Looks like you put a good deal of thought into the lottery, and I like the cut
of your jib. But next time you’re stuck in the airport for 8 hours, you should fix
NBA playoff system. East vs. West? It’s a joke, whip up something like the
NCAA tournament for the pros.

But the lottery with weighted chances must be there, in some form, or the system will get abused time and time again.

That doesn’t make any sense. There is a weighted-chances system now, and it’s still abused. So how does having such a system prevent abuse?

I like Sean’s idea a lot.

Your idea has tremendous upside potential.

All the best,
Santo

That said, the problem with the NBA draft, as you describe it, is that you are trying to simultaneously achieve two inconsistent goals: encouraging teams to win as many games as possible, and giving the worst teams (those that lose the most games) the best opportunities to improve. You can’t do these both at once. Even with two year records, there will still be an ordering late in the season that teams will be aware of, and trying to

That said, here’s another, possibly better proposal: what you really don’t want is teams intentionally tanking late in the season, when playoff slots are on the line. The solution to this is simple: Don’t count the games late in the season when deciding who gets the high draft picks — only consider the first half, or maybe two-thirds, of the season. (You could do this with two seasons in a row, perhaps.) Earlier in the season, even the bad teams will still have a chance to make the playoffs, so they should be less likely to tank games intentionally. You could theoretically imagine that some teams might be thinking “let’s tank now for the draft, then try to make it up later”, but at least everyone will by trying to win all their games when their in the home stretch….

Your main concrete, non-abstract objection seems to hinge on the Spurs, which sounds suspiciously like sour grapes. They are hardly the first team to add a second star when they already had one – look at the Lakers a few years ago, for example.

What have we seen since the end of the Jordan era? A large number of very high quality teams battling for dominance, with the Lakers and Spurs at the top but a lot of other entertaining teams rising and falling as well – Miami, Detroit, Dallas, Phoenix, etc. That sounds to me just like what the NBA should be.

Finally, I think we’re in a transitional phase. With the exception of Phoenix, all the teams that have been dominant for the last decade have fallen or will soon begin to – the Spurs may be able to hold it together for awhile, I suppose, historically it’s unlikely but they’re such a brilliant organization you can never say for sure. But there are a lot of great, very young teams ready to rise and compete.

I don’t see the problem. It’s not perfect, but teams will game any system, and the results are good overall. This year’s playoffs were interesting until the Finals – Spurs/Phoenix matchups should be hot for a few years to come – and the East is bound to bouce back before long with at least one decent team.

However, a non-regional, completely seeded playoffs would be great. I think that innovation would be a lot more valuable than monkeying with the draft, though neither one is gonna happen.