Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Zelda Zonk, post: 5429435, member: 966"]
I don’t understand. That would displace the discussion over rigging the lottery, but how does it disincentivize teams from tanking? If you don’t have a playoff team, you’ll still tank, to get the best possible pick. The very worst team would get the #1, but other teams would still be competing for the next best set of picks. And it’s not every year that there’s a consensus #1.

I also don’t think it’s such a bad thing that not so bad teams still have a chance at top picks. They are trying. Nearly making the playoffs sorta indicates you are committed to winning and have committed money/resources. Which, to me, is a good argument in favor of those teams having a chance at a generational talent. Some franchises are just poorly run, the owners don’t spend, and the fanbases are weak. Why reward that?

It’s kind of a matter of philosophies.

I think I do favor a more stringent statistical or structural rule to maybe have the worst five or so teams eligible for the 1 (and maybe 2), and then a different weighting system for the rest.

I think it may be different with basketball vs football and baseball because one player can have much more of an impact, and baseball and football drafts are much longer and teams pick based on specific needs, not necessarily the highest rated prospect. If you don’t need a QB, you’re not drafting a QB even if he’s the best player. In hoops, you’re drafting Flagg no matter who’s on your roster.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?