NBA proposal to replace lottery with "draft wheel" (Lowe article)

[obnoxiousmime]

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/86940/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel

What do you guys think? While I don't really like this wheel concept, at least the NBA is considering something drastic to revamp the system.

By eliminating a lottery altogether you are taking away a lot of the uncertainty that drives interest in the draft. Though perpetually bad teams do use "hope" as a mask to hide their own organizational ineptitude, that doesn't diminish the fact that it's a (or the only) driver of interest for unlucky fan bases. Even if all teams are trying their best you will always have some teams at the bottom and those fans need something positive to look forward to.

Also, the fact that it's predetermined years in advance could create the possibility of players maneuvering to get to certain teams. What if the Lakers know they have the first pick in next year's draft, and through intermediaries makes a promise to a player to go back to school for a year instead of coming out to join the Bucks, for example? For many small market teams their only shot is to "trap" a young superstar and spend four years convincing him small town life ain't so bad!

The required decade-long wait for an implementation of this system also makes it unfeasible. A decade is a long time and there are a million things that could change and make the new system moot, or at the very least require them to make a rewrite. What if the NCAA is drastically different in 10 years? What changes will the next CBA bring? What if the playoff system is altered?

Also, as a fan I'm just too impatient to wait that long. Surely the current system could be tweaked in a fashion that would improve things but not totally affect all the future draft picks that have already been dealt.

Note: Lowe also linked to the 2012 ESPN Truehoop series on tanking which is a must-read if you want every viewpoint:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/39318/tanking-is-the-tip-of-the-iceberg

[Vermont Green]

I like it.  Teams in preferable FA locations like LA, Miami, NY, would still have an advantage when it came to FA signings but this would level the draft.  What it would do is force the NBA to quit subsidizing teams in bad locations.  Teams would move to better locations and NBA would be better off for it.

[Evantime34]

I like it simply because it would be more interesting. With set draft picks teams would be more likely to trade since they value of a pick would be less variable.

The only thing is agents might convince elite players to wait until a big market team has a high pick to come out.

[JSD]

I don't like it. How would you like to be a fan of the team that started out at 30 on the wheel? Screw that. And it would be us or the Lakers slotted in there I bet. Plus, how many top college players will declare for the draft or hold out a year based on what teams have the top pick? 

The only solution to this problem is to eliminate the age restrictions. We wouldn't be in this mess right now if 12 year old Andrew Wiggins was drafted with a late 1st rounder in 2007.

[Roy H.]

Grantland obtained a copy of the proposal, which would eliminate the draft lottery and replace it with a system in which each of the 30 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once — and exactly once — every 30 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 30 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 30 years out from the start of every 30-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear; there would never be a Harrison Barnes–Golden State situation again, and it wouldn’t require a law degree to track ownership of every traded pick leaguewide.

Not a huge fan.  So, a team could finish with the worst record in the league, and be awarded the 30th pick in the draft?  Or, the next dynasty could get the #1 overall pick?

I think the lottery has to be tied in some way to record.

[jr_3421]

I don't like it. How would you like to be a fan of the team that started out at 30 on the wheel? Screw that. And it would be us or the Lakers slotted in there I bet. Plus, how many top college players will declare for the draft or hold out a year based on what teams have the top pick? 

The only solution to this problem is to eliminate the age restrictions. We wouldn't be in this mess right now if 12 year old Andrew Wiggins was drafted with a late 1st rounder in 2007.

It's not like the rotation goes 30, 29, 28... the order jumps around so the team who starts out at 30 doesn't have to wait 15 years to get into the top 15.

[pearljammer10]

Interesting idea. Not sure Im a huge fan of it though. I like how it semi randomizes things for 30 years but it doesnt help the teams that need the most help during that said year. Say a franchise like the Kings or Bobcats don't get the chance of have a top six pick for 12 years. That doesnt help the small market teams at all.

[Eja117]

People trying to point out that there are far worse solutions than the lottery aren't selling me on either their idea or the lottery. Horrible idea. Just make the lottery public

[obnoxiousmime]

I don't like it. How would you like to be a fan of the team that started out at 30 on the wheel? Screw that. And it would be us or the Lakers slotted in there I bet. Plus, how many top college players will declare for the draft or hold out a year based on what teams have the top pick? 

The only solution to this problem is to eliminate the age restrictions. We wouldn't be in this mess right now if 12 year old Andrew Wiggins was drafted with a late 1st rounder in 2007.

It's not like the rotation goes 30, 29, 28... the order jumps around so the team who starts out at 30 doesn't have to wait 15 years to get into the top 15.

Even though the allotment of picks you would receive in a 30 year period would end up being identical to a 30, 29, 28 system, the perceived "randomness" of the wheel is going to be offputting to many.

Basically, you need to decide first whether you like an equitable "turn" based system at all before figuring out if there's a fairer way to distribute the order over the years.

Adding to my initial point about it taking too long (a decade at least) to implement this system, imagine how difficult it would be to change the system again once you're on this 30-year cycle.

[LarBrd33]

Awful idea.  Tanking isn't actually an issue.  The system isn't broken.

This year it does indeed stink that we'll likely make the playoffs while 5 Western Conference teams with better records than us will make the lottery.  It will potentially make a lopsided conference even more lopsided.  THe rich will get richer and teams who need help like Boston and Toronto will be stuck picking 15-25.  But it is what it is... life will find a way.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Awful idea.  Tanking isn't actually an issue.  The system isn't broken.

This year it does indeed stink that we'll likely make the playoffs while 5 Western Conference teams with better records than us will make the lottery.  It will potentially make a lopsided conference even more lopsided.  THe rich will get richer and teams who need help like Boston and Toronto will be stuck picking 15-25.  But it is what it is... life will find a way.

The conferences are more "broken" than the lottery system is.  Not only is it annoying that a couple really good teams in the west will get top picks, but it would be a lot more fun watching a first round Dallas/Indiana series than Bobcats/Indiana, for instance.

Anyways, I think we're going to miss the playoffs after all.  Rondo will be out until the last month or so and the Raptors really improved their team by dumping Gay's contract.   

[KGs Knee]

Awful idea.  Tanking isn't actually an issue.  The system isn't broken.

This year it does indeed stink that we'll likely make the playoffs while 5 Western Conference teams with better records than us will make the lottery.  It will potentially make a lopsided conference even more lopsided.  THe rich will get richer and teams who need help like Boston and Toronto will be stuck picking 15-25.  But it is what it is... life will find a way.

Sure it is.  Tanking is absolutely an issue, it's spits in the face of the integrity of the game.  Tanking is unscrupulous.

So yeah, anything that could put a stop to it is worth discussing.

[KGs Knee]

Interesting idea. Not sure Im a huge fan of it though. I like how it semi randomizes things for 30 years but it doesnt help the teams that need the most help during that said year. Say a franchise like the Kings or Bobcats don't get the chance of have a top six pick for 12 years. That doesnt help the small market teams at all.

Unless the Bobcats were stupid enough to trade a top 6 pick, they would have one once every 5 years.  Every team would have a top 6 pick once every 5 years.

[Eddie20]

I prefer Chad Ford's idea.

Bill ((Philadelphia))

Chad, any reaction to the Zach Lowe article about the "wheel" draft? Do certain teams around the league already support it?

Chad Ford  (1:53 PM)

Great, just like everything else Zach writes. He's become a must read for me. However, I still think the solution is an idea I've been writing about for a few years. The NBA should aggregate the record of teams over the past three seasons and then give the 3 teams with the worst record over the past three years an equal shot at the No. 1 pick. It's one thing to tank a season. An entirely different thing to tank for 3 for only a 33 percent shot at getting the No. 1 pick. I think it would essentially eliminate teams being bad for the sake of being bad.

[pearljammer10]

Interesting idea. Not sure Im a huge fan of it though. I like how it semi randomizes things for 30 years but it doesnt help the teams that need the most help during that said year. Say a franchise like the Kings or Bobcats don't get the chance of have a top six pick for 12 years. That doesnt help the small market teams at all.

Unless the Bobcats were stupid enough to trade a top 6 pick, they would have one once every 5 years.  Every team would have a top 6 pick once every 5 years.

Im just saying... In a hypothetical situation, say the Bobcats get stuck with pick 30 in year one. In the next 14 years they would only have two top six picks...Number six and number two. Regardless of how bad they are. On the flip, say the Spurs or Heat get lucky with the number 5 pick to start their cycle...Within a 12 year span they receive three top 5 picks.

I just don't think that helps the small market teams, which are the ones that need the help in order to make the team more competitive.