Should the NBA change the odds distribution for the Draft Lottery?

[SweaterBae]

It's a lottery for a reason.

[jkvonny]

Spurs fan here and I voted no.

[Roscoe Sheed]

They probably would have whiffed on the #1 pick anyways. When was the last time Detroit actually made a great draft pick? They've been picking in the lottery for the better part of two decades, and I can't recall a single home run pick. Just a few solid role players and a bunch of busts.

their record doesn't show it, but Cunningham, Ivey, and Duren are solid pros- definitely not busts and they are still quite young

[NyKnicks1714]

I don't think tanking should be rewarded. Detroit should've lost their pick because of the product they have been putting on the floor.

The draft odds change is one of the best things they did in the NBA. Intentionally putting a putrid product on the floor should never be rewarded.

What Detroit have been doing the past 4 years is embarrassing, and it's making the NBA worse. The league should do something.

A little off topic, but what do you want Detroit to do? They're probably in the lowest tier of free agent destinations, and it doesn't make sense right now to trade a bunch of picks for an All-star. Their only option is to build through the draft, and they've done okay. Not great but not awful. Hayes was a bust but beyond that they haven't made any big mistakes.

The colossal advantage teams like the Heat, Lakers, and Clippers have over a team like Detroit solely based on location flat out sucks. Cleveland struck gold with LeBron and Milwaukee struck gold with Giannis. Detroit will need to get lucky with a player like that who stays beyond their rookie deal.

The fairest thing would be to give undesirable FA destinations some kind of leg-up when it comes to draft positioning, but obviously that doesn't work in reality for a number of reasons.

Denver, San Antonio, OKC, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Cleveland (post LeBron), Sacramento, New Orleans (Zion always hurt), Indiana, Orlando, Memphis, Portland (years), Utah, etc are all just like Detroit and have done well over the years and recent years.

Detroit is not well run in the FO. And they have had success in the past ('80s, parts of the '90s and '00s). NBA championships.

How are they "all just like Detroit"? What does that even mean?

And pretty much all of those teams grabbed great players through the draft, and/or spent big to get great players.

[baldur]

No. Maybe don't include eliminated play in teams in the lottery.

This would hurt the NBA's efforts to discourage tanking, teams would be less incentivized to go for Play-In spots

Play-In has discouraged tanking as much if not more than the new lotto odds

Not necessarily. Who got eliminated in the play in on purpose in order to participate in the lottery?

See the one message below of my original post. A 46 win team shouldn't have a chance to win the lottery.

[EmperorLocky]

Let's just keep the odds as they are. Can't have any long term variance if you keep changing after short term variance.

As for Detroit, they should just draft Bronny. See what happens.

[NyKnicks1714]

This. The new draft lottery order hurts more for the smaller markets who arent trade/FA destinations

The Pistons werent even tanking this year, they were honestly trying to get some wins this yr, they tanked towards the end but what do you expect from a team that has sucked for as long as they have in a city like Detroit?

Their front office and overall team culture is awful, but damn it sucks to see any team suffer like they have since they traded Billups to the Nuggets

Well no, practically speaking it doesn't inherently hurt a smaller market team more than it does a big market team. My post was mostly off-topic. I'm fine with the current weighting and I think the biggest advantage to comes in drafts where the best player is a generational talent. Give more teams a shot at him.

It does hurt them more, because they are more dependent on the draft than a big market who can acquire players in FA/trades more easily because theyre more attractive destinations

This time yes, but another year they could have the 5th worst record and this system gives them a better chance at a top 3 pick than the old one did.

[ogmagicfan]

No. Maybe don't include eliminated play in teams in the lottery.

This would hurt the NBA's efforts to discourage tanking, teams would be less incentivized to go for Play-In spots

Play-In has discouraged tanking as much if not more than the new lotto odds

Not necessarily. Who got eliminated in the play in on purpose in order to participate in the lottery?

See the one message below of my original post. A 46 win team shouldn't have a chance to win the lottery.

It's not about teams getting eliminated on purpose

It's that teams would be more encouraged to tank knowing that the opportunity to draft a lotto pick will be interferred with by going for the Play-In spot.

If the Hawks or Bulls knew that in making the playin spot they would lose their chance at a lotto pick, they might have not went for it and instead try to out tank the Nets & Raptors

[ogmagicfan]

Let's just keep the odds as they are. Can't have any long term variance if you keep changing after short term variance.

As for Detroit, they should just draft Bronny. See what happens.

Funny thing, the NBA has changed the draft odds before this previous change after 4 drafts. We've had this draft way for 6 drafts now

From 1990-1993, the odds were 11 balls outta 66 for worst team (16.7% chance) 10 balls outta 66 for 2nd worst, etc.

After the Orlando Magic won their 2nd draft lotto in a row in 1993 while being the best lotto team, they changed odds to increase odds for worse teams and less for good teams who barely made the lotto

It went from 16.7% to 25% for the worst teams odds, and from 1.5% to 0.5% for the best team in the lotto odds. This was the lotto way until the recent changes

[sjballer03]

No, losing shouldn't be rewarded. Its not like any of the bottom 10 teams are great.

Why do people say this for the NBA but not in the NFL or MLB draft?

Bad teams are bad because they dont have good players, so lets punish bad teams more because they dont have good players?

NFL has a 53 man roster (plus a practice squad) with 22 or so starters. MLB draft picks go through a minor league system and it takes years to build up a farm system. Nba rosters are about 11-12 and probably 8-9 are in the rotation baring injuries.

The impact of one superstar in the NBA has a much much higher than any other sport. Sure you can tank for a QB but if you have a bad OL and/or a bad defense it doesn't matter. You can tank for a elite pitching prospect but he will only play every 5 games and you still have to limit pitch counts to avoid arm injuries.

If you're only argument revolves around whataboutisms, then you don't really have an argument at all.

[doogie_hauser]

I actually am happy the Hawks somehow bucked their 3 % odds and gotten their first overall pick in franchise history.

Feel bad for Pistons fans, but I always enjoy teams winning the lottery for the first time, esp for a historic franchise like St Louis/Atlanta.

This draft is bit of a mixed bag in that there is no guarantee the best player could even go in the top 3 (so that is a bit of solace for Pistons fans)

Btw I don't believe Detriot have deliberately tried to tank/stockpile picks in the last 5 years, just been poorly run from a front office/ownership level and had some bad luck along the way.

If the Pistons can luck out with their pick and get a couple of savvy free agent signings, they could possibly challenge for the play in next season..

They are not a total basket case like the Wizards or Hornets right now, nor in no man's land like the Raptors, Nets or Bulls.

There is light at the end of the Piston tunnel (as understandably disappointed their fans are right now)

[LaLover11]

Finals loser gets the #1 pick

[svart]

Just say yes to relegation

This is the NBA (American).

Not European soccer.

We have relegation in European basketball too.

[maverick_41]

The Pistons can screw up the 5th pick as good as the 1st

[turnmeup88]

I'm basing this solely off of the Pistons being screwed into the 5th pick again for the 3rd straight year

The worst team in the NBA having the highest odds for the 5th pick is kinda crazy

Maybe the NBA can reach a compromise btwn what it was prior to the change and the way its distributed now.

Detroit is also very poorly run currently. James Wiseman, Marvin Bagley trades, Joe Harris contract. Indeed they aren't a free agency destination, but with picks going 7,1,5,5,5 in consecutive drafts you should be able to build a decent team.

The odds the way they are means if they continue to be bad they will eventually hit on a high pick or an all-star.

[mariller]

I'm basing this solely off of the Pistons being screwed into the 5th pick again for the 3rd straight year

The worst team in the NBA having the highest odds for the 5th pick is kinda crazy

Maybe the NBA can reach a compromise btwn what it was prior to the change and the way its distributed now.

It's almost like people don't understand maths.
The goal of the change was to discourage total tanking - the teams trying to have the worst possible season to get that 1st pick, the fight between 8 wins and 9 wins etc. It was suppose to lead to a situation where worst team has the best chances of getting first pick, but there is no guarantees, it can very well be the fifth team that wins, or even tenth.
So now you have that, the worst teams has 40% chance of getting top 3 pick.

And what happened? The Detroit has been "screwed"? By what? Math? Since when 40% is a guarantee? It does not matter what happened last 5 years - every year is new scenario, you know that right?

The new system works perfectly and I don't want it changed. Do you really want total tanking?

[mariller]

Just say yes to relegation

This is the NBA (American).

Not European soccer.

.........Jesus **** Christ.

South Park quote works perfectly here "I thought this was AMERICA."

[ogmagicfan]

I'm basing this solely off of the Pistons being screwed into the 5th pick again for the 3rd straight year

The worst team in the NBA having the highest odds for the 5th pick is kinda crazy

Maybe the NBA can reach a compromise btwn what it was prior to the change and the way its distributed now.

It's almost like people don't understand maths.
The goal of the change was to discourage total tanking - the teams trying to have the worst possible season to get that 1st pick, the fight between 8 wins and 9 wins etc. It was suppose to lead to a situation where worst team has the best chances of getting first pick, but there is no guarantees, it can very well be the fifth team that wins, or even tenth.
So now you have that, the worst teams has 40% chance of getting top 3 pick.

And what happened? The Detroit has been "screwed"? By what? Math? Since when 40% is a guarantee? It does not matter what happened last 5 years - every year is new scenario, you know that right?

The new system works perfectly and I don't want it changed. Do you really want total tanking?

Clearly I understand what the odds breakdown is for the draft currently and their motivation

The point is that the draft odds aren't favorable enough for the worst of the league, hence the topic

Not that there's a misunderstanding on how the draft odds work

And yes, even with current odds, the Pistons to get 5th worst 2 seasons in a row while having the worst record in the NBA is 47.9% odds for each season:

.479 x .479 = 0.229 (22.9% chance)

If you include the season prior where they finished 3rd and still ended up 5th, odds drop more. So yeah they've been screwed, screwed by bad luck & the new lotto odds distribution, hence the thread

[jkvonny]

A little off topic, but what do you want Detroit to do? They're probably in the lowest tier of free agent destinations, and it doesn't make sense right now to trade a bunch of picks for an All-star. Their only option is to build through the draft, and they've done okay. Not great but not awful. Hayes was a bust but beyond that they haven't made any big mistakes.

The colossal advantage teams like the Heat, Lakers, and Clippers have over a team like Detroit solely based on location flat out sucks. Cleveland struck gold with LeBron and Milwaukee struck gold with Giannis. Detroit will need to get lucky with a player like that who stays beyond their rookie deal.

The fairest thing would be to give undesirable FA destinations some kind of leg-up when it comes to draft positioning, but obviously that doesn't work in reality for a number of reasons.

Denver, San Antonio, OKC, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Cleveland (post LeBron), Sacramento, New Orleans (Zion always hurt), Indiana, Orlando, Memphis, Portland (years), Utah, etc are all just like Detroit and have done well over the years and recent years.

Detroit is not well run in the FO. And they have had success in the past ('80s, parts of the '90s and '00s). NBA championships.

How are they "all just like Detroit"? What does that even mean?

And pretty much all of those teams grabbed great players through the draft, and/or spent big to get great players.

You said this "They're probably in the lowest tier of free agent destinations, and it doesn't make sense right now to trade a bunch of picks for an All-star. Their only option is to build through the draft, and they've done okay. Not great but not awful. Hayes was a bust but beyond that they haven't made any big mistakes.

The colossal advantage teams like the Heat, Lakers, and Clippers have over a team like Detroit solely based on location flat out sucks. Cleveland struck gold with LeBron and Milwaukee struck gold with Giannis. Detroit will need to get lucky with a player like that who stays beyond their rookie deal."

****
That is pretty much true/the same with all of these mid/small market franchises listed.
Detroit used to have the same success, but their FO hasn't been well run in years.

But, it happens to larger markets that have had long bad years in the past and present as well, poorly run FO can also hurt them. NY Knicks (majority of the past 20 seasons), LA Clippers (Sterling ownership years, '80s and 90s were really bad), Chicago (pre MJ years and post MJ years, they have been bad to mediocre for decades), Houston has been hot and cold, Washington (DC/Balt/DMV) has been mostly bad since their heydays of the '70s, Atlanta (mediocre most years for awhile), Dallas/DFW (terrible the entire decade of the '90s, Philly (stunk for a long time esp during "The Process", LA Lakers Stunk majority of the 2010s (late Kobe years and post retirement), NJ/Brooklyn Nets (hot and cold for years), Boston/New England (stunk pretty much the entire '90s),
GS Warriors (Bay Area) (they were a joke/stunk during the '90s and '00s (no major FAs wanted to go there), Toronto (has more bad years than good over the years), etc.

Point is. FO must be savvy and well run.

[jkvonny]

Just say yes to relegation

This is the NBA (American).

Not European soccer.

We have relegation in European basketball too.

True

Its the NBA (American)

Not European Soccer/basketball/cricket/badminton, etc