|
|
Post by skrouse on Apr 18, 2018 16:53:27 GMT
I know most GMs hate the idea of the wheel, knowing what pick each team will have and when. Others despise the idea of the worst team and 15th/16th best teams having the same odds for the #1 pick. But what if the ideas were somewhat combined?
Haven't given this too much thought but wanted to share this bit to get a feel of what others think. It may be difficult to track, but what if a team couldn't repeat the same lottery pick position within 5 years of previously having said pick? Excluding trades. 5 years may be too many, it could be adjusted but this is basically the idea.
For 2001, these were the lotto results. Each of these 15 teams could not repeat their pick slot until the 2006 lottery.
1. Mavericks
2. Cavaliers
3. Bullets
4. Jazz
5. Warriors
6. Nuggets
7. Bulls
8. Lakers
9. Celtics
10. Hornets
11. Bucks
12. Raptors
13. Heat
14. Suns
15. Blazers
Pros:
- Prevents crazy scenarios like IRL Orlando Magic getting Shaq/Penny in back to back lottos in the 90s, which will be more likely in the current unweighted lotto format
- Unlike the wheel, a top playoff team has no shot of getting a #1 pick the next season outside of a trade
Cons:
- Will be more confusing to track and would need to be accounted for when evaluating picks in trades
- Will make lotto selection process more involved for Odin
It also changes the lottery odds as the number of teams eligible for each pick would vary. Whether that is for better or worse? I'm not sure.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Apr 18, 2018 16:57:35 GMT
so say the mavs get 1.1 again out of the 2002 lottery, what happens? are they bumped to 13?
|
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Apr 18, 2018 16:57:39 GMT
So I had the 7th pick. If I understand correctly, I couldn't have the 7th pick again until 2006.
What would happen to me if I was RNG'd the 7th pick?
|
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Apr 18, 2018 16:59:19 GMT
so say the mavs get 1.1 again out of the 2002 lottery, what happens? are they bumped to 13? They wouldn't be in the selection pool for 1.1. |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Apr 18, 2018 17:02:25 GMT
So I had the 7th pick. If I understand correctly, I couldn't have the 7th pick again until 2006. What would happen to me if I was RNG'd the 7th pick? Each of the restricted slots, 1-15 would be determined by an individual drawing in ascending order. Unrestricted slots, 16-29 would remain based on the reverse standings. |
|
|
|
Post by wee2dee on Apr 18, 2018 17:23:02 GMT
it's been one season, it's fine for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Apr 18, 2018 17:33:59 GMT
so say the mavs get 1.1 again out of the 2002 lottery, what happens? are they bumped to 13? They wouldn't be in the selection pool for 1.1. nice. this does sound interesting but i agree with ward that we can leave it alone for now let a potentially acrimonious situation fester until it explodes, that's the sim league way |
|
|
|
Post by pedro el guapo on Apr 18, 2018 17:47:58 GMT
This is a neat idea
|
|
h7t
New Member
Posts: 563
Likes: 86
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by h7t on Apr 18, 2018 18:02:36 GMT
Interesting idea. I'm open to trying almost anything that makes the league have more variables as it just makes things more interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 18:13:40 GMT
Celtics win the lotto
Draft a bust
Lose all their players in fa
Celtics have no one except busty 1.1 and cant get 1.1 again for 5 years
|
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Apr 18, 2018 18:18:49 GMT
it's been one season, it's fine for now.  |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Apr 18, 2018 18:19:56 GMT
Celtics never win the lotto Draft a shit player with a mid round pick Lose their only good players in fa Celtics have no way to get better other than blind luck FTFY |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 18:20:19 GMT
Celtics win the lotto Draft a bust Lose all their players in fa Celtics have no one except busty 1.1 and cant get 1.1 again for 5 years But they’d have a better chance at 1.2 than they’d have right now |
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Apr 18, 2018 18:22:35 GMT
On topic though I think the idea is interesting
I am all for draft reform and hope we can keep a reasonable discussion about it going to make sure we have the best option
I personally favor a weighted tiering system for picks if we arent going to stick with a traditional odds
|
|
h7t
New Member
Posts: 563
Likes: 86
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by h7t on Apr 18, 2018 18:23:03 GMT
Celtics win the lotto Draft a bust Lose all their players in fa Celtics have no one except busty 1.1 and cant get 1.1 again for 5 years This would be my biggest hold up in this. I like the fact that you can't get certain slots again. Im not sure 5 years is the right option but maybe. I'd honestly like this idea but 1.1-1.3 you are able to hit again. I know that it truly can be hit or miss with prospects but I typically feel like most drafts there are 3 players that truly stand out as elite compared to what you're gonna get even 4-6. I'd hate to lose that opportunity because I hit it 3 or 5 years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Apr 18, 2018 18:56:53 GMT
the easiest solution is an unweighted lotto for 1-5 or something of that ilk, and then order by record from 6-15
|
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Apr 18, 2018 19:16:00 GMT
I guess if we go in ascending order that changes things.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 19:27:48 GMT
the easiest solution is an unweighted lotto for 1-5 or something of that ilk, and then order by record from 6-15 No, this isn't a solution at all. The whole reason we are doing an unweighted lotto is to make tanking stop. Which we have. No more stupid trades where superstars get traded for peanuts for tanking. This literally brings back ALL of the problems we have gotten rid of, while also leaving us with the same problem(ish) we have now that the truly terrible teams will have a harder and longer time to get better. Everyone in this thread proposing some type of lottery system literally has no clue what they are talking about. If your method still incentivizes tanking, people will still tank. Period. If people are still gonna tank then just go back to the old system, theres no reason to make tanking harder if it's still going to be incentivized. |
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Apr 18, 2018 19:40:58 GMT
the easiest solution is an unweighted lotto for 1-5 or something of that ilk, and then order by record from 6-15 No, this isn't a solution at all. The whole reason we are doing an unweighted lotto is to make tanking stop. Which we have. No more stupid trades where superstars get traded for peanuts for tanking. This literally brings back ALL of the problems we have gotten rid of, while also leaving us with the same problem(ish) we have now that the truly terrible teams will have a harder and longer time to get better. Everyone in this thread proposing some type of lottery system literally has no clue what they are talking about. If your method still incentivizes tanking, people will still tank. Period. If people are still gonna tank then just go back to the old system, theres no reason to make tanking harder if it's still going to be incentivized. It's been one season. Teams being stuck in purgatory as a result of years of not getting lucky and getting a top pick will be screwed way more than a team trading a good player to tank. Its amazing that somehow an unweighted 1-5 brings back all the problems of tanking while simultaneously making it harder to get better. It can't be both my man. Being guaranteed at least the 6th pick with the worst record is a hell of a lot better than having equal odds of 1-15 while also not making it not as valuable to bottom out for the 6th pick or having increased odds at 1-4. I think you're the one who has no clue what they're talking. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 19:45:18 GMT
No, this isn't a solution at all. The whole reason we are doing an unweighted lotto is to make tanking stop. Which we have. No more stupid trades where superstars get traded for peanuts for tanking. This literally brings back ALL of the problems we have gotten rid of, while also leaving us with the same problem(ish) we have now that the truly terrible teams will have a harder and longer time to get better. Everyone in this thread proposing some type of lottery system literally has no clue what they are talking about. If your method still incentivizes tanking, people will still tank. Period. If people are still gonna tank then just go back to the old system, theres no reason to make tanking harder if it's still going to be incentivized. It's been one season. Teams being stuck in purgatory as a result of years of not getting lucky and getting a top pick will be screwed way more than a team trading a good player to tank. Its amazing that somehow an unweighted 1-5 brings back all the problems of tanking while simultaneously making it harder to get better. It can't be both my man. Being guaranteed at least the 6th pick with the worst record is a hell of a lot better than having equal odds of 1-15 while also not making it not as valuable to bottom out for the 6th pick or having increased odds at 1-4. I think you're the one who has no clue what they're talking. Lol, yes it can be both. It is both for obvious reasons, but I guess I'll spell it out: 1. If you're ultra-bad (like nuggets or whatever) and you'd be a top 5 weighted lotto seed under the normal system, your proposed system is WORSE than the regular lotto because instead of the best chance at 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever youre on equal terms with the 5th worst team. This system still incentivizes tanking, which is the WHOLE REASON we changed. Therefore, not only does it remove the only "improvement" the unweighted lotto bring (end to tanking), it is also a worse solution to the current complaint (shitty teams being shitty forever) than the previous system. its literally the worst idea possible |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Apr 18, 2018 19:46:20 GMT
It's been one season. Teams being stuck in purgatory as a result of years of not getting lucky and getting a top pick will be screwed way more than a team trading a good player to tank. Its amazing that somehow an unweighted 1-5 brings back all the problems of tanking while simultaneously making it harder to get better. It can't be both my man. Being guaranteed at least the 6th pick with the worst record is a hell of a lot better than having equal odds of 1-15 while also not making it not as valuable to bottom out for the 6th pick or having increased odds at 1-4. I think you're the one who has no clue what they're talking. Lol, yes it can be both. It is both for obvious reasons, but I guess I'll spell it out: 1. If you're ultra-bad (like nuggets or whatever) and you'd be a top 5 weighted lotto seed under the normal system, your proposed system is WORSE than the regular lotto because instead of the best chance at 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever youre on equal terms with the 5th worst team. This system still incentivizes tanking, which is the WHOLE REASON we changed. Therefore, not only does it remove the only "improvement" the unweighted lotto bring (end to tanking), it is also a worse solution to the current complaint (shitty teams being shitty forever) than the previous system. its literally the worst idea possible what if we just had no draft |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 19:46:24 GMT
while also not making it not as valuable to bottom out for the 6th pick or having increased odds at 1-4. I think you're the one who has no clue what they're talking. You seem to think that "not as valuable to bottom out" makes it so people won't tank. They're still gonna tank. Which defeats the purpose of changing the system in the first place. |
|
IanBoyd
New Member
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 315
Joined: February 2018
|
Post by IanBoyd on Apr 18, 2018 19:46:39 GMT
you literally use the word "literally" more than a Kardashian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Druce on Apr 18, 2018 19:50:28 GMT
It's been one season. Teams being stuck in purgatory as a result of years of not getting lucky and getting a top pick will be screwed way more than a team trading a good player to tank. Its amazing that somehow an unweighted 1-5 brings back all the problems of tanking while simultaneously making it harder to get better. It can't be both my man. Being guaranteed at least the 6th pick with the worst record is a hell of a lot better than having equal odds of 1-15 while also not making it not as valuable to bottom out for the 6th pick or having increased odds at 1-4. I think you're the one who has no clue what they're talking. Lol, yes it can be both. It is both for obvious reasons, but I guess I'll spell it out: 1. If you're ultra-bad (like nuggets or whatever) and you'd be a top 5 weighted lotto seed under the normal system, your proposed system is WORSE than the regular lotto because instead of the best chance at 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever youre on equal terms with the 5th worst team. This system still incentivizes tanking, which is the WHOLE REASON we changed. Therefore, not only does it remove the only "improvement" the unweighted lotto bring (end to tanking), it is also a worse solution to the current complaint (shitty teams being shitty forever) than the previous system. its literally the worst idea possible No shit it's worse than the regular lotto, but it's also not nearly as bad as the current system. If someone wants to tank for the 6th pick they're a fucking moron. It gets rid of the weighted lottery and increased odds for top 3. |
|
|
|
Post by TimPig on Apr 18, 2018 19:56:38 GMT
Has anyone ever called him BULLY king? He's so mean.
|
|
|
|
Post by Majic on Apr 18, 2018 20:00:41 GMT
Down with the unweighted lotto  |
|
|
|
Post by skrouse on Apr 18, 2018 20:06:02 GMT
Lol, yes it can be both. It is both for obvious reasons, but I guess I'll spell it out: 1. If you're ultra-bad (like nuggets or whatever) and you'd be a top 5 weighted lotto seed under the normal system, your proposed system is WORSE than the regular lotto because instead of the best chance at 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever youre on equal terms with the 5th worst team. This system still incentivizes tanking, which is the WHOLE REASON we changed. Therefore, not only does it remove the only "improvement" the unweighted lotto bring (end to tanking), it is also a worse solution to the current complaint (shitty teams being shitty forever) than the previous system. its literally the worst idea possible No shit it's worse than the regular lotto, but it's also not nearly as bad as the current system. If someone wants to tank for the 6th pick they're a fucking moron. It gets rid of the weighted lottery and increased odds for top 3. Yeah idk if this actually deters tanking really, or enough anyway. If you are a playoff team, haven't been in the lotto lately and your team starts to suck, you can still trade away assets and tank as much as you can currently. This change really only limits the amount of BS a team can have by getting multiple top or multiple shitty picks. It doesn't completely even it out but helps push the odds one way or another slightly to help balance out the lottery overtime. Which I am all for. |
|
|
|
Post by pedro el guapo on Apr 18, 2018 21:40:36 GMT
The idea of unweighted lotto isn't that playoff teams will no longer trade away players for assets or anything like that. It's meant to disincentivize teams from going scorched earth during their rebuilds. Since there's no difference in the odds between 1 and 15, you can trade away one star player rather than everyone with a pulse since there's no reason to make your team trash
|
|
|
|
Post by pedro el guapo on Apr 18, 2018 21:42:20 GMT
if you did unweighted 1-5, then maybe it accomplishes the same thing, but more likely it means the same kind of scorched earth tanking we had in 4.0 because that's an easy way to ensure you end up with multiple top 5 picks in a row.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 23:19:57 GMT
if you did unweighted 1-5, then maybe it accomplishes the same thing, but more likely it means the same kind of scorched earth tanking we had in 4.0 because that's an easy way to ensure you end up with multiple top 5 picks in a row.  |
|
