The NBA Draft is Rigged

[maverick4]

If there were any doubts, they have been erased now. Consider the top 6 picks, in order:

1 Portland (didn't tank)
2 Seattle (didn't tank)
3 Atlanta (didn't tank)
4 Memphis (tanked, got worst pick possible)
5 Celtics (tanked, got worst pick possible)
6 Bucks (tanked, got worst pick possible)

This was Stern sending a message to all the teams that tanked. The 3 worst teams each got their worst pick possible (what are the odds?). Atlanta had to be in the top 3, or else had to trade their pick to Phoenix. The top two picks went to teams with the two lowest attendances and were about to move cities; the draft now saves these 2 franchises and revives a fanbase. Seriously look at the percentages, there is no way this all was possible without some fixing, it's ridiculous and disgusting at the same time.

Do people know that the ping pong balls are not selected in public? It is done in secret.
Can some stat guy come up with the odds of all this happening? Something like 1 in a million...

[BradyManny2344]

Interesting...I'm not sure if I believe it, but worth thinking about...it's just so hard to imagine the Grizzlies, C's and Bucks all happening to miss the top 3, I'd love to see the mathematical odds on that...

Still, I don't know if I'm a conspiracy theorist, of course, there's always the '85 lottery....

[BelichickFan]

I don't buy your premise but if it's true I'm fine with it. The best picks are supposed to go to the worst teams not the ones that tank or have guys like Pierce out but returning the next season.

[GJAJ15]

I do not like the idea that the balls are not chosen in public, could be a real whoop de do review.. Tommy Heinson could put in the correct # of balls and it might make interesting television.

[ctpatsfan77]

If there were any doubts, they have been erased now. Consider the top 6 picks, in order:

1 Portland (didn't tank)
2 Seattle (didn't tank)
3 Atlanta (didn't tank)
4 Memphis (tanked, got worst pick possible)
5 Celtics (tanked, got worst pick possible)
6 Bucks (tanked, got worst pick possible)

Do people know that the ping pong balls are not selected in public? It is done in secret.
Can some stat guy come up with the odds of all this happening? Something like 1 in a million...

Not too far off the ballpark--if you're talking about this exact result.

Odds of Portland getting #1: 53/1000
Odds of Seattle then getting #2: 88/947
Odds of Atlanta then getting #3: 8/859
Net result: 46 in a million

If all you're talking about is the top three teams getting shut out, it's at least 6%. So--unlikely, yes. Fixed, probably not.

Also, the way the ping pong balls are drawn, it's pretty darn hard to "game" the system (I won't get into the details here, but it's not nearly as simple as drawing a ping pong ball that says "Portland").

[MoLewisrocks]

There is already a poor celtics thread on the main board - and I understand why, it is news albeit bad news for a Boston team. The lottery system is a joke, just like the league that employs it. But it ain't football - so could you crossover fans limit the handwringing to one thread on the football board?.

[BradyManny2344]

I don't buy your premise but if it's true I'm fine with it. The best picks are supposed to go to the worst teams not the ones that tank or have guys like Pierce out but returning the next season.

Pierce was legitimately injured, and in fact, played hurt when he did play.

And trust me, the Celtics were no better than the second worst team in the league last season, they earned one of those top two picks. Long before they could even begin thinking about tanking they lost 18 straight games when Oden, Durant, and the draft were just a blip on the radar screen.

[patsfan55]

If there were any doubts, they have been erased now. Consider the top 6 picks, in order:

1 Portland (didn't tank)
2 Seattle (didn't tank)
3 Atlanta (didn't tank)
4 Memphis (tanked, got worst pick possible)
5 Celtics (tanked, got worst pick possible)
6 Bucks (tanked, got worst pick possible)

This was Stern sending a message to all the teams that tanked. The 3 worst teams each got their worst pick possible (what are the odds?). Atlanta had to be in the top 3, or else had to trade their pick to Phoenix. The top two picks went to teams with the two lowest attendances and were about to move cities; the draft now saves these 2 franchises and revives a fanbase. Seriously look at the percentages, there is no way this all was possible without some fixing, it's ridiculous and disgusting at the same time.

Do people know that the ping pong balls are not selected in public? It is done in secret.
Can some stat guy come up with the odds of all this happening? Something like 1 in a million...


i think mike gorman said one out of five thousand and somethin

[BelichickFan]

Pierce was legitimately injured, and in fact, played hurt when he did play.
That's fine, I'm just saying don't start whining about "the most deserving teams not getting the top picks" when we all know that with a healthy Pierce heading into next season the Celtics aren't close to the 2nd worst in the league.

[BelichickFan]

BTW, don't say the draft is rigged when the two premium guys end up in Oregon. It's not suicide for the league but it ain't good when most of the country will rarely see them play.

[maverick4]

that reasoning about exposure doesn't make sense. portland and seattle both used to have big fan bases and were on tv a lot. tv shows teams that are good, period. san antonio, and sacramento before that, are/were on tv a lot now, because they are good. this draft helped the two lowest fan attendance franchises immensely.

[BelichickFan]

that reasoning about exposure doesn't make sense. portland and seattle both used to have big fan bases and were on tv a lot. tv shows teams that are good, period. san antonio, and sacramento before that, are/were on tv a lot now, because they are good. this draft helped the two lowest fan attendance franchises immensely.
It's still not good for the league - most of their games are at 10pm eastern. Rejuvinating a team like the Celtics would help the league a lot more.

[spacecrime]

that reasoning about exposure doesn't make sense. The premise of this thread dsoesn't make sense, just a bunch of boo-hoo crybaby whining.

We didn't win, it must be rigged or else we would win.

Get over it.

[Patriot Missile]

One word sums it up. Dissapointing. It's always a toss up in these lousy lotteries. It's just not catching a break kind of sucks. We lost the Tim Duncan sweepstakes 10 years ago this week and now this. Anyway it's not all the lotteries fault,they've had some pretty bad management going on as well.

[The Gr8est]

I don't buy your premise but if it's true I'm fine with it. The best picks are supposed to go to the worst teams not the ones that tank or have guys like Pierce out but returning the next season.

Tanking? Do you mean losing deliberately in order to gain another benefit?

Do you think a team should be able to benefit from deliberately losing, like for example, if the Pats were to deliberatly lose to Miami in order to get a home game vs Jacksonville?

Is that tanking or working within the system?

I am not a huge fan of the NBA, but this latest lottery, with the secret drawings and rather unlikely result, makes me feel better about the chances of boxing being free of corruption when compared to the NBA.

God help us if the NFL ever gets the idea that a lottery system would be a good idea.

[patsfan55]

Tanking? Do you mean losing deliberately in order to gain another benefit?

Do you think a team should be able to benefit from deliberately losing, like for example, if the Pats were to deliberatly lose to Miami in order to get a home game vs Jacksonville?

Is that tanking or working within the system?

I am not a huge fan of the NBA, but this latest lottery, with the secret drawings and rather unlikely result, makes me feel better about the chances of boxing being free of corruption when compared to the NBA.

God help us if the NFL ever gets the idea that a lottery system would be a good idea.

ainge today said hes never been a huge fan of the lottery system, and went on to say "but what else is there"

ummm...how bout the format of all the other leagues

[primetime]

BTW, don't say the draft is rigged when the two premium guys end up in Oregon. It's not suicide for the league but it ain't good when most of the country will rarely see them play.

That's not true. The league's biggest market is LA, and they'll see these guys play plenty. Besides, tonight saved the Portland and the Seattle franchises; both teams were in danger of moving, but having a legitimate superstar will allow both to become potentially profitable (Cavaliers in aftermath of Lebron), and both teams have been successful both on the court and in the bank.

The lottery system really bothers me. In the NFL, there's no lottery, but there's not enough games where tanking becomes an issue. In baseball, the draft is practically meaningless anyways (the Devil Rays have had the 1st pick since the founding of their franchise and yet are still horrendous). In the NHL, there's a lottery, but it only effects one team (the team that is drawn can move up to 1, but only if they were picking before 5... the 6th team, if chosen, would move up to 2, the 7th to 3, etc.)

Stern was sending a message to the teams that tanked and trying to keep the Blazers and Sonics in their respective cities. The chance for Memphis and Boston to be outside of the top 3 was 0.18%... ridiculous odds.

[RPCity]

This thread is filled with misinformation.

First....a draft style like that of the NFL encourages tanking. Thats why the NBA encorporated the lottery system to begin with. Otherwise you have instances like the NFL saw in the year of Reggie Bush with teams trying to lose down to the wire to get that #1 overall. You don't think that would have been much more common this year if it were just by the numbers? You don't have a problem with it that's fine....but tell that to a Season Ticket Holder who paid a few grand to watch Paul Pierce and Michael Redd play, only to get stuck watching Gerald Green battle Mo Williams.

Second.....stop saying Portland got the #1 to help keep them in the city. I don't know where you're getting that from, but that's the biggest piece of misinformation in this thread. Portland is not now and never was a major threat to leave. Seattle is a different story.

[dhamz]

Do people know that the ping pong balls are not selected in public? It is done in secret.

It is not done in secret. It is done off camera in front of representatives of all the lottery teams.

It is not done on TV because they think it is more dramatic TV opening envelopes starting with the last pick moving up to the first pick rather than a 30 second ceremony where a couple ping pong balls come out.

I'm amazed that nearly 20 years after the incompetent Dave Gavitt used the whole "league is out to get the Celtics" defense for his failure to do his job that Celtics fans still believe it is true.

[maverick4]

TThe chance for Memphis and Boston to be outside of the top 3 was 0.18%... ridiculous odds.

So one fifth of 1%. That is not even counting the chance for Milwaukee to get its worst possible pick, and for Seattle/Portland to get the top two spots, plus the small chance that Atlanta would actually get to keep its draft pick by being in the top 3.

Yes, I am bitter and disappointed, but I also think this draft was really convenient for the NBA (help out the lowest two fan attendances, and punish the 3 teams that supposedly tanked).

[QuiGon]

Stern was sending a message to the teams that tanked and trying to keep the Blazers and Sonics in their respective cities. The chance for Memphis and Boston to be outside of the top 3 was 0.18%... ridiculous odds.Where's your source or your calculations for that statistic..? Because I gotta say I ran the ESPN lottery simulator a whole bunch of times and I would see both Boston and Memphis outside the top 3 about 1 in every 6 or 7 tries... certainly nowhere near 1 in every 555 tries...

[QuiGon]

Do people know that the ping pong balls are not selected in public? It is done in secret. It is done with 2 media witnesses and a hired accounting firm to oversee the selection and the results.
Can some stat guy come up with the odds of all this happening? Something like 1 in a million... Like so much of what you say, you demonstrate you don't have the first clue WTF you are talking about.

First of all, you obviously have no clue how the NBA draft lottery works.

Second of all, what you say makes no sense. If the NBA was going to rig the lottery, the last thing they are going to do is banish 2 future superstars to Portland and Seattle way out in the obscure Pacific NW. I mean, at least the Patrick Ewing to NY conspiracy theorists make sense. If the NBA wanted to rig the lottery then at least one of the 2 future stars would have ended up in a big, east coast market (Philly, Boston, Atlanta, NY) and the other would have gone to Chicago or LA.

[QuiGon]

Tanking? Do you mean losing deliberately in order to gain another benefit?

Do you think a team should be able to benefit from deliberately losing, like for example, if the Pats were to deliberatly lose to Miami in order to get a home game vs Jacksonville?

Is that tanking or working within the system? Tanking is defined as deliberately losing a game to gain a future benefit. But resting starters and playing reserves is not necessarily tanking. There's a difference between those two concepts.

[sieglo]

The NBA is screwed anyway. Too many teams.... Who cares any more.

Can't wait to see what Fitzy has to say about this one.

[maverick4]

Second of all, what you say makes no sense. If the NBA was going to rig the lottery, the last thing they are going to do is banish 2 future superstars to Portland and Seattle way out in the obscure Pacific NW. I mean, at least the Patrick Ewing to NY conspiracy theorists make sense. If the NBA wanted to rig the lottery than at least one of the 2 future stars would have ended up in a big, east coast market (Philly, Boston, Atlanta, NY) and the other would have gone to Chicago or LA.

That is way too simplistic reasoning. The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem, and a bigger concern than feeding big markets is to keep small markets alive. I would say the only way Portland and Seattle could have saved their franchises and not move was to get the two most exciting rookies.

[PatsMyBoyz!]

The NBA is screwed anyway. Too many teams.... Who cares any more.

Can't wait to see what Fitzy has to say about this one.

LMAO Fitzy should put out a good one,no doubt about it.

The NBA is dead to me as well,except as a NE fan it would be great to see the Celts get competitive again. Actually it would just be nice to see the Eastern Conference be competitive again.

[QuiGon]

That is way too simplistic reasoning. EDIT: Last time you accused me "simplistic reasoning" was when you said the US orchestrated the kidmapping of 14 British sailors by Iran. You used those exact same words, you were wrong then and you're wrong now.
The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem, and a bigger concern than feeding big markets is to keep small markets alive. I would say the only way Portland and Seattle could have saved their franchises and not move was to get the two most exciting rookies. What makes you think the NBA wouldn't want one of those 2 teams moving..? The NBA wants a franchise in Las Vegas and Stern would be plenty happy to see one of those flagging franchises uprooting to sin City.

What you say doesn't make sense at all. The last thing the NBA wanted was to banish both future stars to the obscure Pacific Northwest.

Plus I've seen a lot of probability and calculations here that are simply wrong. No offense, but a lot of people here - yourself included - simply don't understand how the NBA conducts the draft lottery.

[BelichickFan]

Where's your source or your calculations for that statistic..?
It's not close to true :

http://www.nba.com/celtics/stats/inside-the-numbers/itn042307-draft-lottery-odds.html

The Grizzlies had a 36% chance of falling out of the top three, the Celtics 45% so there was about a 15% chance both would. Not a great chance but very legitmate.

[BelichickFan]

Of course the NBA would have preferred them in Boston and Philly. Duh. As Steven A. Smith said last night "it's a disaster for the NBA".

[BelichickFan]

Tanking is defined as deliberately losing a game to gain a future benefit. But resting starters and playing reserves is not necessarily tanking. There's a difference between those two concepts.
And even if the Patriots' tanked, it's different to "tank" for the perceived benefit of a better matchup through a lower seed vs. the definite advantage of moving up in the draft or improving your odds.

[QuiGon]

It's not close to true :

http://www.nba.com/celtics/stats/inside-the-numbers/itn042307-draft-lottery-odds.html

The Grizzlies had a 36% chance of falling out of the top three, the Celtics 45% so there was about a 15% chance both would. Not a great chance but very legitmate.Cool webpage... plus that 15% stat you give falls perfectly in line with my trial-and-error results where I said ESPN's lottery simulator had them both outside the top-3 once every 6 or 7 tries. Funny how that works :D

[mtbykr]

BTW, don't say the draft is rigged when the two premium guys end up in Oregon. It's not suicide for the league but it ain't good when most of the country will rarely see them play.


when did seattle move to oregon?:) The NBA is a joke, and the lottery is worthless......bring on football season! Can't wait to see what Fitzy has to say

[BelichickFan]

when did seattle move to oregon?:)
ORegon, Washington State, it's all the same to me :)

[maverick4]

The Grizzlies had a 36% chance of falling out of the top three, the Celtics 45% so there was about a 15% chance both would. Not a great chance but very legitmate.
----

No, the odds are seriously something on the magnitude of less than 50 in a million. Consider that Memphis, Boston, and Milwaukee each got their absolute worst possible pick, that Atlanta had to be in the top 3, and the small chance that Portland would get #1 and Seattle would get #2. If I have more time maybe I'll actually try to figure it out (unless a stat expert wants to beat me to it first).

You're all correct though, it's probably just pure chance and not any result of 'rigging', but the chance that the draft happened the way it did was really small, small enough to question.

[QuiGon]

No, the odds are seriously something on the magnitude of less than 50 in a million. Yeah... see, this is the sort of statement that shows you really have no clue WTF you are talking about.

The only thing worse than your faulty math is your ridiculous logic.

[BelichickFan]

No, the odds are seriously something on the magnitude of less than 50 in a million.
The odds of what actually happened, but the odds on any exact scenario were long.

The quote was :

"The chance for Memphis and Boston to be outside of the top 3 was 0.18%... ridiculous odds."

Which is simply not true.

Memphis had a 36% chance to be out of the top three. Had the Celtics been exactly 50-50 then the chance of both being out would be 18%. As the Celtics were around 45%, drop that a little to the 15% range and you'll be close. This 50 in a million talk is just wrong.

[Real World]

Tanking? Do you mean losing deliberately in order to gain another benefit?

Do you think a team should be able to benefit from deliberately losing, like for example, if the Pats were to deliberatly lose to Miami in order to get a home game vs Jacksonville?

Is that tanking or working within the system?

I am not a huge fan of the NBA, but this latest lottery, with the secret drawings and rather unlikely result, makes me feel better about the chances of boxing being free of corruption when compared to the NBA.

God help us if the NFL ever gets the idea that a lottery system would be a good idea.

Don't go there! You're making sense and criticizing the Patriots at the same time! Sacreledge! :D

[Real World]

So one fifth of 1%. That is not even counting the chance for Milwaukee to get its worst possible pick, and for Seattle/Portland to get the top two spots, plus the small chance that Atlanta would actually get to keep its draft pick by being in the top 3.

Yes, I am bitter and disappointed, but I also think this draft was really convenient for the NBA (help out the lowest two fan attendances, and punish the 3 teams that supposedly tanked).

The lottery is wrigged. Anyone remember the folded envelope in 1985? "And the NY Knicks select, Patrick.....

David Stern hates the Celtics. When Reggie Lewis DIED (RIP), he denied them any cap relief for his contract. He made a dead man's money stay on the Celtics cap. Stern is a loooooooooser.

(I'm venting and thus being illogical, but it helps me feel better :D )

[ctpatsfan77]

No, the odds are seriously something on the magnitude of less than 50 in a million. Consider that Memphis, Boston, and Milwaukee each got their absolute worst possible pick, that Atlanta had to be in the top 3, and the small chance that Portland would get #1 and Seattle would get #2. If I have more time maybe I'll actually try to figure it out (unless a stat expert wants to beat me to it first).

As I stated before, you're talking about two separate issues.

The odds of this exact result were about 50 in a million.
The odds of the top 3 falling to 4-5-6 are much higher, on the order of 5 percent. [There is a 39.5% chance that the #1 seed goes to a non-top 3 team, and slightly worse chances--if that happens--of the same happening to the #2 and #3 seeds.]

[Real World]

The NBA is screwed anyway. Too many teams.... Who cares any more.

Can't wait to see what Fitzy has to say about this one.

The NBA is disgusting, but I still love the Celtics. The league is a bunch of hooligan, thug criminals, who play school yard ball to rap music. The most retarded thing in the NBA is when they play music while the teams are playing the fricken game. That's just ridiculous. It's all about cash, and nothing about the sport. The players stink, all they can do is run and jump. Almost none of them have any remote sense of fundamentals. They play 1 on 1 basketball, or just shoot 3's. Scoring has increased some the last couple of years, but 80-75 games are still too common. In the 80's, almost everygame was over 100 points. The league is gross.

[Real World]

That is way too simplistic reasoning. The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem, and a bigger concern than feeding big markets is to keep small markets alive. I would say the only way Portland and Seattle could have saved their franchises and not move was to get the two most exciting rookies.

Seattle for sure. Seattle was in danger of moving for the last 5 or 6 years. There were doubts about resigning Ray Allen last year because of cash. Portland's attendence stinks, but Paul Allen has Billions.

[maverick4]

As I stated before, you're talking about two separate issues. The odds of this exact result were about 50 in a million.
The odds of the top 3 falling to 4-5-6 are much higher, on the order of 5 percent. [There is a 39.5% chance that the #1 seed goes to a non-top 3 team, and slightly worse chances--if that happens--of the same happening to the #2 and #3 seeds.]

OK right, the odds of the 3 worst teams getting 4-5-6 were 5%, but the odds get smaller when you factor in Atlanta had to get a top3 pick or else it went to Phoenix, and helping the 2 worst fan attendances...

Like I said, this is stupid, it is likely not the result of rigging, and I know I'm basically just venting because I'm so disappointed. BUT... it's interesting nontheless.

[Real World]

What makes you think the NBA wouldn't want one of those 2 teams moving..? The NBA wants a franchise in Las Vegas and Stern would be plenty happy to see one of those flagging franchises uprooting to sin City.

What you say doesn't make sense at all. The last thing the NBA wanted was to banish both future stars to the obscure Pacific Northwest.

Plus I've seen a lot of probability and calculations here that are simply wrong. No offense, but a lot of people here - yourself included - simply don't understand how the NBA conducts the draft lottery.

Where would they move to? The NBA, as have all national leagues, has dried up it's metropolitan possibilities. MAybe the NFL could find a couple of new homes, but revenue sharing & popularity are why. The NBA might be able to move to Vegas, even though they have some serious reservations in doing so, but that doesn't cure the problems they are realizing in places like Charlotte, New Orleans, Memphis, Seattle, etc.. I remember when SA got Duncan, there were questions about that cities feasability in keeping the franchise. They played at the old Alamo Dome, and the city wasn't interesting is helping pay for a new building. Insert Duncan and guess what the team got? A new building. Anyhow, this isn't to say that the lottery is wrigged, so much as it gives us pissed off Celtics fans something to vent about. :mad:

[BelichickFan]

Sigh.

The odds of Memphis and Boston BOTH being out of the top three was 15.8%.
The odds of Memphis and Boston BOTH being in the top two was 18.0%.

Almost the same. Would the draft have been rigged had Memphis and Boston both been in the top two ?

[maverick4]

Sigh.

The odds of Memphis and Boston BOTH being out of the top three was 15.8%.
The odds of Memphis and Boston BOTH being in the top two was 18.0%.

Almost the same. Would the draft have been rigged had Memphis and Boston both been in the top two ?

BelichickFan, you can't compare it like that.
- What are the odds Memphis got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Boston got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Milwaukee got its absolute worst possible pick?
- Do you think there was concern by the NBA about teams tanking and being rewarded for it?
-What are the odds that Atlanta would get a top 3 pick, thus preventing it from going to Phoenix?
- What are the odds Portland would get #1?
- What are the odds Seattle would get #2?

All of these taken together, it's not even close. They are NOT the same chance as Boston and Memphis getting 1/2.

[BelichickFan]

BelichickFan, you can't compare it like that.
- What are the odds Memphis got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Boston got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Milwaukee got its absolute worst possible pick?
- Do you think there was concern by the NBA about teams tanking and being rewarded for it?
-What are the odds that Atlanta would get a top 3 pick, thus preventing it from going to Phoenix?
- What are the odds Portland would get #1?
- What are the odds Seattle would get #2?

All of these taken together, it's not even close. They are NOT the same chance as Boston and Memphis getting 1/2.
Look at the chart at the bottom of the link I provided.

- Memphis' most likely pick was what they got. You call it the "worst possible pick"; I call it their most likely pick at 36%.
- Boston's pick was the worst and least likley but still a reasonable 12%.
- Milwaukee is the real loser with this scenario only being 4%.
- The odds of Atlanta getting a top three pick was less than 50-50.

You say that I can't compare it like that, I say you can't compare it like you're doing because you're saying what are the odds of a single scenario involving 14 teams. The most likely scenario would be a longshot.

[QuiGon]

BelichickFan, you can't compare it like that.
- What are the odds Memphis got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Boston got its absolute worst possible pick?
- What are the odds Milwaukee got its absolute worst possible pick?
- Do you think there was concern by the NBA about teams tanking and being rewarded for it?
-What are the odds that Atlanta would get a top 3 pick, thus preventing it from going to Phoenix?
- What are the odds Portland would get #1?
- What are the odds Seattle would get #2?And what are the odds that all that crap would happen on the EXACT SAME NIGHT that the mega-millions drawing was 2-7-11-22-36 with a mega ball of 35...? Damn, it's gotta be over 100 million to 1 against. Obviously the NBA draft lottery is rigged in conjunction with Mega-Millions because nothing that improbably could ever happen in any of our lifetimes.

[maverick4]

And what are the odds that all that crap would happen on the EXACT SAME NIGHT that the mega-millions drawing was 2-7-11-22-36 with a mega ball of 35...? Damn, it's gotta be over 100 million to 1 against. Obviously the NBA draft lottery is rigged in conjunction with Mega-Millions because nothing that improbably could ever happen in any of our lifetimes.

Well, I would suspicious of mega-millions if related family members of its CEO won a disproportionate share of the time, or if the money always went to the most dirt poor person on the planet (if this was proven to be unlikely) followed by a touching news story about poverty. Either of those situations would also be cause for investigation.

[The Gr8est]

It's really very simple, tanking or no tanking, a system that allows a team that is not the worst the possibility of getting the top pick is a flawed system. The draft is supposed to be the equalizer that allows poor teams the chance to become a better team by picking the best available players. When that doesn't happen, the league is lesser for it by, in a sense, helping the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

It is such a flawed premise that even the team that lucks out and gets the undeserved top player,should still be opposed to the system.

If the Celtics had lucked out and gotten Tim Duncan and the #1 this year I would have been thrilled, but still hated the lottery system.

I guess an inferior league has to come up with this sort of gimmick to attempt to create interest, but how many here would like to see the NFL go to a lottery system?

[maverick4]

The argument that rigging was impossible because the NBA wants to support big market teams is flawed. The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem and its small cities are in danger of going under or moving. Oden to Portland and Durant to Seattle really revives those franchises, which makes more businesss sense for the NBA.

Again, it probably wasn't rigged, but the whole nature of the NBA draft is pretty fishy, and why can't they just pick the lottery balls in public? Are they afraid some astute viewer will pick up something they're doing?

[Real World]

The argument that rigging was impossible because the NBA wants to support big market teams is flawed. The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem and its small cities are in danger of going under or moving. Oden to Portland and Durant to Seattle really revives those franchises, which makes more businesss sense for the NBA.

Again, it probably wasn't rigged, but the whole nature of the NBA draft is pretty fishy, and why can't they just pick the lottery balls in public? Are they afraid some astute viewer will pick up something they're doing?

By not picking in public they allow people to question it's integrity. I think a lottery system is fine, but to have your two worst teams picking #4 & #5 is extremely unfair. It's why teams some teams are the victims of perpetual mediocrity.


As for the NBA wanting it's marquee players to only be in big markets or cities, that isn't necessarily correct. The big cities will always attract fans, whereas the smaller ones will not. Marquee players will sell shirts in any city so long as they win, or wow the audience. Vince Carter was a star in Toronto. Lebron James is one in Cleveland. Kevin Garnett in Minnesotta.

[QuiGon]

As for the NBA wanting it's marquee players to only be in big markets or cities, that isn't necessarily correct. The big cities will always attract fans, whereas the smaller ones will not. Marquee players will sell shirts in any city so long as they win, or wow the audience. Vince Carter was a star in Toronto. Lebron James is one in Cleveland. Kevin Garnett in Minnesotta.Perhaps, but there's no question the TV network (who pay a pretty big share of everyone's salary) want marquee stars in big cities. They want big names playing in big cities going deep into the playoffs.

[Iverson]

The NBA is disgusting, but I still love the Celtics. The league is a bunch of hooligan, thug criminals, who play school yard ball to rap music. The most retarded thing in the NBA is when they play music while the teams are playing the fricken game. That's just ridiculous. It's all about cash, and nothing about the sport. The players stink, all they can do is run and jump. Almost none of them have any remote sense of fundamentals. They play 1 on 1 basketball, or just shoot 3's. Scoring has increased some the last couple of years, but 80-75 games are still too common. In the 80's, almost everygame was over 100 points. The league is gross.

What a load of BS that is.

[Iverson]

The NBA is facing a talent dilution problem and its small cities are in danger of going under or moving. Oden to Portland and Durant to Seattle really revives those franchises, which makes more businesss sense for the NBA.

A talent dilution? Seriously? With all the great foreign players that are coming into the league thats nonsense.

Plus you're inferring that teams are going to go out of business? You have got to be kidding me. OKC is dying for their own team plus one could work in Vegas. Not to mention the popularity of the NBA across the world. Seattle is talking about moving because the owner was pushing for public funding for a new stadium, which the public rejected.

What other "small" cities are in jeaopardy of losing teams? Portland? Sacramento? San Antonio?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2843010

[Iverson]

It's really very simple, tanking or no tanking, a system that allows a team that is not the worst the possibility of getting the top pick is a flawed system.

In reality, a system that rewards the worst teams with the best players is a flawed system. European soccer (or all soccer outside the MLS) has it right in that the bottom 3 or 4 teams each season get demoted to a lower league while the top 3 or 4 teams from the lower league get promoted. Teams that finish higher in the standings get entrance to various tournaments and get more revenue. This way, teams are rewarded for being good. Not only does this make the regular season way more meaningful, but it certainly stops teams from tanking.

[Real World]

Perhaps, but there's no question the TV network (who pay a pretty big share of everyone's salary) want marquee stars in big cities. They want big names playing in big cities going deep into the playoffs.

The TV networks aren't the NBA though. If you only have marquee players in big cities, then you won't have a league. You'll have the Yankees, Redsox, a couple of cans, and lots of cannot's. Baseball realized this and thus moved to a Wild Card system, and increases in revenue sharing. It's in the best interests of the league to keep attentances high & interest high in their host cities. This doesn't mean that you don't want marquee guys in marquee cities, it simply means that you need the right balance. Lebron James is in Cleveland, and that won't hurt the league. If he were in NY, it would be better, but NY makes money and has a following regardless. The question therefore becomes, are you better off with Lebron in NY, where money will be made, or having him in Cleveland where you might not otherwise have a franchise.

[Real World]

What a load of BS that is.

Care to explain why? Are you denying that there is a lack of fundamentals in the NBA? Are you denying that scoring is down? Are you denying that the league is now more MTV than is it 1980's NBA? How old are you? Do you remember 80's basketball?

[Real World]

A talent dilution? Seriously? With all the great foreign players that are coming into the league thats nonsense.

Plus you're inferring that teams are going to go out of business? You have got to be kidding me. OKC is dying for their own team plus one could work in Vegas. Not to mention the popularity of the NBA across the world. Seattle is talking about moving because the owner was pushing for public funding for a new stadium, which the public rejected.

What other "small" cities are in jeaopardy of losing teams? Portland? Sacramento? San Antonio?

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2843010

Foreign born players actually have fundamentals. They can shoot, pass, and run a pick and roll. Why do you think they destroy us in international competitions?

OKC wants a team now because they never had one before. When the honeymoon wears off, and the team is a perpetual 30 win to 8th seed team, you can kiss that cities feasability goodbye. Look at Seattle, they have been trying to move for 5-10 years now. Watch how attendance goes in Charlotte the 2nd time around. The league is seriously diluted as are all others, especially the NHL.

[Real World]

In reality, a system that rewards the worst teams with the best players is a flawed system. European soccer (or all soccer outside the MLS) has it right in that the bottom 3 or 4 teams each season get demoted to a lower league while the top 3 or 4 teams from the lower league get promoted. Teams that finish higher in the standings get entrance to various tournaments and get more revenue. This way, teams are rewarded for being good. Not only does this make the regular season way more meaningful, but it certainly stops teams from tanking.

:rofl:


They have it right? Are you out of your mind? There are 3 teams in Italy's serie A that have a shot at a title each year, and that it Juventos, Ac Milan, and Inter Milan. The rest are all pretenders. To think that system would be wise in the states is beyond ridiculous. The Yankees Redsox, and everyone else go home. Then we would demote Tampa and Pittsburg down to the International League, and bring up such juggernauts as Rochester, Richmond, and Scranton Willks-barre. Sure, that is some competitive league. :rofl:

[VJCPatriot]

This thread is filled with misinformation.

First....a draft style like that of the NFL encourages tanking. Thats why the NBA encorporated the lottery system to begin with. Otherwise you have instances like the NFL saw in the year of Reggie Bush with teams trying to lose down to the wire to get that #1 overall. You don't think that would have been much more common this year if it were just by the numbers? You don't have a problem with it that's fine....but tell that to a Season Ticket Holder who paid a few grand to watch Paul Pierce and Michael Redd play, only to get stuck watching Gerald Green battle Mo Williams.


This is a ridiculous comparison. Tanking is not a problem in the NFL. The NFL does not need a lottery and thank god they have never had one. HAHAHA since when did Houston try to out-tank New Orleans for the rights to Bush? That never happened. In fact Houston was so stupid that they decided to draft Mario Williams over Bush. Both teams were just plain BAD. Terrible example. In fact if anything smart NFL teams these days covet lower slotted 1st round players over top 5 players because of the financial savings, which they can then turn around and use to improve their middle class quality players.

The difference between the NFL and the NBA is the level of parity in the league. Teams can easily turn it around from a year to year basis in the NFL, two years at most so long as they have a competent front office in place.

Whereas in the NBA teams can get stuck in the cellar for a decade, and if they don't win the lottery during a franchise player year, they'll be stuck there for another decade. Look at the Celtics for proof of this. First they lose out on Duncan, the Spurs on the other hand (who tanked btw) go on to win 3 championships. Now the Celtics missed out on Oden. They will continue to blow until they can win the next Lebron or Oden, and that type of player may not come around for another 10 years.

In the NFL you have rosters of 53 players. So 1 great player alone is usually not enough to make the difference. In football you have to upgrade your entire team overall to have a chance to win more games.

In the NBA where there are only 5 starters, adding 1 superstar quality player can turn a division doormat into a playoff contender. Just look at Lebron James' impact on the Cleveland Cavaliers as the most recent example.

Now look at the results of the 2007 NBA draft. The 3 worst teams in the league - Memphis, Boston, Milwaukee all received the worst possible picks 4-6. Basketball as noted is a game where you NEED superstars to even compete. These 3 teams will likely never get as good a chance at a franchise player as they had this year. Those teams are screwed for 10 or so years until the next Oden/Durant/Lebron comes along. How is this by any stretch of the imagination a fair result for the lottery?

The NBA would be better served to just abolish the lottery. Otherwise the bad teams in the league will continue to be bad, meanwhile the semibad ones, like Portland/Seattle get quantum leap forwards during franchise player years.

Honestly that's why I love watching football more. It is much more of a team game, and your team doesn't HAVE to have a top 2 draft pick to make an improvement, although you DO need better management than the Houston Texans or the Washington Redskins.

[Iverson]

Care to explain why? Are you denying that there is a lack of fundamentals in the NBA? Are you denying that scoring is down? Are you denying that the league is now more MTV than is it 1980's NBA? How old are you? Do you remember 80's basketball?

Yeah, I remember 80s basketball and its overrated. Basketball is just as good now and in terms of talent. In fact, there's more talent now in the NBA then there was in the 80s. Old white guy media types will disagree, but its true. Players are MUCH better defensively now, they are more athletic (bigger, stronger & faster), more players have 3 point range and players are more versatile. The fact that HS players came into the league at an earlier age does lead to some initial sloppiness, but overall it has helped players like Kobe, Garnett, McGrady, Jermaine O'Neal, Lebron, etc. become better players throughout their career. If any time there was a talent dilution in the league, it was due to the lack of talent that entered the league between the years of 86-91. In this period I think there actually was a lack of talent in the NBA and it allowed some of the stars from the 80s to remain superstars when younger guys really should have taken their place.

[Iverson]

:rofl:


They have it right? Are you out of your mind? There are 3 teams in Italy's serie A that have a shot at a title each year, and that it Juventos, Ac Milan, and Inter Milan. The rest are all pretenders. To think that system would be wise in the states is beyond ridiculous. The Yankees Redsox, and everyone else go home. Then we would demote Tampa and Pittsburg down to the International League, and bring up such juggernauts as Rochester, Richmond, and Scranton Willks-barre. Sure, that is some competitive league. :rofl:

I didn't say it would work here or that it would create a balanced league. All I said is that it would reward teams for being good and punish teams for being bad. You agree that in American sports finishing with the worst record should mandate that you get the first pick in the draft? "Congratulations... your team did the worst in the league. Here is your prize for your ineptitude!"

Imagine if you ran a sales force like this. Would you give all of the best leads and to the worst salesmen from the previous year? I doubt it. I'm not saying that the Euro soccer model would or could work with US sports. But to claim that "the system is flawed" because the team that has performed the poorest (worst record) is not rewarded with the top draft pick I think is flawed logic. My only point is that the Euro soccer system has done a much better job of rewarding those who deserve to be rewarded.

[Real World]

I didn't say it would work here or that it would create a balanced league. All I said is that it would reward teams for being good and punish teams for being bad. You agree that in American sports finishing with the worst record should mandate that you get the first pick in the draft? "Congratulations... your team did the worst in the league. Here is your prize for your ineptitude!"

Imagine if you ran a sales force like this. Would you give all of the best leads and to the worst salesmen from the previous year? I doubt it. I'm not saying that the Euro soccer model would or could work with US sports. But to claim that "the system is flawed" because the team that has performed the poorest (worst record) is not rewarded with the top draft pick I think is flawed logic. My only point is that the Euro soccer system has done a much better job of rewarding those who deserve to be rewarded.

Sports leagues are not a sales force. They are not an open market. They are exempt from anti-trust laws. They are basically a chain akin to Buger King or McDonald's, only, without each others competition. Leagues make money through a fan base, who are their customers. They have no competition but themselves. The reason they reward the worst franchises with the best draft picks is because they need some form of parity. If the same team(s) are always at the top, and your other 25+ franchises have zero chance of competing, you won't have a league for very long. You simply cannot compare a professional sports league to the real world, since the real world has actual competition.

[dhamz]

Sports leagues are not a sales force. They are not an open market. They are exempt from anti-trust laws.

Only baseball is exempt from anti-trust laws.

[QuiGon]

Only baseball is exempt from anti-trust laws. For all practical intents and purposes, the NFL is as well. Back in the 80's when the USFL sued the NFL for being a monopoly under anti-trust laws, the USFL won the lawsuit - and was awarded one whole dollar in punative damages.

[QuiGon]

Sports leagues are not a sales force. They are not an open market. They are exempt from anti-trust laws. They are basically a chain akin to Buger King or McDonald's, only, without each others competition. Leagues make money through a fan base, who are their customers. They have no competition but themselves. The reason they reward the worst franchises with the best draft picks is because they need some form of parity. If the same team(s) are always at the top, and your other 25+ franchises have zero chance of competing, you won't have a league for very long. You simply cannot compare a professional sports league to the real world, since the real world has actual competition. It's amazing how many people don't understand the concept you just explained here... The New England Patriots are not in competition with the Broncos or 49ers or Jets or Seahawks or Cowboys or whatever... oh sure, they compete on the field but from a business standpoint they are partners. Creating a system where weak teams have a chance to improve helps the league overall.

[Iverson]

It's amazing how many people don't understand the concept you just explained here... The New England Patriots are not in competition with the Broncos or 49ers or Jets or Seahawks or Cowboys or whatever... oh sure, they compete on the field but from a business standpoint they are partners. Creating a system where weak teams have a chance to improve helps the league overall.

Who doesn't understand that?

I understand that weak teams have a better chance to improve by getting a top draft pick. I understand the current system allows for more parity and is better for business of the league. Does that make it the perfect system? I would say no. I'm not saying that Euro soccer is perfect or that it would work here in the US. But the fact that all of the teams in soccer have something to play for all season long is much better than teams purposely resting players so that they can have a better chance at being rewarded for ineptitude.

[QuiGon]

Who doesn't understand that? Countless Yankees fans I have had arguments with (mostly on alt.sports.baseball.ny-yankees). I wasn't trying to say that anyone here in this forum didn't understand what RW was saying and I apologize if it seemed that way.