"NBA again pushing for "anti-tanking" draft reform"
Essentially, the team with worst record could pick as low as fifth overall, the three worst teams have the same odds at getting the #1 pick, and other teams get better odds at picking higher. They also want to make it so a team can't have the #1 overall pick in successive years. So, if you pick #1 in 2017, the highest pick you could get the next draft is #4.
It's annoying that Silver's still stuck on this non-existent "problem." It's not that hard to fathom that some teams during any given season are just bad.
Oh, and they're still putting together a proposal to punish teams for resting players for televised games.
The NBA is aggressively pursuing draft lottery reform that could be voted into legislation and instituted by the 2019 draft, league sources told ESPN.
Commissioner Adam Silver is a strong advocate to deincentivize tanking by implementing lower odds on the NBA's worst teams to gain the top picks in the draft, league sources said.
The proposed measures would also increase the chances of better teams making a jump into the draft lottery. The NBA's 14 non-playoff teams compromise the league's annual draft lottery system.
The NBA competition committee, comprised of several general managers and coaches, is expected to vote next week on sending a formal recommendation to the board of governors for final passage, league sources said.
The competition committee is given significant latitude to challenge and amend the league office's proposals, and thus could recommend none, part, or all of a proposal for the league owners to vote upon at its late September board of governors meeting in New York.
Presently, the NBA team with the worst record can drop no lower than No. 4 from No. 1, but the NBA's currently proposed legislation could allow that team to drop from first to fifth in the lottery, league sources said. This would include a domino effect through the lottery, where the second-worst record -- presently dropping no lower than fourth -- could fall to sixth. Then the No. 3 team could drop as far as seven, and on down, league sources said.
Currently, the teams with the three worst records have an ascending chance of winning the No. 1 pick, including (No. 3) 15.6 percent, (No. 2) 19.9 percent and (No. 1) 25 percent.
The NBA's proposal would flatten those odds and give the three teams with the worst record the same percentage of earning the No. 1 overall pick, league sources said. Now, the worst record to the fifth-worst record is a gap of 25 percent to 8.8 percent, but new legislation would tighten that difference significantly, league sources said.
For example, the fifth-worst team would only have a few percentage points less than those teams with newly equal odds among the three worst teams, league sources said.
At the apex of the Philadelphia 76ers tanking saga, the NBA's board of governors voted down a somewhat more liberal proposal on lottery reform in 2014.
Another idea born out of the competition committee that could gather support, league sources said: No team can pick in the top three of the draft in consecutive years. For example, if Minnesota wins the No. 1 pick and drafts Karl-Anthony Towns -- as was the case in 2015 -- it can pick no higher than No. 4 in the next lottery. For now, that idea is outside of the league office's proposal but is expected to be considered in the upcoming committee meeting, sources said.
The competition committee is also finalizing its recommendations to the board of governors on the league's new resting plan, which would level punishment on teams for sitting out key players for nationally televised games, or multiple key players for road games, league sources said. The commissioner's office has pushed a plan of minimizing, if not eliminating, the intentional resting of players in nationally televised games.
Many NBA executives believe those new measures will effectively impact the perception of the tanking issue, what with the incentivizing of teams to play healthy starters down the stretch of the season. Many teams believe that tanking is no longer an issue in the league, and that the fear of other teams mimicking the 76ers' process has been unwarranted.
There is some fear among small-market teams that lottery reform will make it even harder for them to obtain star-level players through the draft, especially because of a pervading belief that it has become increasingly hard to do so through free agency and trades. Teams believe that the process of trading for star players has become more difficult, with agents and players warning that they'll leave come free agency and will never consider re-signing with those teams.
5. "lol...how about this" In response to Reply # 0 Fri Sep-08-17 09:34 AM by auragin_boi
Right after the season ends, give an 8 day window until the official playoffs start. That lets teams rest up and develop strategy for their first round opponent.
During this 8 day period, all 14 teams that missed the playoffs play a single elimination tournament for the 1st pick (worst record remaining after 1st round gets second round bye). Every pick after that will be determined by point differential and record (worse you lose by, higher your draft chances but your record is assigned a multiplier based on where you landed...lose big and have the worse record, you'd get #2).
The seeding would be so that the worst teams played each other and the better teams played each other. So worst record vs second worst, third worst vs 4th worst, and so on.
This allows the worst teams better chances to get to the top and the better teams harder routes.
So for 2017 it would have been:
Brooklyn vs Phoenix Second round bye so winner moves to final 4.
LA vs Philly Orlando vs NY Winners play each other
Minny vs Sac Dallas vs NO Winners play each other
CHA vs Det Denver vs Miami Ditto
These extra 3-4 games are played at one location, every other day, in a playoff city so no particular home court advantage but closest to the worst team if plausible (given some places will just be closer to some).
Each player will receive a bonus for playing in the extra games (15-25% of their annual salary, prorated based on advancing, winning gets you the full amount, lose early get an evenly prorated amount).
14. "Have the Lakers been legit bad the last 4 years, or are they "tanking"?" In response to Reply # 11
They've been legit bad. And by being legit bad, they've had the last three #2 overall picks, and they've been able to add players that either are or thought they were going make them better. So now, they're finally in a place where things **might** be looking up. They're not play-off good this season, but they'll be incrementally better and on the right track.
With the revised rules, chances are you wouldn't have gotten the #2 pick this season. And then with no draft pick, things sure aren't looking up.
So why penalize the Lakers for being legit not so good?
19. "So as an actual Lakers fan, this is how I see it...." In response to Reply # 14
Yeah, they've legit sucked, although folks have still rooted for us tanking. I do feel like Byron's last season, they did purposely tank, but even then, it's arguable.
My thing is...Whether we got the #1 or #4 pick, overall, that's still a high enough pick to assist with the rebuild. And we know how it's ALLLLL a crap shoot any way...as backwards as it sounds, there are more successful #3 picks than #2 picks, so it's surely not a for sure thing that a higher pick is going to bring success.
Of course I'm happy as hell we got the #2 pick this season, but in the previous years, we may have ended up just as good (ok, just as bad) with a #4 or #5 pick....you never know.
Now, if he wanted to revise it to where the worst three teams have the same odds as the #1 pick as the 13th worst team? Which is almost how it was when Orlando got the #1 in 93? That would be an issue. But if he does change it, I don't see it being that big of a change for real. It may even help out those semi-bad teams who are stuck at like 23-25th worst, and would actually make good use of a #1 pick versus a completely garbage team who wastes their potential and skill.
20. "Also any lottery doesn't do much to discourage it" In response to Reply # 13
Unless they did even odds for all non-playoff teams, which they won't/shouldn't. If tanking exists then why wouldn't a team tanks for a better CHANCE at the top pick rather than a full guarantee of the top pick? It makes no sense to keep overcomplicating it.