NBA Lottery 2.0: Eliminating the incentive to lose

8/14/2019 NBA Lottery 2.0: Eliminating the incentive to lose

1/32

ELIMINATING THE INCENTIVE TO LOSE:

A UNIQUE PROPOSAL TO REFORM THE NBA DRAFTS LOTTERY SYSTEM

By: Andrew Smith


2/32

2

During our countrys revolution from British tyranny over 200 years ago, Thomas

Paine opined in his famous pamphlet Common Sense, that a long habit of not thinking a

thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a

formidable outcry in defense of custom.1 In a progressive society, it is important to

never be satisfied with the status quo and understand that no matter how successful an

entity may be, there is always room for improvement.

The National Basketball Associations draft process has received some scrutiny

the last two seasons, as several teams have been accused of not giving maximum

organizational effort in their games, so that they would have the best opportunity to be

awarded the first overall draft selection. It was not the first time that the NBA had to

confront questions on the success and legality of their draft, and more recently, its lottery

process. The best way to remedy an ailing process is to get to the root of the problem.

In this paper, I will analyze the history of the NBA Draft and the reasons for its

existence in the first place. Then, I will explain why all of the key parties involved in the

situation, the owners, coaches, players, and the league itself, would be pleased with my

innovative draft process which would address every weakness with the current system

and explain why my proposed changes would be beneficial for all of the interested

parties.

LEGAL HISTORY

Before I break down the NBAs draft system it is important to look at its legal

history and how it has progressed to its current state. The amateur draft is present in

1 Paine, Thomas. Common Sense. Philadelphia: printed. And sold by W. and T. Bradford[1776]; Bartleby.com, 1999. www.bartleby.com/133.


3/32

3

every major sport because of the importance of competitive balance. In every sport,

organizations have understood the necessity for evenly distributed talent. Obviously, the

main goal of every team is to win games, but the main goal of the organization as a whole

is to be successful and for some owners, teams are financial investments. There are a

handful of owners who would certainly sacrifice organizational revenue in order to

improve the team that they field, but there are still some who operate the organization

simply as a financial asset. This is what makes sporting leagues so inimitable.

For example, in the fast food industry, McDonalds does not want Burger King to

be successful. They want to increase revenue while at the same time pushing any

competitors out of the market. In sports though, the success of a professional team

depends greatly on the success of its league. 2

This necessity for an equal balance of talent adds to the unique excitement of

sports. Obviously, there are a number of factors that go into being a successful team, such

as player development, coaching, style of play, and personality traits of players, but the

draft has proven in the past to be the most effective way of assuring that all teams have a

chance to acquire talented players.

The NBA Players Association in the landmark antitrust case of Robertson v.

National Basketball Association challenged this thought.3 This was a case brought by

current basketball Hall-of-Famer Oscar Robertson, who at the time was the players

union representative. In this case, the players union contended that their new collective

bargaining agreement violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. The union challenged the

2 Roger G. Noll, Sports, Jobs, and Taxes: The Economic Impact of Sports Teams andStadiums 27 (1997)3 Robertson v. National Basketball Association, 556 F.2d 682


4/32

4

legality of the draft, the merger with the ABA, and the leagues reserve clause that

prohibited free agency. The unions argument was put in laymans terms in an essay by

sports agent Leigh Steinberg, A standard analogy, repeated so regularly by some

lawyers and agents, is a system in which an attorney graduates from law school and is

drafted by, and forced to work for, a law firm in Biloxi, Mississippi, rather than a firm in

San Francisco for whom the lawyer wants to work. 4 In 1976, six years after the suit was

originally brought, the NBA finally settled by eliminating the option clause and creating

free agency but upholding the merger between the two leagues and of course, the legality

of the draft.

5

One of the two other main cases is Bridgeman, et al. v. NBA, et al., 675 F.Supp.

960, a case in which the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey held

that plaintiffs (NBA players) were not entitled to summary judgment on the issue of

whether the NBA draft, salary cap, and right of first refusal were violative of anti-trust

provisions; by virtue of the fact that there was a factual issue of whether the NBAs

collective bargaining agreement which treated the issues and thus exempted them from

anti-trust scrutiny had in fact, expired.

The other case is Wood v. NBA, et al. 602 F.Supp. 525, in this case the United

States District Court for the Second Circuit denied plaintiffs motion for a temporary

injunction in a lawsuit which alleged that the practice of requiring an NBA draftee to

accept the minimum salary or forego playing for one year was violative of anti-trust

4 Leigh Steinberg, Negotiating Contracts in the National Football League, C627 A.L.I.-A.B.A. 617, 619-20 (1991).5 NBA.com official biography of Oscar Robertson,http://www.nba.com/history/players/robertson_bio.html


5/32

5

provisions, holding that plaintiff failed to establish irreparable harm.6 The court

inferred that the practice in question was part of the collective bargaining agreement by

which all players are bound.

There are a litany of cases, including Robertson, where courts have upheld the

draft against antitrust claims by using the argument of competitive balance and the

necessity of such for a league to stay afloat. The lone opposing decision was Smith v. Pro

Football, Inc. 420 F.Supp. 738, in which the National Football League gained the

notoriety of losing the only case directly challenging the legality of a professional sports

draft.

7

This decision though was specific to the NFL, and the Washington D.C. District

Courts analysis has not only been scrutinized a great deal, but has never been used by

another court in a similar case. In general, the court questioned the correlation between

the draft and on-field competition, suggesting the existence of a stronger relationship

between competition and other factors such as the sharing of television revenues and the

ability of individual coaches. 8 In his 1995 article in the Marquette Sports Law Journal

titled The Amateur Sports Draft: The Best Means To The End, Jeffrey Rosenthal opined

that the courts reasoning suggests, no pro-competitive effects that increase athletic

competition are ever of significance.

6 In my opinion, this case was the end-all decision showing the power of the collectivebargaining agreement. Leon Wood, a draftee of the Philadelphia 76ers in the 1984 NBADraft, declined to accept a one-year contract offer that would have paid him $75,000. Hisargument centered on the argument that in signing a salary not commensurate with histalents he would be exposing himself to a career ending injury. The court ruled that oncea player is drafted he is immediately bound to the regulations of the CBA, and that thesalary limitation clearly fell within the terms and conditions pursuant to Section 8 (a) ofthe National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.S. 158 (d).7 Jeffrey A. Rosenthal, The Amateur Sports Draft: The Best Means To The End?, 6Marw. Sports L.J. 1 (1995).8 Ibid., Page 4


6/32

6

In an analysis of the other court decisions in which the antitrust elements of the

amateur sports draft have been ruled on, it does not seem to be a coincidence that no

other court has followed the Smith decision. In order for the talent that enters every

professional league on a yearly basis to be spread out evenly, and not placed into an open

market and signed by the wealthiest team or team in the most desirable location, the

amateur draft is a necessary entity. The legality of the amateur draft though is not what is

at issue in my argument. My paper will focus on whether or not the arrangement of the

amateur draft in the National Basketball Association is the best means to reach the

leagues intended goal.

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT AND DRAFT RULES

Each of the four major professional sports, baseball, basketball, football, and

hockey hold an amateur draft in the off seasons of their respective sports. Each draft has

their own set of rules pertaining to the draft, but the NBAs draft is unique in its brevity.

The two-round draft gives every organization two picks, one in each round, every pick

can also be traded to other organizations, which sometimes gives certain teams more or

less than the standard two selections.

The NBA players association, led by its chief Billy Hunter, agreed to some

modifications to the draft in the most recent collective bargaining agreement, which was

signed after the 2005 season. The most important change from past drafts was the

amendment that high school players would only gain draft eligibility one year after their

graduating class has finished high school, and only if they are also at least 19 years of age


7/32

7

as of the end of the calendar year of the draft.9 The age requirement of 19 is also the same

for international players.

The players union agreed to the leagues proposal for the age requirement

because of the immaturity and lack of skill that many of the leagues early-entry players

possessed. There have been a small number of high school players who have made an

immediate impact in their first season, but even well known players like Kobe Bryant and

Tracy McGrady struggled in their first couple of seasons as a professional basketball

player. Unfortunately, this rule has opened up a whole other can of worms for college

basketball, as players are now entering a school with the mindset that it will be a one-year

stop, which essentially defeats the purpose of amateur athletics at the college level. This

is an issue that I will not address in this paper though.

The rest of the drafts rules are fairly basic. All United States-born players are

automatically eligible upon the end of their college eligibility. All other players who wish

to be drafted and meet the age requirement, must declare their eligibility no later than 60

days before the draft. After this date, prospective draftees may attend up to two of the

four major NBA pre-draft camps, where teams send their scouts to evaluate the available

talent. Potential draftees are also invited to many individual team workouts. Throughout

this period, the players who still have college eligibility can obtain feedback regarding

their projected draft position, and if they so choose, they can return back to their schools.

Each player is only allowed to use this test period once if they would like to retain

9 National Basketball Players Association, Collective Bargaining Agreement, Article XSection 1, Paragraph (a)


8/32

8

amateur status, as the NCAA does not allow student-athletes to play at the college level if

they withdraw from the draft twice.10

The most complex aspects to the drafts section in the collective bargaining

agreement pertain to the negotiating rights and the sliding salary scale. Pursuant to

Article X, Section 4, Paragraph (a) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, a team that

drafts a player shall, during the period from the fate of such NBA Draft to the date of the

next Draft, be the only Team with which such player may negotiate or sign a Player

ContractIf a Team has made a required tender contract to such a player and the player

has not signed a player contract within the period between the two drafts, the team that

drafted the player shall lose its exclusive right to negotiate with the player and the player

will then be eligible for selection in the subsequent draft. 11

This issue was at the crux of the players associations antitrust argument, but it is

an argument that courts have ruled against, as stated before for the policy of a balance of

talent among leagues. This negotiating rights clause is necessary so that any holdouts can

be avoided by giving players very little leverage.

Article VIII of the collective bargaining agreement lays out the framework for the

Rookie Salary Scale. This scale establishes that a first-round picks applicable rookie

scale amount is determined by the players selection number in the NBA Draft.12 Every

first-round pick is restricted to negotiating with only the team that drafted them for the

subsequent 12 months until the next draft. As far as salary goes, there is very little

leverage given to the players in the negotiating of these contracts, they can be awarded

10 Ibid., Article X, Section 811 Ibid., Article X, Section 4, Paragraph (a)12 Ibid., Article VIII


9/32

9

significant money in a signing bonus. There is no leverage though given to the players

when it comes to contract length. Section 1, Paragraph A of Article VIII states that Each

Rookie Scale contract between a team and a first round pick shall cover a period of two

seasons, but shall have an option in favor of the team for the players third season and a

second option in favor of the team for the players fourth season. This was another win

in the collective bargaining agreement for the league, as they wanted to avoid having

players pick and choose their destinations, and also allow for teams to be rewarded for

good draft picks with more service time under contract.

The NBAs draft though puts a great deal of pressure on every organization

because there is so little room for error. There have been many well-known blunders in

NBA Draft history, selections that have hindered organizations for years into the future

and cost them millions of dollars in ticket sales, media coverage, and other sources of

revenue. The most notable of these selections came in 1984, when the Portland Trail

Blazers selected 71 center Sam Bowie with the second overall selection. Despite having

modest success with Portland, as well as the New Jersey Nets, Bowie was hampered by

leg injuries throughout his eleven-year career, and more importantly, this selection

allowed the Chicago Bulls to select Michael Jordan with the third pick. Obviously

hindsight is twenty-twenty, but six NBA Championships later for the Bulls, and it is safe

to say that Portland has regretted their decision.

The Sam Bowie pick though is just one of several notable gaffes since the NBA

Drafts inception in 1947. In recent memory, there was the selection of 18-year old Darko

Milicic by the Detroit Pistons with the second overall pick in the 2003 NBA Draft. Led

by a solid core of veteran players, the Pistons achieved great success in the years after the


10/32

10

pick, winning two Eastern Conference titles, and one NBA title. But, the Pistons passed

on the leagues leading scorer in 2006, Carmelo Anthony, who was selected by the

Denver Nuggets one pick later. Anthony, who won an NCAA Championship as a

freshman at Syracuse University, has established himself as one of the leagues premier

offensive players, while Milicic is now playing for the Memphis Grizzlies, his third team

in four seasons.

These are just examples illustrating the fact that scouting talent in the months

leading up to the NBA Draft is not an exact science, and there are just as many players

selected among the top ten selections who do not pan out, as there are players selected

late in the second round who turn into all-stars. The drafts unpredictability is just one of

the many reasons why the NBA should consider reforming the draft system.

So, the courts have ruled that the draft is a legal entity because all antitrust issues

are outweighed by the necessity for competitive balance. We also know that the

collective bargaining agreement weighs heavily in favor of the league, and the league

seems to have the upper hand in any potential negotiations, which would lend one to

believe that if the league intended to adopt a new policy, they would be able to

incorporate it into the new collective bargaining agreement. The next steps are explaining

the NBAs motive in establishing a lottery system that was so different from other

professional sports, and whether or not it actually achieves what the NBA had originally

intended. Also, I intend to explain how alternative dispute resolution methods would be

the most effective route in putting my proposal into effect.

THE LOTTERY


11/32

11

As mentioned previously, the NBA Draft is unique in its short length. Here is a

graphic displaying the number of players drafted in 2007 in each of the respective major

professional leagues.

MLB: 1,453

NBA: 60

NFL: 265

NHL: 21113

The draft is shorter in length because of the fact that NBA teams do not have

minor league systems as do MLB and NHL organizations, and the NBA only allows its

teams to have active 15-man rosters, a much smaller allowance than teams are given in

the other sports. In every other sport though, the order of selections is based on record in

a simple worst-to-first order, and this order remains the same in every round. Now, let us

look at how the NBA progressed to the decision to hold a lottery.

The NBAs inaugural draft took place in 1947 and its system has changed several

times throughout its 60-year history, which may be a sign that the NBA is willing to

continue progressing until the best possible system is found. From 1947-1965, the NBA

allowed teams to forfeit their first-round pick in order to select a player from its

immediate area. These territorial picks were created in an effort to drum up local

support in a time when nearly every NBA organization was struggling to get consistent

fan attendance.14

From 1966-1984, the NBA used a coin flip between the two worst teams to

determine the first pick of the draft. This completely random procedure gave off the

13 These numbers were gathered from various websites listing all of the drafted players in2007.14 Evolution of the Draft and Lottery, available athttp://www.nba.com/history/draft_evolution.html


12/32

12

appearance that the league simply could not come up with a better solution, so they just

went to an unsystematic, juvenile method. In 1979, the Chicago Bulls lost the coin toss to

the Los Angeles Lakers, it was their wrong call of heads that cost them the opportunity

to draft Michigan State wunderkind Earvin Magic Johnson, who led the Lakers to an

NBA Championship in his rookie season before obviously going on to an illustrious

career. 15 There is no justification for making a coin toss the ultimate determining factor

in who selects first overall, but it was not until the Houston Rockets end-of-season

meltdown in 1984 that the NBA rightly decided to trash this process for the 1985 NBA

Draft.

On March 13, 1984, the Houston Rockets sat at 26-39 with 17 games remaining in

the regular season. The Rockets had won the coin toss in 1983 and drafted 74 phenom

Ralph Sampson out of the University of Virginia, despite Sampsons first-year campaign

which garnered him the Rookie of the Year award, the Rockets were not a playoff

contender. Meanwhile, at the same time, 70 center Akeem Olajuwon was leading the

University of Houston to the NCAA Final Four. As New York Daily News sportswriter

Filip Bondy wrote in his book, Tip-Off: How the 1984 NBA Draft Changed Basketball

Forever,

The league in 1984 was in its last throes of a stubborn plutocracy, dominated by a

powerful ruling triumvirate: the Boston Celtics, the Los Angeles Lakers and the aging

Philadelphia 76ers. The rosters of too many other teams were paper-thin in marketable

15 Filip Bondy, Tip-Off: How the 1984 NBA Draft Changed Basketball Forever, 4(2007). This book did a fantastic job of running down Portlands decision to draft SamBowie after they lost the coin toss to the Houston Rockets. Not only did the Portlandorganization pass up on Michael Jordan, but John Stockton and Charles Barkley, alsoNBA Hall-of-Famers were passed on in order to draft Bowie. Hindsight is definitely 20-20, but it is just one more example why the draft is viewed by many as a crapshoot.


13/32

13

stars. The coin flip to determine the first draft pick on May 22 represented a chance for

either the Houston Rockets or the Portland Trail Blazers to change all that, to transform

the trio of elite teams into a quartet. Olajuwon wasn't a particularly glamorous figure.

He wasn't even American. But the Nigerian star figured to have an immediate impact. He

was big, smart, agile and owned surprising court savvy considering his inexperience.

Title teams were built around such centers, guys like Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Robert

Parish. Olajuwon looked like a franchise player who figured to win a championship or

two.16

The Rockets seemed intent on doing whatever it took to obtain Olajuwon, the

local hero, with a territorial pick of their own. So, over the final 17 games of the

regular season the Rockets promptly posted a 3-14 record. There was no incentive for the

Rockets to play out the final weeks of the regular season with any passion, their fans

wanted Olajuwon, and the organization made it very apparent that they did as well. After

all, what team wouldnt? But, sport should exist solely for teams to compete to win,

whenever losing has an incentive, the whole purpose of competition is voided.17

In the inaugural lottery system in 1985, all seven teams who missed out on the

postseason were given an equal shot at the first overall pick. The New York Knicks had

the third-worst record in the NBA in the 1984-85 regular season, yet they won the

randomized lottery, earning the first pick in the draft and ultimately the rights to the

consensus best available player, 70 center Patrick Ewing from Georgetown University.

16 Ibid., Page 4.17 There have been several arguments as to why the NBA Draft should be modified. But,none have addressed the fact that there should never be an incentive for losing, and nonehave ever created a new model developed solely to avoid this tenet of competitivenesswhich is at the crux of why sports exist.


14/32

14

Still to this day, there is great controversy over the frozen envelope scandal, an alleged

attempt by the NBA to rig the lottery and allow Ewing to play in New York, the

countrys largest market.18 Immediately, this system drew ire from the Golden State

Warriors and Indiana Pacers, the two teams who tied for the worst record in the league.

They wondered how a system in which two teams who each finished 22-60 and a team,

the Atlanta Hawks, who finished 34-48 had equal opportunity to earn the first pick in the

draft could ever be considered equitable.

Over the next eight years, the lottery was adapted three more times, until finally in

1993, the NBA developed the weighted lottery system which is still being employed

today. Although the percentage points that determine the likelihood of each pick has

changed as more expansion teams have been added to the league has changed, the general

idea of the system has remained the same. To put it in laymans terms:

1000 different outcomes of an experiment exist and are equally likely to occur. A certain

amount of outcomes is assigned to each non-playoff NBA team. The largest number of

18There will always be a minority of conspiracy theorists who question the actions of an

entity that has little, if any, oversight. Blogger Seth Cohen summed up the feelings of thedoubters at his blog, www.cubeside.com. Prior to the 85 draft, the team with the worstrecord in the NBA would always get the number 1 pick in the draft. However,commissioner David Stern decided that it was too enticing for a mediocre team topurposely throw games in an attempt to land the next years top draft pick. So in 85 itwas decided that the 8 worst teams would have their names put in an envelope and thenStern himself would swirl them around a big plastic ball, bingo style and pick them out atrandom. Everyone knew that Patrick Ewing was the pick that year, to put it inperspective the 2nd pick was Wayman Tisdaleyeah ,you havent heard of him. Thetheory goes that Stern wanted the lowly Knicks to land the franchise player and helpboost revenue in the major market of New York, so he decided to freeze the envelope sothat when he reached into the big plastic globe hed know which one it was by its coldtouch. To put even more mystery into it, Stern did it behind closed doors with notelevision cameras allowed to watch the selections, so no one really knows what tookplace back there. The Knicks landed Ewing and made two finals appearances during histenure.


15/32

15

outcomes is assigned to the team with the worst record. The team with the second worst

record gets the second largest number of outcomes, and so on for each of the 14 teams in

the lottery. The experiment is conducted, and the team to which the winning outcome was

assigned receives the 1st pick in the NBA Draft. The experiment is conducted again. If the

winner is the same team that already won, the experiment is performed over again until

there is a different winner. The winner of the second experiment receives the 2nd pick.

The winner of the third experiment receives the 3rd pick. After the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd picks

are determined, the 4th-14th picks are assigned to teams based on weakness of record.

The lottery is conducted with witnesses verifying that all 14 balls are represented once as

they are placed in the lottery machine. The balls are placed in the machine for 20

seconds to randomize prior to having the first ball drawn. The remaining three balls are

drawn at 10-second intervals. NBA officials determine which team holds the winning

combination and that franchise is awarded the #1 overall draft pick. The four balls are

returned to the machine and the process is repeated to determine the second and third

picks. In the event that a combination belongs to a team that has already won its pick (or

if the one unassigned combination comes up), the round is repeated until a unique winner

is determined. When the first three teams have been determined, the remaining picks are

given out based on regular season record with the worst teams getting the highest picks.

This assures each team that it can drop no more than three spots from its projected draft

position.19

From the standpoint of the teams with the worst record each season, this system

has not been successful. The team with the worst record in the regular season has only

19 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Draft_Lottery


16/32

16

earned the first pick in the draft twice over the fourteen-year period that the weighted

lottery system has been implemented, and this has been the cause of many sour grapes

being spilled.20 But, from the standpoint of the NBA, this has been the intended result,

they did not want to reward the team with the worst record. The lottery was put into

practice because of the leagues desire to avoid having teams purposefully lose games in

an effort to obtain the first overall pick.

But judging from the late-season effort given by the Minnesota Timberwolves and

Boston Celtics in 2007, the New York Knicks, Milwaukee Bucks, and Seattle Sonics in

2008, as well as a number of other teams in previous seasons, it appears that the weighted

lottery system is not deterring teams from losing on purpose. So, in an effort to avoid the

tanking of games by non-contending teams, the NBA has first unsuccessfully

implemented a coin toss, and now, in my opinion, unsuccessfully implemented a

weighted lottery system.

In 1996-97, the Boston Celtics finished with a franchise-worst 15-67 record, and

in 2001 the then-Celtics general manager M.L. Carr admitted that the team had

purposefully tanked games in order to try and secure the first overall pick and select

Wake Forest University center Tim Duncan. That was part of the orchestration, Carr

said, in an interview for the Boston Herald on February 1, 2001. It turned out that the San

Antonio Spurs beat the odds and were awarded the first overall pick, while Boston picked

third.

20 Since the implementation of the weighted lottery system, only twice has the first pickbeen awarded to the team with the worst record in the previous season. (2003: ClevelandCavaliers- LeBron James; 2004: Orlando Magic; Dwight Howard)


17/32

17

The Celtics were again the center of a similar controversy in 2007 when they were

accused of doing the same thing, and the numbers dont lie. The Celtics finished the

season losing 11 of their final 13 games, and were hit by what was coined as a sudden

rash of injuries, as their usual starting players were held out of the final games. This

effort to lose was even evident by the actions of Celtics general manager Danny Ainge.

Last March, Ainge was fined $30,000 for sitting next to the mother of Texas freshman

Kevin Durant during the Big 12 Conference Tournament; this is deemed excessive

contact under the NBA Rules and Regulations.21

Jon Krawczynski documented the last several games of the Timberwolves a

season ago and found a similar meltdown.22 Hosting the Memphis Grizzlies in the final

game of the season, the Timberwolves sat out superstar Kevin Garnett with right knee

tendonitis, and promptly lost 116-94 to a Memphis team that had entered the game with

a league-worst 21-60 record. As it turned out, the Celtics and Timberwolves efforts

were ironically squandered as they were respectively awarded the 5th and 7th picks by the

weighted lottery system.23

21 Last years draft was the cause for many teams perceived interest in losing because ofthe consensus top two players. Texas freshman Kevin Durant and Ohio St. freshmanGreg Oden were, and still are, viewed by scouts as future NBA superstars. Oden wasselected first by the Portland Trail Blazers, but is out for the season with an injured knee.While, Durant was chosen second by the Seattle Super Sonics, and has lived up to hispotential early on, averaging 20 points per game on 43% field goal shooting in his firstNBA season.22 Jon Krawczynski is an Associated Press sportswriter. His article was found onESPN.com and was a basic game summary of the Timberwolves game against the DallasMavericks on April 10, 2007. The link to his article can be found athttp://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=nba&id=2834029.23 There were fourteen non-playoff teams in the NBA in the 2006-07 season. I calculatedthe records of these teams after the trading deadline of February 22, 2007. The followingare the records of the non-playoff teams in order of winning percentage, and Ill explainthis footnote more in my detailed proposal.


18/32

18

Although it could never be totally confirmed that teams deliberately try to lose

games, enough evidence exists that shows certain teams have done so. But, the fact that

the thought has crept into the minds of people around the league should be enough for the

NBA to accept its systems faults and be willing to make a necessary change.

PROPOSAL

As my paper stated in the Lottery section, the NBA has made several

adaptations to its draft over its history, and in more recent years, made several

adjustments to the lottery system. When addressing a problem, one must evaluate it in its

entirety and try to address the situation by tackling it at its roots. The NBA has developed

the lottery system with two goals in mind: 1) To redistribute talent in the most equitable

manner by giving the worst teams the best opportunity to acquire premium talent; and 2)

To avoid the tanking of games by teams in an effort to gain the first pick in the draft. My

proposal addresses both of these issues and solves all of the problems that have arisen

from the lottery system.

Philadelphia 76ers 17-11Los Angeles Clippers 15-15New Orleans Hornets 13-14

Charlotte Bobcats 12-16Boston Celtics 11-18

Milwaukee Bucks 9-18Minnesota Timberwolves 7-21

New York Knicks 9-18Atlanta Hawks 9-19

Sacramento Kings 9-19Seattle Super Sonics 9-19Memphis Grizzlies 8-18

Portland Trail Blazers 8-18Indiana Pacers 6-23


19/32

19

Let us first address the concept that the lottery is the best possible route to

redistribute talent in the most equitable manner. NBA legend Jerry West, who has been

incredibly successful both as a player and executive, served as President of the Memphis

Grizzlies until June 30, 2007. West was extremely upset with how the lottery played out

last year, as the Grizzlies were awarded the fourth pick in the draft despite having the

worst record in the NBA. Its like pitching pennies. Its grossly unfair to the team, but

Ive said it before, I dont think the lottery is fair. I never liked it. Its not sour grapes. I

just think its a terrible system and it needs to be addressed. Every other league in the

other professional leagues, they all draft according to how they finish the season. There

have been a lot of picks in the lottery that have failed. There are two in the lottery this

year (Greg Oden and Kevin Durant) that are not going to fail. There are two superstars in

this draft. I think for the teams fortunate enough to get them, the fortunes of their

franchises have changed forever.24

Well, Mr. West is right in that the lottery is a terrible system that needs to be

addressed, but West is wrong in stating that his statement is not sour grapes. If the system

had played out and given the Grizzlies the top pick, I am sure that West would have

stated a different response.

Before I get into the crux of my proposal, it is important to explain why the NBA

is unique in its draft and cannot follow the basic worst-to-first order that all of the other

major professional leagues follow. As evident by the Tim Donaghy scandal that rocked

the NBA, basketball games are the easiest of any other to have the outcome altered.25

In a

24 http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=287956825 On August 15, 2007, NBA referee Tim Donaghy pleaded guilty to two federal chargesresulting from an FBI investigation revolving around allegations that Donaghy bet on


20/32

20

game of basketball, if a player wanted to attempt to lose the game, they could do so by

missing a free throw or allowing an opposing player to score by playing weak defense.

To even the most ardent fans, this could go unnoticed and just look as it is a normal part

of the game.

The physical nature of football and hockey do not lend itself to the same

opportunities, if a player were to take a play off in either of these sports, it could result

in serious physical injury. While, in baseball, despite the infamous Black Sox Scandal of

1919, baseball has progressed to the point that in the final weeks of the regular season,

the non-contending teams are usually fielding minor leaguers who are playing to impress

their coaches and organization. Also, baseball draft picks do not make as an immediate

impact as they do in basketball, as the majority of baseball draftees have to work their

way up the minor league system.

One counter-argument to this line of thinking is that any organization in any sport

could simply sit their star players in an effort to lose, just as the Minnesota Timberwolves

and Boston Celtics were accused of doing last year. This is certainly true, but I think its

importance is outweighed by not only the benefits that would come from a new, unique

drafting system, but also the fact that the game is still won and lost by the players on the

field.

Let us now look at the concept of talent distribution and why the NBA attempts to

maintain competitive balance by giving the best players to the worst teams. There is no

doubt that there is a certain batch of players who can be labeled special. These are the

games he officiated over a span of two seasons and made calls affecting the point spreadof these games. There have also been a number of point-shaving scandals involvingplayers, although these were mostly at the collegiate level.


21/32

21

players whose presence alone can compel a team from mediocrity to greatness. Shaquille

ONeal, Tim Duncan, Yao Ming, and LeBron James have all been no-brainer decisions to

be selected with the first overall pick, and all of them have led their teams to levels of

greatness in one form or another. ONeal and Duncan have combined for eight NBA

championships (Four titles each). James has led his Cleveland Cavaliers on a four-year

steady rise from being the worst team in the league in 2003 to Eastern Conference

Champions in 2007. While, Yao26

has firmly established himself as one of the premier

centers in the league, and helped place the Houston Rockets in the upper echelon of the

Western Conference.

By no means do I want to single out Mr. Wests aforementioned comments, but it

seems to be an epidemic of negativity that has worked its way around a number of teams

that has not been successful in recent memory. The Memphis Grizzlies went 22-60 a

season ago, what exactly makes them more deserving of the number one pick, then say,

the Boston Celtics (24-58), Milwaukee Bucks (28-54), or as I will argue, the Philadelphia

76ers (35-47). If the draft is such an important entity to the success of a team, then what

is the Memphis Grizzlies excuse for losing when they had a starting five that consisted

of all top ten draft picks, the only team in the NBA to do so.27

26 Despite his Americanized name being Yao Ming. When referred to, he goes by his reallast name, which is Yao.27 In the 2006-2007 season, the most common starting lineup used by the MemphisGrizzlies consisted of Damon Stoudamire (7th overall pick in 1995), Mike Miller (#5-2000), Rudy Gay (#8-2006), Pau Gasol (#3-2001), Stromile Swift (#2-2000). Therefore,their most used starting five averaged out to be a #5 pick. Using this calculation, I rankedevery NBA team according to the average draft pick of their most used starting five.Ironically, the defending champion San Antonio Spurs averaged out to a 41.6, the highestin the NBA. Here are the rest of the rankings with an asterisk denoting whether or not theteam made the playoffs in 2006-07:

Memphis- 5


22/32

22

Two examples of how the draft has played out in opposite directions are the

Atlanta Hawks and the San Antonio Spurs. The Hawks have the longest tenure in terms

of the most consecutive seasons without a playoff appearance (eight). They also hold the

longest drought of not drafting an All-Star player in all professional sports.28 Since 2000,

the Hawks have drafted among the top six positions on five separate occasions, they

traded away their first round picks in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Obviously, having high draft

*Detroit- 7.6*Orlando- 8.4

New York- 8.4*Denver 10New Orleans- 11

*Houston- 12*New Jersey- 12.4

Portland- 12.4*Dallas- 12.6Seattle- 14.2

*Cleveland- 15.2Indiana- 15.6Boston 16.4

*Golden State 17.2*Washington 17.4

*Miami 18.4Atlanta- 18.8

Philadelphia- 19*Chicago- 21.4

Sacramento 21.6*Los Angeles Lakers- 22

*Phoenix- 23*Toronto- 23Charlotte- 24*Utah- 24.4

Milwaukee- 25.8Los Angeles Clippers- 26.6

Minnesota- 34*San Antonio- 41.6

(Since 60 players are drafted, any undrafted player in a teams starting lineup wasconsidered to be 61st.)

28 The last All-Star player that the Hawks drafted was Kevin Willis in 1984. (Informationfound at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_Hawks)


23/32

23

picks goes hand in hand with having losing seasons. There are a number of other

important facets to a successful team; astute scouting, talented players, good coaching,

and players with good character are all essential factors, and in my opinion, the Hawks

lack the scouting, coaching, and high-character players necessary to compete at a high

level in the NBA.

On the other hand, the San Antonio Spurs have established themselves as the

model franchise in the NBA. Tim Duncan is not only one of the best players in the game

today, but one of the all-time best players. He has been the centerpiece of the Spurs

dynasty in which they have three championships in the last five seasons. Duncan was

drafted first overall in the 1997 NBA Draft, and although he is the most prominent player

on the team, the Spurs success is due to a team chemistry that is unmatched by any of its

rivals. In their most frequently used starting lineup in last years championship season

was All-Star point guard Tony Parker (28th overall selection in 2001), Manu Ginobili

(57th pick in 1999), and Bruce Bowen and Fabricio Oberto (both undrafted players).

The Spurs have a head coach in Gregg Popovic that has convinced all of his

players to buy into his system and style of play, they have scouts who shrewdly selected

Parker and Ginobili late in their respective drafts, and they have players who have team-

first attitudes.

Henry Abbott, the moderator of the blog TrueHoop that is featured on ESPN.com,

commented on the new trend of what scouts were looking for at last years pre-draft

camp:

What teams are shopping for are complementary players. Role players. Guys who can fit

in to the teams larger goals, while contributing very specific things. Playing really good


24/32

24

perimeter defense and hitting the occasional three, for instance. Rebounding and blocking

shots without getting the ball much. Players who can shine without the spotlight, and who

will not be a disturbance in the locker room if they dont get a lot of minutes.

These are guys who might play 15 years without scoring 30 points, or faking someone

out of their socks. I talked to ESPNs David Thorpe, who is in Orlando, and he points out

that you could stick any of those Spurs I just mentioned (Bowen, Oberto, etc.) in the pre-

draft camp, and no one watching would be certain that they were sure-fire NBA players.

Because they just do not have the skills to thrive in this hyper, ball-hog, show-your-

moves environment. Wouldnt it be smarter to develop, nurture, and evaluate who will

make the best role players?29

The Spurs were ahead of the trend in understanding the need for role players, but

maybe if teams like the Atlanta Hawks were not given the fallback option of suffering

through a bad season and getting a high draft pick, then teams would make a gung-ho

effort to play every game to their fullest potential.

The trading deadline serves as a chance for teams that are contending for a title to

add players who can benefit them for the stretch run, while the non-contending teams

have an opportunity to get younger or save money by trading a more expensive veteran

player. Last season, the struggling Philadelphia 76ers traded their superstar Allen Iverson

to the Denver Nuggets at the trading deadline. This act of concession by their

organization could have given their players an easy excuse to give up their season and try

and lose in order to get the top pick. But, the 76ers young players led them to a post-

deadline record of 17-11, and they only missed the playoffs by five games. This type of

29 http://myespn.go.com/nba/truehoop


25/32

25

play should be rewarded. The Minnesota Timberwolves who went 7-21 after the

deadline, including seven consecutive losses to end the season, and the Memphis

Grizzlies who went 8-18 after the trade deadline should not be rewarded for an

organizational effort to try and lose games in order to earn the top pick in the draft.

My proposal suggests that the fourteen teams who miss the playoffs should

be ranked by their post-trading deadline records. This would not only give the

contending teams an incentive to win a championship, but the non-playoff teams

would now be fighting to win a high draft pick, not fighting to lose. More

importantly, it would eliminate the simple appearance that teams are attempting to

lose.

LEAGUE

Judging from the NBAs recent actions in trying to clean up the image of the

league, Commissioner Sterns goals would be twofold in adapting a new draft policy: 1)

Avoid any controversies; and 2) Maximize Profits and Enhance the NBA brand.30

I would explain to Commissioner Stern that nearly every controversy would be

eliminated by my proposal. Two hypothetical scenarios could sum up why this would

benefit the league. On April 18th 2007, the Golden State Warriors visited the Portland

Trail Blazers in a must-win situation. The Warriors needed to win in order to secure the

eighth and final playoff spot in the Western Conference. The Trail Blazers were stuck in

30 After the now-infamous brawl that took place between the Indiana Pacers and DetroitPistons on November 19, 2004, and more recently the officiating fiasco with TimDonaghy, Commissioner David Stern has made a conscious effort to repair the image ofthe league. Through more strict suspensions, a zero tolerance policy with player-refereeinteractions, and even a dress code, Commissioner Stern has made a dedicated effort torepair the leagues image.


26/32

26

limbo, as they were out of playoff contention, yet only had the fifth worst record in the

NBA, so there chances at getting the first pick were minimal.31

The Warriors ended up defeating the Trail Blazers 120-98 in a game that the Trail

Blazers can benefit from in two ways, winning and spoiling the Warriors season, or

losing and increasing their percentages at getting the top pick. This is a choice that would

not have to be made under my proposal. If you do not give teams any possible incentive

in losing, the benefits will be seen on the court with more competitive gameplay and off

the court with higher ticket sales and television ratings.

The NFL is the model sports league in that it has a level of parity unmatched in

any sport.32 A cover-story article in the January 27, 2003 edition of Business Week

magazine discussed the ever-powerful brand that the NFL has developed. The article

stated that in the 2003 season, By the final regular-season weekend, 19 teams still had a

shot at the playoffs and a record 24 games had been decided in overtime. Those photo

finishes helped boost TV viewership by 5% over 2001.33

In 2007, the Dallas Mavericks went 67-15, the best record in the NBA, while the

Memphis Grizzlies went 22-60. The Grizzlies certainly have a talented group of players,

evident by their high draft picks. Last year, they missed their leading scorer Pau Gasol for

several months due to an injury, but every team battles through injuries over the course of

31 As it turned out, the Trail Blazers defied the odds and earned the first pick despite onlyhaving an 8.8% chance.32

Newark Star-Ledger sports reporter Rob Gebeloff researched the changes in standingsin the NFL on a year-to-year basis. He found that in the NFL the chances for any giventeam making a major move two or more sports in the standings, in either direction arehighest in football or hockey. Since, the NFL plays in 4-team divisions, and the NHL infive, the volatility of change is much greater in the NFL. Information can be found in theNewark Star-Ledger, September 7, 2007, page 91.33 http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_04/b3817001.htm


27/32

27

a season. I am confident that if my proposal would be put into effect. this forty-five game

difference would be substantially reduced by the fact that even the non-contending teams

would have an incentive to leave everything they have on the court for all 82 games. In

all, the parity of the league would be greater.

The NBA could counter my proposal with this hypothetical situation:

It is the last day of the regular season, and Team A needs to win to make it to the

playoffs. If they lose, their post-deadline record would garner them the first pick in the

draft. Their owner sees the top player in the draft as the savior of the franchise who can

take them to the championship and demands that his coach rest his star players, after all,

his team will probably lose in the first round.

If this situation were to play out, I do not think any owner would sacrifice his duty

to the fans and players in his organization, which is to put out a team, or product, that

has the best chance of winning. Not to mention, last years eighth-seeded Golden State

Warriors pulled off one of the greatest upsets in NBA history by defeating the top-seeded

Dallas Mavericks in the first round of the playoffs. There is no athlete that would ever

sacrifice the ability to play in the postseason for a selfish owner.

Another reason for the NBAs willingness to change could be that this new

proposal would wipe out any threat of controversy or scandal on behalf of the league.

Whether or not the frozen envelope scandal is true, the thought still does exist in the

eyes of many. My proposal would make the lottery be decided on the court where teams

could play hard to earn the right to gain the top selection, not decided by a percentage of

ping-pong balls.


28/32

28

Another component that my proposal would add to the league is that the teams

that are squeezed out of the postseason are usually just one player away from being a title

contender. Under the new rules, 40-win teams could become 55-win teams, which may

be of more benefit than turning a 15-win team into a 30-win team. This would add a new

team to the dramatic NBA playoffs every season and give every citys fans hope for the

upcoming season.34

In the end, I think the league can benefit a great deal by the proposal. At the very

least, the league should give it a trial run for one season, there are only benefits to gain, it

is a win-win situation for the league.

OWNERS

The next group to discuss the proposal with would be the NBA owners. In a

mediation, it is important to allow the party that has entered into the discussion to express

their desires first. This would be a very short request. The owners want to win and the

owners want to make money, and not necessarily in that order.

The reasons why my proposal would satisfy the owners requests goes hand-in-

hand with why it would benefit the league. The contending teams would get better

competition from the lesser-talented teams in the league because all teams would be

playing to win, thus every single game would be of importance to both participants.

34 The incredibly competitive Western Conference in the 2007-08 season has created thepossibility that a 50-win team could miss the playoffs for the first time ever. As of April4

th, the Golden State Warriors would be on the outside looking in. Imagine giving the

Warriors the opportunity to add Michael Beasley from Kansas St. or Derrick Rose fromMemphis to their roster next season. The Warriors have been a very successful team thisseason and would be given no playoff appearance and a pick in the middle of the firstround as the fruits of their labor. It does not seem fair that other teams who have put forthmiserable late-season efforts would be rewarded with the opportunity to add a moretalented player to their roster.


29/32

29

The owners of non-contending teams would salivate at the thought of having their

teams playing important games from October to April. Under the current system, at the

end of the season, non-playoff teams are playing in meaningless games where losing

actually benefits them. Under the new system, a sellout crowd could come to watch a

non-contending team at the end of the season just to root for their team getting the

opportunity to add the best possible player in the upcoming draft. I am confident that this

proposal would have owners salivating at the idea of having a more balanced league that

would increase revenue by a great deal. All you have to do is eliminate the incentive to

lose.

COACHES & PLAYERS

This proposal is a no-brainer benefit for the coaches and players. One of the most

difficult jobs an NBA coach has is keeping his players motivated. Although many fans

argue that the money they make should be enough, the long road trips away from home,

the incredible physical demand, and the scheduling all take its toll on the players. It is

difficult to keep players positive and focused when they play a hard-fought game in

Cleveland and have to leave right after the game to fly to Phoenix for a game the very

next night.

Mississippi College School of Law Professor Michael McCann commented on

last years mind-numbing quote from Boston Celtics forward Ryan Gomes on his Sports

Law Blog.

First off, aren't players prideful about competing and winning games? And even if they

aren't--let's say they are completely selfish--wouldn't they care about their stats for their

purposes of future contract and endorsement opportunities? So why would a player play


30/32

30

worse to help a team lose? Or why would he not play in games, or parts of games, due to

what are really phantom injuries, thus potentially making him appear less durable and

less tough (which again would seem to jeopardize future contract and endorsement

opportunities)?

Those arguments certainly have some logic to them. But to counter them, I bring you

Boston Celtics forward Ryan Gomes, a graduate of Providence College and the Celtics'

second round pick in the 2005 NBA draft. Gomes was one of the Celtics better players,

averaging 12 points and 6 rebounds a game, making him the Celtics 4th leading scorer

and 3rd best rebounder. Of interest to this topic, Gomes and starting point guard Rajon

Rondo were curiously benched for the fourth quarter of the Celtics home game against

the Milwaukee Bucks last night--a game the Celtics lost by two points, thereby securing

the second worst record in the NBA this season, and preventing the Bucks, holders of the

third worst record, from "overtaking" them for that honor/dishonor.

When asked why he didn't play in the fourth quarter, Gomes surprisingly admitted the

obvious:

"I probably (would have played), but since we were in the hunt for a high draft pick, of

course things are different. I understand that. Hopefully things get better. Now that we

clinched at least having the second-most balls in the lottery, the last three games we'll see

what happens. We'll see if we can go out and finish some games."35

35Professor McCann is one of the moderators of the Sports Law Blog, this specific

column can be found at http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2007/04/ryan-gomes-and-hunt-for-high-draft-pick.html. In a twist of irony, the Celtics failed to get the top pick in thedraft and were awarded the fifth pick overall which they traded to the Seattle SuperSonics for All-Star guard Ray Allen. Gomes was then traded to Minnesota for All-Starforward Kevin Garnett who has led Boston to the best record in the Eastern Conferencethrough the first month of the NBA season. Gomes and the five other Celtics who were


31/32

31

The above quote may be the seminal factor in accepting the fact that the system

needs to change. The faulty system is most apparent when players arent playing to their

full potential and accepting losing as a benefit. If anything, this quote is a clear sign that

the players do pay attention to the incoming players, and maybe it could be the incentive

they need to give 100% effort in every game. As far as coaching goes, they would

embrace the fact that their players would have another reason to be focused and energetic

to win on a nightly basis.

CONCLUSION

There is no question that the NBAs lottery system is flawed. It remains to be seen

whether or not this proposal is also flawed, but it is certainly worth trying. The benefits

that can stem from this proposal both financially and as an addition to the competitive

nature of the sport have the potential to bring the NBA to a level of popularity that it has

not reached since the incredible Lakers-Celtics rivalry of the 1980s. Sports have given

people a reason to cheer for thousands of years. Sports give everyday fans a chance to

feel the highs and lows of competitive athletics at its highest level. When teams are given

an incentive to lose, it takes away from what the game is supposed to be about: two teams

going head-to-head with the better team on that night coming out victorious. This

proposal has taken into consideration every issue that has arisen in the past, and could

potentially occur in the future.

traded to Minnesota for Garnett sit at the bottom of the Western Conference at the end ofNovember. Be careful what you wish for!


32/32

This paper is the intellectual property Andrew Smith. No page or file from this

site may be copied or duplicated, in whole or in part, without giving full and appropriate

credit to the original creator, Andrew Smith. 2008-present.

Documents

NBA Lottery 2.0: Eliminating the incentive to lose