Predicting Fallout from NBA Draft Lottery Reform
NBA Commissioner Adam Silver and the 30 owners who employ him will have much more to discuss at the next Board of Governors meeting than the league's shiny new national television deal.
Among the many items on the substantial agenda: a makeover to the league's draft lottery aimed at discouraging teams from tanking and what ripple effects that change might have.
Grantland's Zach Lowe recently tweeted out some of the details to be discussed, with more complete strings compiled courtesy of Pro Basketball Talk's Dan Feldman and Complex's Gus Turner:
Feldman also illustrates what each non-playoff team's odds of landing a particular pick in the draft would look like under the new plan compared to what they are currently:
Changes to the lottery system are nothing new for the NBA. The early years of the draft lottery, which was first instituted in 1985, were rife with turnover in rules and regulations.
But the odds have largely held steady over the last 20 years, with only minor changes here and there. The proposals being discussed would mark a relatively radical shift in how the NBA doles out its draft considerations to the league's biggest losers from year to year. Not only would the odds flatten, but the number of picks to be determined by ping-pong balls would double, from the top three to the top six.
Not surprisingly, the support for such dramatic upheaval isn't exactly unanimous. ESPN.com's Brian Windhorst reported back in July that the Philadelphia 76ers would likely lead any charge to oppose the latest plan:
"The rough draft of this plan was met with opposition by 76ers management, which is in the midst of a multiseason rebuilding project that is dependent on a high pick next year. The 76ers, sources said, are hoping to get the NBA to delay the plan's implementation for at least a year because it would act as a de facto punishment while just playing by the rules that have been in place.
"
The Sixers would probably be upset if another stinker-of-a-season didn't guarantee them a prime pick in what should be a strong 2015 draft. Then again, a 19-63 campaign in 2013-14, marked by a record-tying 26-game skid, landed Philly in the No. 3 slot after the Cleveland Cavaliers sneaked their way to the top.
As it happens, Philly might not be opposed to the proposal in its entirety. "A change that flattens the Lottery system would be a little bit worse for Philadelphia in the short run," Sixers managing owner Josh Harris told NBA.com's John Schuhmann. "But long run, since we expect to be a consistent playoff or deep playoff-caliber team, it’s actually better for us."
Cleveland's lucky leap over Philly was more norm than exception. Only four times in the lottery's 30-year history has the No. 1 pick gone to the team with the worst record. In fact, teams with the eighth-worst record or better (i.e. teams in the bottom half of the lottery) have won the No. 1 pick just as frequently as have their brethren in the basement.
Why change the system, then? The one in place already works just fine, right?
By and large, the answer is "yes." Philadelphia would seem to be the only franchise that's taken such a drastic approach to rebuilding through the draft, one that would be jeopardized by the NBA's proposals.
The Sixers aside, the Boston Celtics and the Utah Jazz also reduced their talent base considerably prior to last season. The C's traded away Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Jason Terry and head coach Doc Rivers, and they could get even worse by parting ways with the injured Rajon Rondo at some point this season.
The Jazz had a similar goal in mind, though their project began instead with letting Al Jefferson and Paul Millsap walk in free agency and eating a slew of the Golden State Warriors' expiring contracts.
But Boston and Utah both appear to be operating on far different timetables than Philly's. The Celtics' teardown has come within the confines of a typical NBA team life cycle, and a return to the top could be sped up considerably if general manager Danny Ainge is able to wrangle a good return for Rondo.
The Jazz, on the other hand, had stockpiled young talent prior to parting ways with Jefferson and Millsap, both of whom were blocking some of said talent from developing.
The rest of last season's worst were more or less dealing with the fallout from poor luck. The Los Angeles Lakers and the Orlando Magic were both reeling from the loss of Dwight Howard, with L.A. suffering even further from injuries up and down its roster.
The Milwaukee Bucks, who wound up with the No. 2 pick in this year's draft, made an honest effort to be decent but couldn't overcome the dragging effect of lost seasons from some of their key components, including Larry Sanders and O.J. Mayo.
The six teams mentioned herein all figure to find themselves outside of the playoff picture come 2015. If there's any team that stands to benefit handsomely from a retooling of the lottery, it's the Lakers. Their first-round pick will belong to the Phoenix Suns, by way of the Steve Nash trade, if they fall outside the top five.
L.A., though, spent its summer trying to construct something resembling a competitive club. In the event that Kobe Bryant and Steve Nash stay healthy and a few of the team's important newcomers (i.e. Carlos Boozer, Jeremy Lin, rookie Julius Randle) are able to contribute effectively, the Lakers should be able to improve upon last season's miserable 27-55 mark.
If the proposed lottery reforms take effect by next May, the Lakers would have a solid shot at landing in the top five—and, in turn, keeping their pick—even if they take a marginal step toward the playoffs. Some of the league's smaller-market outfits might not be so keen on that, but it's not as though the Sixers, who play in the nation's fourth-largest media market, per Nielsen, would have any complaint along those lines.
As displeased as certain members of the NBA might be with a more even lottery system, it's not as though there wouldn't still be a winner for every loser, and it's not as though the league's worst teams can't still nab the best picks.
Ideally, the changes would merely discourage teams from taking extreme measures to restock their rosters and instead encourage them to field competitive clubs. The coming flood of TV money and the skyrocketing of the salary cap that'll follow could have a similar effect since every team will have both the impetus and the flexibility to spend.
Of all the people who could be affected by the latest lottery proposal, the fans may be the ones who benefit the most. Anything that cuts down on the sheer volume of bad basketball played in the NBA has to be a boon to those who tune in on TV and/or buy tickets to watch games in the flesh.
As for the draft itself, more mediocre teams would be granted greater hope, if not greater access, to the golden tickets that sit atop nearly every incoming class.
Young blue-chippers like Andrew Wiggins and Jabari Parker have a way of reinvigorating fanbases wherever they end up, and the mere idea of having a chance to get a prospect of that caliber would, in theory, give followers of the league all the more reason to stay tuned.
And then there's the lottery itself, which becomes all the more intriguing as a TV spectacle when the proceedings themselves are injected with even more uncertainty and the stakes themselves are that much higher.
All in all, lottery reform would seem another cause for celebration among the NBA, its Board of Governors and the fans, irrespective of any grumblings coming out of the City of Brotherly Love.
What do you make of the potential lottery changes? Tweet me your thoughts!
