11/23/24
March 27, 2007
Scratchers for Everyone!: Jeff Van Gundy suggests the NBA open up the Draft Lottery to the entire league, not just those teams with the worst records.
posted by lilnemo to basketball at 01:24 PM - 14 comments
I think the idea is great. Perhaps weight the lottery to the weaker teams. Give the 30th place team 30 balls, the 29th place team 29 ping pong balls in the hopper, the 28th place team 28, and so on, up to the team with the best record in the leauge having only one ball in the hopper. This way it is more likely that the weak sisters of the league will get the better draft position, but everyone has a shot at the best players. Why should a team be punished for being successful?
posted by tommybiden at 03:11 PM on March 27, 2007
I'm not sure I get this. Isn't the entire reason to have a lottery in the first place to weaken the incentive for teams to tank games? The worst record in the NBA by no means guarantees the #1 pick. Tanking games only increases the number of ping-pong balls which is far from a foolproof strategy. So I don't see NBA tanking as a fatal or even serious problem. It isn't a very fruitful plan of attack. One of the issues that I have with the NBA is the fact that you almost NEED a top three pick to move your team from the bottom of the league to title contention. Take a look at the list of NBA Finals MVPs. Going back twenty years or more, almost every single guy was a top three pick. (The only exception I could find from 1986-2006 was Joe Dumars, and the Pistons had Isiah.) Why should a team be punished for being successful? Because competitive balance is good for the league as a whole. Allowing a team like, say, San Antonio or Cleveland - who already have one of those MVP-caliber players - to acquire another one, while other teams constantly pick in the vicinity of 8th, has the potential to discourage large sections of the fanbase.
posted by Venicemenace at 03:54 PM on March 27, 2007
I never quite understood why losing is rewarded, other than for parity." I think you about answered your own question, Jeff.
posted by jmd82 at 04:33 PM on March 27, 2007
Jeff's been looking for the answer ever since Michael Jordan pounded him into submission, consistently, when he was with the Knicks.
posted by dyams at 04:36 PM on March 27, 2007
How bout allowing teams to turn in their last years first round picks, kinda like an upgrade? put a name like joe forte on a ball maybe? or i would have gladly taken back the Robert "stuck in the mud-tractor" traylor for the next years pick. Talk about parity, a sucky player going to another team might help mine beat em. Hell, apply it to all rounds, i might only keep two players on my bucks roster.
posted by firestompinmed at 09:29 PM on March 27, 2007
or i would have gladly taken back the Robert "stuck in the mud-tractor" traylor for the next years pick If your a T-Wolves fan, I'd bet dollars to donuts that you'd take the draft rights to Dirk Nowitizki back for the draft rights to Traylor. That wasn't a flaw in the system. That was a flaw in Minnesota management. Could you imagine a team with both KG and Dirk? That'd be sick. Other than that, regarding Van Gundy's theory, I'll just second what jmd82 said.
posted by Ufez Jones at 10:04 PM on March 27, 2007
Jeff Van Gundy has the haunted, haggard look of a man who just spent a million years in one night with Greg Maddux.
posted by The_Black_Hand at 06:26 AM on March 28, 2007
What about giving all teams who missed the playoffs an equal chance? Teams will still try to get into the playoffs, but then you won't have teams tanking.
posted by bperk at 08:42 AM on March 28, 2007
Hell why not just /random who you invite to the playoffs too! Then you can decide the games by alternating coin flips, and do a bake-sale to determine the MVP!
posted by chmurray at 10:37 AM on March 28, 2007
Teams will still try to get into the playoffs, but then you won't have teams tanking. Sure you would, and it might be even worse as everybody who might wind up with an 8 seed would be throwing games to the shittiest teams.
posted by yerfatma at 11:15 AM on March 28, 2007
I don't believe that. The playoffs have more value than a 1 in 14 chance of getting the top pick in the draft.
posted by bperk at 11:28 AM on March 28, 2007
This is one more example of what's wrong with the NBA. Name another sport where this is even an issue. NFL teams often win a game late in the season and cost themselves the first pick. It's a thing called professional pride that keeps them playing to win. People who want the best teams in the league to also get rights to draft the best new players should just buy a minibus and follow the Harlem Globetrotters around.
posted by olelefthander at 12:05 PM on March 28, 2007
The playoffs have more value than a 1 in 14 chance of getting the top pick in the draft. The gate from 1-3 home games is more valuable than a better draft pick? At best it seems like that's a debatable proposition from year to year.
posted by yerfatma at 01:06 PM on March 28, 2007
As long as it doesn't take effect until next year, I'm fine with it. The tanking and even just the appearance of tanking put an odd spin on watching a team.