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.