A lottery will not stop tanking

[Duffman95]

Getting rid of any priority picks will kill off so much of this talk. If a club wants a spoon just to get one number one pick instead of number 2 believing the gap in talent is so massive it warrants losing games, let them sell their soul.

The main issue is that clubs don't want to win more than four games if they are struggling in order to get an extra pick. If you take away this hurdle, the bad teams wont be fighting with each other to lose games.

 

[Richard Cranium]

***THE NBA LOTTERY IS ONLY FOR THE FIRST THREE PICKS! AND IT IS ONLY FOR THE TEAMS THAT MISS THE PLAYOFFS!***

Which means that the team with the worst record will not finish with anything lower than the 4th pick. So people saying that the 16th team could end up with the 7th or 8th pick (or worse), are wrong.

If the AFL did it, maybe they could make it only for the top two picks, or maybe just have a lottery for the top pick that only involves the bottom four sides? But you can come up with a system that looks after poor teams, without guaranteeing them anything based solely on where they finish.

 

[Moo]

They will tank less and it is fun to laugh when a team that does tank don't get the result.

I would think for the chance of one more lottery ball, any coach would much rather finish 2nd last than last.

 

[celtic_pride]

Surely the 'tanking' debate will stop once the new GC and WS teams come in and hoard all the early draft picks, there will no longer be any incentive to finish near the bottom anymore ...