The NBA Draft is Rigged

[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.

 

[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 ******ed 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.

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.

 

[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.