Should NFL take on a lottery style draft?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

yeah, Boston fans have to be pretty ticked. They dropped to #5, yikes.

I think Red Auerbach must have sold the future soul of the Celtics to get all the Championships in the 60s - 80s. Think about the Celtics' woes after the 1986 Championship; Len Bias, Bird's back, Reggie Lewis, missing out on Tim Duncan, Danny Ainge as GM , and now this.

I've been a Celtics fan since the '70s and really enjoyed the Bird/Mchale/Chief years, but outside of the one playoff appearance in 2002 (i think) it can't get much worse.

[724Skinsfan]

Can't say that I'm a fan of the proposal but since you did say "for the bottom five teams" then that probably wouldn't be all that earth-shattering. It won't fly but I like the originality of the thread, at least. You have been awarded 17 points.

[Rajmahal33]

yea boston ppl have a lot to complain about what with the Pats and Red Sox. I mean I know the city was tormented in the past but we are in the present and they have had enuff success that boston fans don't need to be crying. They deserve to be screwed over for trying to tank their season also. It also proves that there is no conspiracy in the NBA draft b/c it would have been in the NBA's best interest to have those superstars end up in Boston, one of their cornerstone markets, rather than the middle of nowhere pacific northwest.

However, the system is flawed, it would be a disaster in the NFL with the amount of hype or conspiracy theories that would go around. Could u imagine if baltimore who finished 6-10 in 2005 got the #2 pick last year and got Vince Young or Reggie Bush. They would be unstoppable and it wouldn't be fair. The bball system is designed the way it is b/c even with an all-star like lebron james or someone it take a team a few years to turn a losing franchise around. Typically bad teams will stay bad unless they get a once in 5 years kinda superstar.

[GiantsSuck703]

Originally Posted by Rajmahal33

yea boston ppl have a lot to complain about what with the Pats and Red Sox. I mean I know the city was tormented in the past but we are in the present and they have had enuff success that boston fans don't need to be crying. They deserve to be screwed over for trying to tank their season also. It also proves that there is no conspiracy in the NBA draft b/c it would have been in the NBA's best interest to have those superstars end up in Boston, one of their cornerstone markets, rather than the middle of nowhere pacific northwest.

However, the system is flawed, it would be a disaster in the NFL with the amount of hype or conspiracy theories that would go around. Could u imagine if baltimore who finished 6-10 in 2005 got the #2 pick last year and got Vince Young or Reggie Bush. They would be unstoppable and it wouldn't be fair. The bball system is designed the way it is b/c even with an all-star like lebron james or someone it take a team a few years to turn a losing franchise around. Typically bad teams will stay bad unless they get a once in 5 years kinda superstar.

I agree with everything except the unstoppable comment, no matter how good you are in the NFL, no team is unstoppable, evidenced by the Dolphins beating the Bears last year.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

yeah, Boston fans have to be pretty ticked. They dropped to #5, yikes.

Since the lottery was implemented in the NBA has the Celtics ever had the #1 pick?

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by steveo395

No the crappy teams need all the help they can get.

i would never want to see this happen

[FRPLG]

What is dumb about the NBA's lottery is the amount of teams they allow into it. In any given year there are at most 2 players worth tanking for. The rest of the players are pieces who'll go where they fit. The NBA should reduce the lottery to 5 teams. Give the teams proportional ping pong balls to losses.

The
1st worst record gets 10 for every loss
2nd worst record gets 7 for every loss
3rd worst record gets 5 for every loss
4th worst record gets 3 for every loss
5th worst record gets 1 for every loss

Then pick the top 2 positions. The worst team can fall at most 2 spots and has a propotionally better chance than the 5th worst team. Not just a predetermined proportion but a loss adjusted proportion. That way if one team is far worse than the others they get a better chance at the top pick.

Example:

25-57 gets 570 giving them 40.45%
27-55 gets 385 giving them 27.32%
31-51 gets 255 giving them 18.10%
32-50 gets 150 giving them 10.65%
33-49 gets 49 giving them 3.48%

The only problem I see with this is that it still rewards tanking. As long as the odds are weighted I don't see how they can ever reduce the motivation to tank really. But on the other hand it would be totally unfair to weight everyone the same. In the above example why should the team who won 8 more games have the same shot at the first pick? The worst team didn't tank out of 8 games. At worst they lost 3 or 4 games they might have won if they had tried.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

Since the lottery was implemented in the NBA has the Celtics ever had the #1 pick?

No but they did have the #2 in '86 which was the Len Bias pick. I think the curse on that franchise started right there.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

What is dumb about the NBA's lottery is the amount of teams they allow into it. In any given year there are at most 2 players worth tanking for. The rest of the players are pieces who'll go where they fit. The NBA should reduce the lottery to 5 teams. Give the teams proportional ping pong balls to losses.

The
1st worst record gets 10 for every loss
2nd worst record gets 7 for every loss
3rd worst record gets 5 for every loss
4th worst record gets 3 for every loss
5th worst record gets 1 for every loss

Then pick the top 2 positions. The worst team can fall at most 2 spots and has a propotionally better chance than the 5th worst team. Not just a predetermined proportion but a loss adjusted proportion. That way if one team is far worse than the others they get a better chance at the top pick.

Example:

25-57 gets 570 giving them 40.45%
27-55 gets 385 giving them 27.32%
31-51 gets 255 giving them 18.10%
32-50 gets 150 giving them 10.65%
33-49 gets 49 giving them 3.48%

The only problem I see with this is that it still rewards tanking. As long as the odds are weighted I don't see how they can ever reduce the motivation to tank really. But on the other hand it would be totally unfair to weight everyone the same. In the above example why should the team who won 8 more games have the same shot at the first pick? The worst team didn't tank out of 8 games. At worst they lost 3 or 4 games they might have won if they had tried.

i hate the nba draft lottery

[SC Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

What is dumb about the NBA's lottery is the amount of teams they allow into it. In any given year there are at most 2 players worth tanking for. The rest of the players are pieces who'll go where they fit. The NBA should reduce the lottery to 5 teams. Give the teams proportional ping pong balls to losses.

The
1st worst record gets 10 for every loss
2nd worst record gets 7 for every loss
3rd worst record gets 5 for every loss
4th worst record gets 3 for every loss
5th worst record gets 1 for every loss

Then pick the top 2 positions. The worst team can fall at most 2 spots and has a propotionally better chance than the 5th worst team. Not just a predetermined proportion but a loss adjusted proportion. That way if one team is far worse than the others they get a better chance at the top pick.

Example:

25-57 gets 570 giving them 40.45%
27-55 gets 385 giving them 27.32%
31-51 gets 255 giving them 18.10%
32-50 gets 150 giving them 10.65%
33-49 gets 49 giving them 3.48%

The only problem I see with this is that it still rewards tanking. As long as the odds are weighted I don't see how they can ever reduce the motivation to tank really. But on the other hand it would be totally unfair to weight everyone the same. In the above example why should the team who won 8 more games have the same shot at the first pick? The worst team didn't tank out of 8 games. At worst they lost 3 or 4 games they might have won if they had tried.

Seems pretty sensible, is that original? Pass it along to David Stern.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Just some food for thought, imagine the Patriots got to draft Calvin Johnson this year. I don't think I'd be too happy about that.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Just some food for thought, imagine the Patriots got to draft Calvin Johnson this year. I don't think I'd be too happy about that.

i dont think anyone would be happy with that

[Hog1]

Don't fix it, if it isn't broke.
The NFL has success far beyond what the other sports have. They have figured out what works. They still have things that need fixing. Maybe the biggest challenge is to know when to leave things alone

[MonkFan4Life]

No the lottery system stinks. The only thing I suggest the NFL do as someone did earlier, implement a salary cap for rookies. That means less hold outs, the contracts that some NFL rookies get are ludicrous. I'm all for getting what you can while you can but I think they should have some kind of cap for rookies coming into the league. That way you know what you're going to get or at least what you can get, things would go by a lot smoother I would think.

[MTK]

The question is why would the NFL want a lottery system??