if they'd stayed at that high water mark they'd've missed the playoffs by 6 games (in a 66 game season) and finished 11th in the West instead of 13th.  That's not a playoff team dropping out, that's a bottom-10 team sliding a few notches to keep a pick.  It's not reinforcing your point.

Fair enough, I misspoke -- my ultimate point is that you'd have teams aiming to lose games.

Like others, I think its important to point out the biggest problem w/ the current system is a team like the Cavs, not Philly (and Philly is ridiculous, but they are the most blatant tanking team I've seen in a while). Philly wasn't going to be very good, anyway. There should be something in place to handle that, but that's about owners and GMs....who also run the league. So, the tanking problem they talk about is their own doing. There are bad teams. They are bad for many reasons, but mostly b/c they're just bad. They need the best players to improve. The Cavs winning the lottery shifted the entire NBA landscape, not Philly getting the 3rd (vs. maybe the 5th had they not tanked so hard) pick. The Cavs didn't make the playoffs b/c they are run horribly, but by being much worse than they should have been, they then get to leapfrog 8 other teams who were actually worse than them and end up with LeBron and Love directly as a result? That's the problem.

The proposal would've just increased the possibility of another team like the Cavs jumping in the lottery.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #62 on: October 22, 2014, 04:49:02 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
Also, keep in mind that, depending on who you ask, the Hawks tanked this past year down the stretch after a rash of injuries in the middle part of the season.  And Danny Ferry did very little to fight off the speculation, even saying he wasn't necessarily concerned with making the eighth seed.  I'm not saying that the Hawks tanked, nor am I saying they didn't (well, actually, I am saying they did, but that's irrelevant).  It's easy enough to hide or obscure your intentions if you really want to.  Outside of a few under-the-radar articles and some discussions on forums, no one really paid any mind to what the Hawks were doing.  No one even brings it up nowadays.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 05:02:13 PM by Endless Paradise »

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #63 on: October 22, 2014, 04:51:59 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30859
  • Tommy Points: 1327
Past results have 0 predictive value for future results; I'm pretty sure most front offices know that and I'm positive that you do.

Of course.  That doesn't change my point that even under the current odds, the worst team has a 75% chance of not winning the lottery, yet we still see teams tanking.  A better chance is a better chance and a positive, non-zero percent chance is better than a zero percent chance.
You're ignoring that tanking isn't about "winning' the number one pick, its about getting the highest pick possible. If you have the worst record you can't go lower than 4, second worst 5, etc.

This makes the calculus of 75% not to win the top pick deceptive, teams are looking at getting the highest expected value for their pick. A team that backs out of the playoffs has a very high upside if they jump up, but their risk is massive as by far the most likely outcome is that they stay at the 14th pick (or whatever they slot to).

This sort of massive risk isn't something teams are going to be willing to do for a 2% chance compared to playoff revenue and the other benefits of the playoffs. Plus the risk of driving away fans by dropping out of the playoffs.

An estimate of the increased expected slot of dropping out of the playoffs for the new proposal would be as follows if they had a 2% shot of moving into any slot 1-6, assuming they get the 14th if they don't jump: Note I simplify the math a bit so my calcs are a bit off a full value tree

89% of not jumping stay at 14

(1+2+3+4+5+6)*.02 + .89 * 14 = 12.88

15th pick plus playoffs

They'd be missing the playoffs for an expected jump of about a slot and a half (because my simplifications slightly underestimate the odds of jumping up) in the draft on average. That's a terrible return considering the lost revenue and the backlash.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #64 on: October 22, 2014, 05:01:10 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
I just don't see the "threat" of public backlash and lost playoff revenue being that big of a factor, depending on the team.  You already face all of that as it is when undergoing any rebuilding process.  Instead of conceding the playoff race at the start of the season, you'd have some teams doing it later on.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #65 on: October 22, 2014, 05:08:07 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
I just don't see the "threat" of public backlash and lost playoff revenue being that big of a factor, depending on the team.  You already face all of that as it is when undergoing any rebuilding process.  Instead of conceding the playoff race at the start of the season, you'd have some teams doing it later on.

Depends on the team. The lost playoff revenue would be a big deal for a team like OKC or Indiana.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #66 on: October 22, 2014, 05:23:17 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
I have read that the average NBA team makes around $1 million in revenue for each home game they have in the playoffs. That's definitely incentive to finish in the playoffs rather than just out of the playoffs given the lottery odds of finishing with the 12th, 13th or 14th worst record

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #67 on: October 22, 2014, 05:27:05 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15720
  • Tommy Points: 1386
Again I will bring this back to Philly. There is a delicate line that they have crossed that has obviously angered a lot of other owners or this wouldn't happen. I do think there should be a penalty or changes to the league rules so that you don't end up with the exhibition team the 76ers are putting forth this year.

For one, I believe last year they didn't even reach the salary cap floor which meant they had to give their existing players a little bump in salary by league rules just to stay within existing rules. This is a loophole that should be set. They should be able to throw a few bones at a veteran that will either make the team more entertaining for their fans and the league as a whole and/or mentor their younger players. Heck, why not sign Iverson or one of these other guys that wants to make a comeback? They are already a side show with their epic blowouts, that would at least add some entertainment.

Secondly,  repeatedly drafting players that will not play in the upcoming season is a problem. To be fair I think what the OKC did with Huestis should also be illegal.

Anyways, I guess I'll end the rant there. I just wish that Philly would not be an embarrassment to the league and I hope their blatant tanking really blows up in their face.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #68 on: October 22, 2014, 05:38:48 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36703
  • Tommy Points: 2951
I would do a simple reverse the finishing order , first place picks last and so on.  To prevent tanking ....the first three picks of the lottery go to the back of the line for the following year .  Then after this they may return to the lottery the next year.  This keeps teams from tanking more than one year in a row......but still allows a rebuild .

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #69 on: October 22, 2014, 05:55:16 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
put the teams that didn't make the playoffs in a separate tournament(like the NIT), put all the those teams in a hat to pick the seeding, the team that wins the tournament gets the #1 pick and the team that lost in the finals the #2 pick.

more games, more money. what's wrong with that?

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #70 on: October 22, 2014, 06:19:50 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30912
  • Tommy Points: 1604
  • What a Pub Should Be
put the teams that didn't make the playoffs in a separate tournament(like the NIT), put all the those teams in a hat to pick the seeding, the team that wins the tournament gets the #1 pick and the team that lost in the finals the #2 pick.

more games, more money. what's wrong with that?

Why are you giving the team that lost the Finals the #2 pick?  Seems a bit arbitrary.

In regards to your NIT type tournament, you'd see phantom injuries popping up all over the place.  The only incentive for these guys being that your organization might end up drafting your replacement?  I could see agents holding these guys out left & right.  If there is no title at stake and the chance for injury still exists, whats the incentive to play here?


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #71 on: October 22, 2014, 07:03:13 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
I've seen a draft playoff idea pitched on a number of occasions.  My issue is that it ignores the very apparent issue: the worst teams in the league are bad for a reason and the very worst teams in the league are unlikely to suddenly become good enough to beat the less-worse non-playoff teams in a series.  It's not like the players are dogging it during the year to fuel the tank.  Most of the time, it's not even the coach punting the season.  Players and coaches depend on good performances to maintain careers in the NBA; it looks better to be a good player/coach for a good team than to be a good player/coach for a bad team.  Tanking is generally a front office decision and I don't see how this would really dissuade executives from doing it.

Phoenix won 48 games last year and just missed out on the playoffs.  Would it really have been fair to force 15-win, injury-ravaged Milwaukee to play that near-playoff squad in a draft playoff, inevitably lose, and then have to settle for the 14th pick in the draft?  Meanwhile the Suns, who really didn't need to add a top 3 talent, go on to play for the chance to draft Wiggins, Parker, or Embiid?

Players have incentive to ramp up their efforts and intensity in the playoffs because they're playing for a championship.  Good luck convincing guys that they need to play over 40 minutes a game and go all out just to help their teams draft their eventual replacements.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2014, 07:11:41 PM by Endless Paradise »

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #72 on: October 22, 2014, 07:15:32 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
put the teams that didn't make the playoffs in a separate tournament(like the NIT), put all the those teams in a hat to pick the seeding, the team that wins the tournament gets the #1 pick and the team that lost in the finals the #2 pick.

more games, more money. what's wrong with that?

Why are you giving the team that lost the Finals the #2 pick?  Seems a bit arbitrary.

In regards to your NIT type tournament, you'd see phantom injuries popping up all over the place.  The only incentive for these guys being that your organization might end up drafting your replacement?  I could see agents holding these guys out left & right.  If there is no title at stake and the chance for injury still exists, whats the incentive to play here?

I hate that excuse. every yr. these players have a chance at getting replaced. here's an idea play well and you don't get replaced.

as far as incentive? why can't they get paid?

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #73 on: October 22, 2014, 07:22:28 PM »

Offline freshinthehouse

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1620
  • Tommy Points: 156
I'm glad to see this was voted down.  It was far too radical in my opinion.  If they increased it from the first 3 spots being decided by the lottery to the first 4 spots, I could live with that.  But the idea of a team being the worst in the league and possibly ending up with the 7th pick doesn't sit well with me. 

Basketball is the one sport where getting one superstar player can change everything.  None of the other major pro sports (hockey, football, baseball) can say that.  There is always going to be tanking when getting that one player can make all the difference in the world.  It's just the nature of the game.

Re: WHOA: Lottery reform proposal has been voted DOWN. 17-13.
« Reply #74 on: October 22, 2014, 07:43:09 PM »

Offline GreenWarrior

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3275
  • Tommy Points: 228
My issue is that it ignores the very apparent issue: the worst teams in the league are bad for a reason and the very worst teams in the league are unlikely to suddenly become good enough to beat the less-worse non-playoff teams in a series.  It's not like the players are dogging it during the year to fuel the tank.  Most of the time, it's not even the coach punting the season.  Players and coaches depend on good performances to maintain careers in the NBA; it looks better to be a good player/coach for a good team than to be a good player/coach for a bad team.  Tanking is generally a front office decision and I don't see how this would really dissuade executives from doing it.

now this a legit argument against this idea. I agree asking a team that might just be real bad to win is a strong case against this idea.