Jerry West Has a Right to Be Upset About the Draft Lottery

After reading Brian Berger's Sports Business Radio Blog yesterday, I became a little bit upset. In the post Mr. Berger criticized current Memphis Grizzlies GM Jerry West for these comments following the draft lottery:

"It's like pitching pennies. It's grossly unfair to the team, but I've said it before, I don't think the lottery is fair. I never liked it. I don't think it's a good system at all, period.

"There have been a lot of picks in the lottery that have [failed]. There are two in the lottery this year that are not going to fail. There are two superstars in the draft. I think for the teams fortunate enough to get them, the fortunes of their franchises have changed forever."

Berger categorized the comments as "sour grapes", stating that Mr. West only made the comments because his team lost the lottery. However, being the media watch dog that I am, I know that Jerry West had been urging the league to change its current lottery system long before Tuesday's draft lottery. In fact, in a podcast with Chad Ford back in early April, Mr. West spent half of the interview talking about how terrible he thought the system was.

And really, what was so bad about what he said? The lottery is flawed. There is no way that a team that played as bad as the Grizzlies shouldn't have received the top pick. And don't give me that tank nonsense, because the Grizzlies were playing with eight healthy guys at one point in the season. Anytime a team is counting on Chucky Atkins to drop 20 in order to secure a win, you know they are in need of a change. Every sport outside of basketball has a traditional draft where the draft order is strictly determined by record. And don't say that the lottery prevents tanking, because if anything the lottery would be the thing the one thing that encourages tanking. Think about it...It's pretty set in stone which team is going to have the worst record in the league. At the most, there are usually only one or two teams that are neck and neck for the worst record spot. But because of the lottery, every non playoff team has incentive to lose games at the end of the year.

If you're a lottery proponent, I want to hear why. Seriously, name one benefit of the lottery. I really don't think you can. I think that's all Mr. West was trying to say. When a respected and experienced person like Jerry West speaks, I think it's best that we not be so quick to be critical, because in most cases, he probably knows a thing or two more about the business of basketball than the rest of us.

Previously at Fanhouse:
The Debriefing: Tanking Is an Unfortunate Fact of NBA Life
How Bad Are Things in Memphis?

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

5-24-2007 @ 2:46PM

Matt D said...

The lottery system isn't ideal (nothing is) but the Grizzlies were in the playoffs last year. Just because they played below themselves one year, doesn't mean they should automatically get the #1 pick the next.

5-24-2007 @ 2:55PM

The Troll said...

Nate you are usually better than this. This is an ignorant post. There is a reason the league went to the lottery system, research it. Blogging really is the talk radio of sports journalism.

5-24-2007 @ 3:02PM

Nate Jones said...

Troll: So name some of the benefits.

I really don't see a benefit when the teams that are the most deserving don't win the lottery year after year.

How about Orlando, winning the thing three times. since 92 despite never having the worst record in the league? The teams that need the most help are punished by the system. It's just not a fair system, bro...

5-24-2007 @ 4:25PM

Jon said...

Anybody got a better idea? yes its not ideal but what way would be..any lottery is luck and therefore unfair..

5-24-2007 @ 4:24PM

It's just not a fair system, bro

whoever said life was fair,ummm bro

5-24-2007 @ 4:47PM

I think it should be just like the NFL, MLB, and every other sport where the draft order is determined STRICTLY by record.

5-24-2007 @ 5:00PM

george said...

While you shouldn't automatically be rewarded for ineptitude (Danny Ainge, coughcough), I like the idea where all non playoff teams get an equal shot at the top spot and then after that it's according to the worst record after #1.

5-24-2007 @ 5:10PM

Don Paco said...

Nate, I usually find your commentary intelligent and insightful, but I really think you're in the wrong here.

Imagine there was no lottery and there was a simple straight reverse order draft. The Celtics and the Bucks would've tanked even more egregiously. Boston would've been suiting up the janitor and the concession stands guy.

As it is, there was a whole lot of poetic justice in the lottery. It's totally fair that teams that did so much tanking as the Bucks and the Celts don't get top picks.

Without the lottery, the NBA would be ludicrous - half the teams this season would've been in a race to the bottom.

And there's a reason too why the NBA is different from other sports. There'll never be an NFL draft as significant as Oden/Durant. With only five guys on the court, it makes a world of difference to get a real stud.

Lastly: the lottery is fantastic drama. For entertainment value alone, it should be kept.

5-24-2007 @ 5:08PM

5-24-2007 @ 5:31PM

Jason!!! said...

Gotta agree with the Don. If there was no lotto, the Tanking would start in November. In fact, as soon as a team got a few games back with this kinda draft on the horizon, you wouldn't see some stars for months. The would have Pierce's mug on milk cartons.

The stakes are simply too high to have a straightforward system. Maybe the lotto needs to be tweaked, but it's a good system. Relying on tanking is like relying on scratch-off tickets in order to pay the rent next month, then bitching if you dont line up those three cherries. The way to avoid all this mess is to stop, you know, sucking. Tough luck Jerry.

5-24-2007 @ 5:57PM

Lets put it this way, I know for a FACT that the Grizzlies were not tanking. When you have a down year like the Grizzlies did...especially with a Franchise that is struggling financially, you shouldn't have your opportunity to acquire a franchise changing player be taken away from you by the lottery. So what if the Celtics tanked. Don't punish the rest of the league for the actions of a few bad apples. For the most part the teams in the league do not do such a thing. But if the league office thinks they are tanking, then it is up to them to do something about it. Seriously, Stern likes giving out fines, so why not fine teams that sit their stars at the end of the season? But don't punish the teams that play by the rules. It's simple logic: The worst teams should get the best players in the draft. That way they have a better chance of getting better. The Blazers and Sonics got top picks. Seriously, the Sonics have two All-Stars yet get Kevin Durant or Oden because of a random draw? It's just not fair. One last thing...Why doesn't anyone talk about tanking in football or any other sport? I think this tanking crap is WAAAAY overblown.

5-24-2007 @ 6:53PM

Nate, there's no tanking in football because it's not that big a deal if you have the 1 or 2 or 5 pick in the NFL draft. In the NBA, it's a franchise defining moment.

Also, there's a flaw in the argument everyone makes that "ooo poor Celtics an Memphis, they had such a terrible year". Portland and Seattle, they were bad teams too (they just didn't too the tanking bit).

Sonics have two all stars? Well, so do the Celts (Wally, Pierce). Portland has none. Memphis has a world champion All Star and were a playoff team last season. This lottery wasn't stealing from the poor to give to the rich.

Also: you're ignoring the bit about how the lottery generates fantastic drama - this year, more people cared about the lottery than game 2 of the Spurs-Jazz series.

And lastly: I never suggested Memphis tanked - but the Celts and the Bucks, man that was shameless...

5-24-2007 @ 7:26PM

-I just think this tanking thing is way overblown. Outside of the Celts and possibly the Bucks (at the end of the season at least), name a team that you actually think tanked. The Grizzlies were playing Pau 40 minutes a night at the end of the year. The Sixers played hard every night. You can say the same about the Bobcats and the Hawks too (and they had more incentive to tank than anyone). These are NBA players that have pride. Most of them are pretty competitive. Some of them are fighting for free agent money or trying just to stay in the league the next season. Tanking for the most part is a myth.

-Can we just ignore the Celtics and admit that their franchise deserves all the bad luck they've had.

-Seattle sucked because they wouldn't buck up for a coach other than Bob Hill because they were more worried about selling the team at the start of the year than anyting. Nate McMillain had that team in the playoffs two years ago.

-The Blazers were not that bad of a team. They finished 10 games ahead of the Grizzlies. That's a big gap between the two. Don't tell me you think it's fair that they didn't get one of the top two picks.

5-24-2007 @ 8:55PM

Martin said...

The lottery is the best way to protect the integrity of the game. Moreover, although everybody's focusing on the Nos. 1 and 2 picks, the Celtics should pick up a very good player on the fifth pick. And certainly "can't miss" number one picks have flopped.
Finally, as Detroit and several international teams have shown, the team with the best teamwork will beat a team of superstars. The difficulty in the U. S. is finding coaches and players who are smart enough to understand this concept.
Boston and Memphis should quit feeling sorry for themselves and put together a "team." After all, remember that neither Durant nor Oden won the NCAA championship. Rather a group of players who played as a team did.

5-24-2007 @ 11:33PM

IDEA! (atleasti think it is)

How about letting the NBA board of governors (i believe those represent the owners) decide who get's what pick from a pool of non play of teams. That way the burden of proof would be on the teams to show that they di not tank.

5-25-2007 @ 11:44AM

I just don't think tanking is as prevalent as people make it out to be. If anything, the only reason you might have seen such a thing (by the Celtics in particular) was because of the fact that we had not one but two sure fire franchise players in this draft. In order for teams to tank players have to buy into it. A lot of these teams are filled with young up and coming talent that are trying to make a name for themselves in the league. The notion that those guys don't come out and play to win is ridiculous. I watched a TON of Grizzlies games, just so I could have something to converse about with my friend from Memphis. They played hard so many nights, but would choke at the end of the game. That is just a sign of a bad team. Same could be said with Atlanta, Charlotte, Philadelphia, and until the last two weeks of the season, Milwaukee. Unless the coach deliberately stops playing guys (Celtics were the only ones doing that in my eyes), it's very hard for teams to tank because of the fact that players have pride and are often times playing for their next contract. In order for that to work, you have to have cooperation from the entire organization from top to bottom. I just find that very difficult to pull off without it getting leaked to the media. I don't know, I've just seen Orlando win the draft lotter THREE TIMES since 1992 without ever having the worst record (Turned into Penny, Shaq, and Dwight Howard). It's just not a fair system.

And the way you prevent tanking is to punish the teams (or in this case the team) that do tank. I seem to recall David Stern sending a fine the way of Pat Riley and the Lakers when he sat all five of his starters at the end of the year. David Stern fines players for not showing up to the All-Star game. He can find out if a team is not playing healthy players. Punish those teams. But don't hurt the rest of the teams that really do need help with this stupid system.

5-29-2007 @ 6:34AM

ChoWZa said...

Nate,
You're absolutely right. As much as you can argue the lottery prevents tanking, it encourages it. You still have the best chance at getting the #1 pick with the worst record, and its significant enough to tank games, but I don't believe this happens as people like to think it does.

The worst 8 records have a realistic chance at the top overall pick. Now instead of having two teams with awful records "tanking" you have up to a dozen. Thats if teams were actually tanking games which is, and has always been, an overexaggerated problem. Grizzlies and Celts get the top two picks and you don't see them anywhere near the top 2 draft picks next season as they are rebuilding for playoff runs. It could be another 5-10 years before either of these teams have the fortune to land the top overall pick at the same time the draft is producing franchise players. Now instead of trying to fix a near inexistent problem, what you have instead done is doomed franchises to years of heartache where they simply cannot compete, and no hope for them in any near future.

Theres a reason the NBA is the only major sport to employ such a rediculous system. If there should be any non-standard, unproven draft system, it should be aimed to determine who the actual worst team is...that is...if we are to assume there is a better way than by worst record, which I don't believe there is.