Did David Stern fix last night's NBA lottery??

[Big Reed]

it's very easy to rig the ping pong system. just use weighted ping pong balls for the combos that certain teams have. and then use lighter balls for the number of the combos that you want to be winners. in this manner, the weighted balls will stay within the container, and any combo that contained that weighted ball would not come up.

 

two things stand out- the combinations each team had that would have made them a winner were never revealed. if you weighted 3-4 balls, you could also ensure all of the bucks' or celtics or memphis combos had one of those 4 weighted balls Thus none of their possible winning combos would ever happen.

 

I loved the fact they said the balls were locked inside a briefcase so that the lottery balls could not be tampered with. in other words, they were already tampered with, and Stern didn't want anybody to play with them to realize they were tampered. Did anybody look at all the balls and weigh them before or after the lottery was conducted ? the answer is no.

 

to the untrained eye, a weighted ping pong ball looks the same as a reguar one. all you have to do is make the outer shell of the ball thicker. Dicks sporting goods sells three different grades of ping pong balls. you can't tell the difference between any of them other than the price.

 

it's obvious to me stern wanted to send a message to the three teams that tanked the most. he rigged the lottery to ensure that all three lost out.

[pitchleague]

this "drum", is it like those air-power vacu-suck machines like they use for powerball and other lotteries drawn on tv?

[Bernman23]

People who conspire prey upon the naive who believe that conspiracies aren't very possible, thus allowing them to not be questioned. Some people think all conspiracies have to do with aliens and are quick to dismiss them. Sometimes they are as simple as an agreement between two people when millions to billions of dollars are involved. And when things are done so secretively, they are pretty easy to pull off.

 

I did watch the Bucks get screwed pretty blatantly by the officials back in the big three days. I mean some of those calls can't be possible for 3 officials to miss. Eddie Jones in the last few seconds of a 1 possession game, dribbles the ball and picks it up for 5 seconds, before proceeding to dribble again. It's a blatant violation in junior ball, but it's not called in professional basketball. There were just so many close games and playoff games, where I couldn't believe my eyes. Same things with the Kings in the playoffs against the Lakers. How much money and credibility is the NBA losing with all those meaningless games late in the season when teams aren't trying to win for the possibility to win in the future? The chances of it none of the top 3 staying there were .08 percent. If the Sonics move to Vegas, that's a pretty great place for Durant to be in the spotlight and become a star. He's going to make much more on promotional deals than Oden anyways, because his game is more exciting, and Oden has the personality of a rake. Who cares about games being played in the northwest or west coast? The Lakers don't seem to have problem getting ratings.

[BraunsBoyfriend]

Big Reed, your theory is great except you take great liberty with the facts.

 

Every ball is "inspected" before it is put into the case. OK, not good enough, I understand...

 

After the first 4 balls are selected and the team that has those numbers is identified (which is public to all in the room) they are put back into the machine.

 

So with your theory, the same 4 balls would come up every time.

 

But it's obvious they don't. And if they don't what's the point?

[rluzinski]

No matter what happens, someone will claim a conspiracy. I guess it gives people sometimes to talk about.

People who conspire prey upon the naive who believe that conspiracies aren't very possible, thus allowing them to not be questioned.

 

What's the evidence we are naively overlooking?

[BoneDaddyKool]

Thank goodness the NFL doesn't have this lottery. Look at the mess it makes. I see no good in it at all. The worst teams are crying "foul" Many people out there saying "Conspiracy!"

 

AT least with the NFL draft, its cut and dry. No conspiracy, no nothing, just some catty moves and deniles by teamson whom they want to draft.

 

IMOP, The NBA should drop the lottery gimmick. If teams tank games, so what? The World of sports isn't an exact science, Oden could stink, like Sam Bowie did, or Durrant could blow out a knee. Or take coke and die like Bias did...

 

But don't punish the worst team (s) even more. I'm sorry, I just don't like it.

[Big Reed]

my theory is that you weight the balls you don't want to come up. you don't have to weight 4 balls. all you really have to do is ensure there is one weighted ball for every possible combo for a particular team.

 

let's say the bucks had 50 different combos. if the number 12 is included in 26 of those combos, and the 38 is included in the remaining 24 combos, then the bucks would never have a winning combo.

 

realistically, i doubt the bucks had any more than 20 possible winning combos. if you weighted 4 balls, yo u could easily have one of those 4 balls in each of the 20 combos and nobody would ever suspect a thing.

 

A question i would ask, as the balls came out of the shoot and the number combos were posted on the board, was there a numbered ball that never seemed to come up and be posted? if the #5 ball never came out of the shoot fr any of the combos posted, i would say that ball was somehow weighted? Did one numbered ball seem to come up out of the shoot more often than not? then that #3 ball would have been made lighter before being placed in the shoot.

 

an easy way to disprove my theory would be to have the number combos for each team to be published and then compared with each other and the frequency of a ball coming out of the shoot. if all the balls came out of the shoot with similar frequency, then it's not rigged. however, if several balls came out of the shoot a significant amount less than others, and those numbers were associated with the combo numbers on the Bucks, celtics and grizzlies, then we have a big problem. Additionally, if the celtics, grizzlies and bucks all had combos containing similar numbers, then we also have a problem.

 

example: the Bucks had a 4 number combo of 1, 3, 5, 10.

 

the grizzlies had a combo of 1, 5, 7, 13

 

the celtics had a combo of 1 , 7, 10, 14.

 

 

and then the 1 ball never seems to pop up out the shoot. poof goes the chances of the Bucks, celtics and grizzlies.

 

or to make sure those three teams never win, the 1, 5 and 7 ball could be weighted.

 

and portland and seattle and atlanta would have to have combos that did not include those numbers.

 

as I said, a way to remove any doubt of the lottery being fixed would be to reveal the team combination numbers, and also a reflection of the number of times each numbered ball came out of the shoot. if all the balls came out of the shoot wit h equal frequency, that would help dispell the conspiracy theory.

 

Did an y agency outside the NBA keep an accurate account of these two things? or are they kept secret within the NBA?

 

i would see no reason why the NBA would not be willing to show the codes after the fact, unless they had something to hide.

[BraunsBoyfriend]

The lottery is run by an independent group actually. There's a few articles out there by guys who have been witness to the lotto. They've all mentioned an independent company that makes and operates these machines. They even bring a backup in case the machine breaks down. They also have a contingency plan if the machines don't work that amounts to basically drawing names out of a hat.

 

I can see your theory. And assigning a single number to the teams you don't want to win and then making sure that ball doesn't come up is a good idea.

 

But I really just doubt this happens. The owners all have a vested interest in winning the lottery and they would never let this happen. It would be risking so much to the integrity of the sport and actually be illegal. A rookie contract is only 4 years and then they are restricted in which they can take a 1 year tender and be unrestricted after 5 years. At this point they can go to the big market the league points them in ala Shaq.

 

Plus, if a ball was weighted you would notice it not floating around in the hopper like the others and this would draw suspicion form at least one of the 20 or so people in the room.

 

Teams get accused of tanking every year. Cleveland and Denver were accused of it the year LeBron and 'Melo came out. Cleveland won the lottery after a masterful tank job that started in November.

 

This year none of the bottom 3 won a spot. It's certainly possible. Do a mock draft at ESPN.com. I've had none of those teams come up after running 20 trials more than once.

 

One way to look at it is add up the probabilities of the bottom 3 teams getting each pick. For each one, 1-3 they add up to less than 65%. So if you treat the rest of the teams as a single entity (the not a bottom 3 entity) you see this entity has almost as good a chance to be selected. Out of the pool of 1001 numbers, the "rest of the teams" have about half. So since it's a lottery, with replacement, it's not that too crazy to think that one of the bottom 3 teams wouldn't win. And as it gets closer to the 3 spot, the odds of the bottom 3 get less, down to about 55% So imagine they have a 65% chance at #1, 60% chance at #2 and a 55% chance at #3.

 

For instance, it's not too bizarre to believe you could flip a coin 4 times and have it come up tails every time. These are about the same odds.

[funkyplaidcoat]

being the cynic I always am, these there were the first thoughts that popped in my mind when I heard what happened in '05 and on Tuesday night:

 

'05 : It was a weak draft, so they threw a cookie in Milwaukee's direction because the NBA doesn't want a marketable/profitable superstar in such a small market...

 

'07: pubic support for arenas in both Portland and Seattle fell apart, so they need to build more NBA support in the NW...but i see Seattle moving anyway.

 

Even if it is fixed, there's always free agency to "correct" these fixes. Rookie contracts are only 3(+1) seasons long....

[Big Reed]

the lottery probably isn't fixed. however, it didn't prevent teams from tanking either. i had thought the original intent for the placement of a lottery was to eliminate the teams from tanking. Since tanking always happens to some degree in every sport, i see no real need to keep the NBA lottery.

 

even baseball has gone to a last = first draft.

 

Just think of all the conspiracies that would be formed if Baseball had a lottery draft.

[BrewCrewForever]

I don't think this was fixed. I do think that the 1985 draft lottery was though.

[GAME05]

if this one was fixed, then it stands that past ones have been fixed. and if so, nobody would have ever given the mini-market Bucks the #1 pick.

[BraunsBoyfriend]

I think comparing the NBA to other sports doesn't work in this regard BigReed.

 

In the NBA 1 player can change everything. Look at Cleveland. Perennially basement team that is now in the conference finals. Same goes for many teams. Denver has been a playoff team since they obtained Carmelo.

 

In football and baseball, 1 player isn't going to make or break a teams fate.

 

Basketball is a game dominated by a couple guys on each team with everyone else role playing. It's 5 games per team at a time with a player playing both offense and defense. So the benefits to tanking are so great.

 

It makes sense to try and get that player that can change the face of your franchise for years. The payoff is immense.

 

In baseball its actually kind of the opposite. The way the farm and draft systems work now, smart teams can sustain good play for years. This is of course because of having to give up draft picks when you sign a teams FA's. So teams like the Brewers, who have a lot of young talent, will potentially be getting lost of good draft picks down the road to keep the farm going as they lose todays players to FA down the road.

 

In basketball, your teams fortunes can be changed dramatically if you get the #1 and not the #2 pick. It is because of this the NBA needs a lottery system.

 

The bottom 6 teams are really the only ones with any real chance of winning the top pick. And the difference between these teams is usually very little.

 

For instance the Bucks and Celtics this year weren't nearly as bad as their records and tanking isn't the only reason. Both teams suffered so many injuries this year and under performed by a wide margin. Both teams are probably better than Seattle and Portland to be honest.

 

Memphis is a pretty bad team but they still have the fourth pick.

 

Atlanta with the third pick....well, they've been in the top of the draft for years anyways and haven't gotten better.

 

I think this year is proof that not only is the lottery needed (not because it stops teams form tanking, but doesn't guarantee the tanking teams get anything for it) but that it works.

 

Without it a lot more teams would have been tanking because it would be guaranteed they got the picks.

 

If anything, drop the lottery and develop an algorithm that ranks teams and awards teams draft picks based on their power. Don't ask me what to use. I'm guessing their is some kind of RPI out there they could use. Take all types of variables into account so by the time the last quarter of the season rolls around it would be impossible to tank so bad as to break the system.

 

This is maybe the best way to do it. But invariably this method will pick the "worst" team and lots of people will disagree and complain about how it's stupid, etc, like in footballs BCS rankings.

 

I'd also imagine it would have to weight conferences and divisions. Because the bad teams in the West would probably look worse than teams that might be worse than them but play in the East where the competition is worse. This would prevent a clumping, or off balanced drafting system where one conference gets stronger and stronger while another gets weaker and weaker.

 

It would be interesting to figure out a system that is fair. What variables would go into play? Would you mix an algorithm with an independent lobbies poll also? Could you trust humans to be impartial?

[BraunsBoyfriend]

Expanding on this idea of a ranking system, should it take into account a teams potential? That is, not weigh every game equally.

 

This way teams can play young players late in the season and not taint the true results of how good or bad they are.

 

Maybe bell curve it to some time in the season? Teams could exploit this bell curve of course.

 

I'd imagine weighing all the variables you take into account with a teams potential would be the best. This is similar to how handicaps work in golf. They aren't based on your average, but rather your best games....or your potential one could say..

 

So teams that have good players that get injured and end up stinking don't artificially get high draft picks because of this turn of "luck".

 

 

So basically take into account how your team did at its best, how they did at their worst and how they did the rest and weight the algorithms variables this way. This kills tanking, unless you intent to start tanking in December.

 

It would definitely be interesting and have to be open and would kill any idea of a conspiracy. It would also have to be tested over the results of the last 50 years and people would have to generally agree it's fair.

[trwi7]

I would just like them to use the ping pong system and not the combination system after the ping pong balls are drawn.

 

Here's what I would do. Televise it, the team with the worst record gets the least ping pong balls the team with the best record (in the lottery of course) gets the most ping pong balls. That way you can count from 14-1.

[sheetswannabe]

Breaking news: Sack races will be held to figure out to the nbas draft.

 

But seriously, sack races...

[BillScottCanRake]

I don't think this was fixed. I do think that the 1985 draft lottery was though.

 

The Ewing Lottery?

 

I am going from memory, so I could well be wrong, but I believe:

 

1) That was the very first NBA lottery.

2) All teams in the lottery had an equal chance of getting the top pick, rather than the current weighted system.

3) The weighted lottery was put in place for the next draft.

 

Maybe the NBA knew they needed a weighted system, and they really were hoping a team like NY got Ewing, and in that sense the lottery was "fixed" to give their chosen team a better choice. If that's the case, I can't really argue that point.

 

However, they didn't need to "fix" the actual results to get the result they got.

 

what if the system went like this. the teams that dont make the playoffs are in the lotterty, as it is now. But then best of those teams gets the best chance at number one and the worst team gets the lowest chance of all the lottery teams.

 

While I like adding an incentive to get teams to play their best the entire season, this system punishes teams that are truly bad and may reward a good team having an off year.

 

If the Bucks, for example, were clearly the worst team in the league and they were getting thumped every night while playing their best 5 guys 35-40 minutes, they could, in theory, be picking 8-10 every year in such a system.

 

Conversely, a really good team that just misses the playoffs (maybe because of injuries) could get an impact player. Lets say that the Spurs had lost Duncan for most of they year and they just missed the playoffs... and then they get to add someone like Durant or Oden.

[BraunsBoyfriend]

I like the idea of sack races. Each owner or GM gets an official BA issued team sack. The lottery teams then compete in a sack race in Madison Square Garden.

 

I think sack races are probably the way to go. They should at least be considered.

[Fatter than Joey]

Lets say that the Spurs had lost Duncan for most of they year and they just missed the playoffs...

 

This is exactly how they got Duncan -- They had gone to (and I think won a series) the playoffs, and then Robinson and Sean Elliot got hurt the following year and then they won the lottery and drafted Duncan -- and then made the playoffs everytime since.

[BillScottCanRake]

This is exactly how they got Duncan -- They had gone to (and I think won a series) the playoffs, and then Robinson and Sean Elliot got hurt the following year and then they won the lottery and drafted Duncan -- and then made the playoffs everytime since.

 

Being the lazy guy I am, I'm going to ask this instead of look it up myself.

 

Do you remember how bad the Spurs were the year before (without Robinson and Elliot)? I don't remember if they were a fringe lottery team or if they were really bad.

 

I guess with the lottery system in place, you'll have occasional weirdness, but I don't like the thought that a 35-40 win team would consistently winning the lottery while 25-30 win teams are picking 8+.

 

Maybe that's because I am a Bucks fan. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[patrickgpe]

21-61, so fringe playoff team

[Fatter than Joey]

Do you remember how bad the Spurs were the year before (without Robinson and Elliot)? I don't remember if they were a fringe lottery team or if they were really bad.

 

They went something like this

 

Playoffs

Lottery

Playoffs

 

The year they won the lottery they blew hard -- I don't think they were the worst -- but I think they were in that top-3 group -- they weren't a long shot to win it, or at least that is how I recall it.

[BillScottCanRake]

The year they won the lottery they blew hard -- I don't think they were the worst -- but I think they were in that top-3 group -- they weren't a long shot to win it, or at least that is how I recall it.

 

21-61 is what someone else posted... so, top three and that record, with their two best players hurt... makes sense I guess.

[BraunsBoyfriend]

The Spurs tanked to get Duncan. Robinson was indeed hurt, but they weren't nearly as bad as their record and really just did nothing on purpose the second half of the year. Everyone knew Duncan was going to be a basketball God. So the Spurs tanked and it worked out really, really well for them.

 

The Spurs are notoriously one of the dirtier franchises, especially in the Popovich era. They were one of the first notable tankers (and benefited from it validating the concept), they took flopping to a whole new level and they groomed Bowen into one of the dirtiest players ever to play a professional sport not named hockey.

 

It's hard to blame them though with all the success they've had.

 

Seriously though, it's hardly worth watching the NBA for your team until they win a future HOF player in the draft or pick one up via FA, which the Bucks will probably never do.

[BillScottCanRake]

The Spurs tanked to get Duncan. Robinson was indeed hurt, but they weren't nearly as bad as their record and really just did nothing on purpose the second half of the year.

 

I don't recall all the details, but did the Spurs actually play their worst players (or sit their best) to lose games (what I'd consider tanking)? Or did they just do nothing to replace Robinson and Elliot?

 

I know it is a gray area, but I could see a team making a legitimate case for not making trades and the like to fix a lost season if they knew they'd be back when they got healthy.

 

While the end result is the same, I see that as more reasonable than not playing your starters in the 4th. It is still a gray area to be sure, but it at least seems more legit.