Lottery or No Lottery?

[The People's Peep]

Last night, even though the Nets had the best chance of landing the number one overall pick, the wizards won it. In sports like football and baseball, the team with the worse record is guaranteed the #1 pick. But in basketball and hockey, they have a lottery to see who wins the #1 pick, with the worse the record is, the better chance you have of winning that pick. Which system do you prefer?

I cant stand the lottery. The team with the worse record obviously needs the most help. With the lottery, there is that slight chance that a team that doesnt need as much help can win the top pick. This can widen the gap between playoff and non-playoff teams, and even set a franchise back a few years. By using records to determine the draft order, the teams that need help get the amount of help they need, granted that they draft properly. The only good thing the lottery does is cut the probability of tanking a little.

 

[People's Champ]

I like the lottery. You say it stops tanking a little? What do you think will happen if there is a draft order based on records? You don't think teams will put out less effort knowing that they can guarantee themselves the first pick? Now I'm not saying tanking happens all the time or every team does it. But the lottery can curb that because having the worst record doesn't guarantee you the top pick.

The one thing I would change is increase the chances for the top 3 teams. I do think the top 3 worst teams should really have the best chances to win the top pick. Since 2000, only 4 times has one of the 3 worst teams actually won the top pick. 3 times has a team with the 5th worst record won. And in 09 Chicago won with the 9th worst.so I believe the 3 worst teams should have even higher chances. Not to the point where they are the only teams with a chance to win it, but it should be extremely difficult for team outside the top 3 to win the top pick.