What they are saying is that the owners are considering change the lottery so that all teams in the lottery have an equal chance. My dime store analysis is that that they should have a lottery for the type of style of lottery they use. If it just a matter of adjusting ping pong balls it would eliminate the incentive to totally tank.

JesseDark wrote:I saw the link to this article on the home page. http://nypost.com/2015/05/26/derek-fisher-backlash-shows-need-for-nba-lottery-reform/

What they are saying is that the owners are considering change the lottery so that all teams in the lottery have an equal chance. My dime store analysis is that that they should have a lottery for the type of style of lottery they use. If it just a matter of adjusting ping pong balls it would eliminate the incentive to totally tank.

So are you saying that the lottery system might be a different one each year?

Strange article, since Berman starts with all the karma BS that has nothing to do with the actual picking of the lottery balls.

Even if you have equal odds for the worst 5 or 6 teams, you might still have teams tanking to get into that "elite" group of losing teams. What is to stop the team at #7 during the year to tank in order to make the bottom 6?

Minny, Philly, and LA were clearly trying to lose at the end of the year, IMO. LA had the most to lose, since they would have lost their pick.

Knicks should have shut Anthony down as soon as it was medically determined that he should have surgery. It was the right thing to do for the franchise, and yes, it would have helped us to lose more games.

So it goes.

Moonangie wrote:I really bristle at the notion that slipping from #2 to #2 has doomed us. That's like saying "if we don't get Towns, OK4 or Russell, our plans are doomed".

Totally ridiculous.

ha. it isn't like saying that. it is saying that exactly.

and while it kinda comes off as ridiculous, its not really, since there's such a fine line to being relevant and being lost. one player can make all the diff.

Maybe Phil can build something here. Maybe we are cursed with a joke of a franchise so long as this owner is around.... who knows, but I just cant care too much anymore. Hopefully we pick a stud. If we dont? Ill spend time on my patio looking looking at stars at night. This is getting insufferable.

fishmike wrote:I cant even read this stuff.. its vomitous. Hell, I bought a telescope and have spent more time on the astronomy forum of late than on UK. I didnt start following a pro team so I could feel venom towards a rookie coach trying to fight through a disaster season with a roster of NBDL players, only to have that coach (whom I like and respect as an individual) dragged over the coals because the team couldnt find a way to throw games (integrity) to keep the "pole position" for the draft, that is the worst record, when that team has one the #1 pick like what? 3 times? Vomitous. I would rather read DK's musings on Melo's work ethic.

Maybe Phil can build something here. Maybe we are cursed with a joke of a franchise so long as this owner is around.... who knows, but I just cant care too much anymore. Hopefully we pick a stud. If we dont? Ill spend time on my patio looking looking at stars at night. This is getting insufferable.

+4.24 light years

Knixkik wrote:To me, the solution has always been to give each lottery team the same amount of ping pong balls. Just put 14 balls in the machine and draw them out in order. That way teams are rewarded equally for missing the playoffs, and receive no advantage to tank. They will have to try to build a playoff team because there is no real advantage not to. Some teams may feel getting a lottery pick instead of an 8th seed is better, but that will happen with far less teams than the amount trying to tank each year.

I thought that too but then every team on the brink of the playoffs will lose games to get in the lottery. So that is not a solution. We should throw all the teams in there and let the chips fall where they may. Usually good teams will probably trade their picks at a higher rate. Sometimes adding a franchise player to a good team makes them shuffle their teams.

Vmart wrote:

Knixkik wrote:To me, the solution has always been to give each lottery team the same amount of ping pong balls. Just put 14 balls in the machine and draw them out in order. That way teams are rewarded equally for missing the playoffs, and receive no advantage to tank. They will have to try to build a playoff team because there is no real advantage not to. Some teams may feel getting a lottery pick instead of an 8th seed is better, but that will happen with far less teams than the amount trying to tank each year.

I thought that too but then every team on the brink of the playoffs will lose games to get in the lottery. So that is not a solution. We should throw all the teams in there and let the chips fall where they may. Usually good teams will probably trade their picks at a higher rate. Sometimes adding a franchise player to a good team makes them shuffle their teams.

Good teams don't trade their picks at a higher rate than bad teams. Good teams realize the value of having players on cost-controlled contracts and under team control for a minimum of 5 years. Bad teams, like the Knicks, are the ones that give away picks all the time.

Vmart wrote:

Knixkik wrote:To me, the solution has always been to give each lottery team the same amount of ping pong balls. Just put 14 balls in the machine and draw them out in order. That way teams are rewarded equally for missing the playoffs, and receive no advantage to tank. They will have to try to build a playoff team because there is no real advantage not to. Some teams may feel getting a lottery pick instead of an 8th seed is better, but that will happen with far less teams than the amount trying to tank each year.

I thought that too but then every team on the brink of the playoffs will lose games to get in the lottery. So that is not a solution. We should throw all the teams in there and let the chips fall where they may. Usually good teams will probably trade their picks at a higher rate. Sometimes adding a franchise player to a good team makes them shuffle their teams.

anrst wrote:

Moonangie wrote:I really bristle at the notion that slipping from #2 to #2 has doomed us. That's like saying "if we don't get Towns, OK4 or Russell, our plans are doomed".

Totally ridiculous.

ha. it isn't like saying that. it is saying that exactly.

and while it kinda comes off as ridiculous, its not really, since there's such a fine line to being relevant and being lost. one player can make all the diff.

Those three guys are destined to become stars in three years. The next dude who might surprised most is Winslow.