Re: Chicago wins lottery - seems awfully fishy

[Sherry & Hart <hartleyo@ix.netcom.com>]

Ryan Falcone wrote:
> 
> >>> "R. Bentz Kirby" <bocelts@usit.net> 05/22/99 10:58pm >>>
> I am trying to figure out if I am upset that Chicago is lucky enough to
> get pick No. 1, or if I am happy that there is no Tim Duncan in the
> draft.  And maybe not even a Keith Van Horne.  Damn this sucks.  Well,
> at least the Lakers got beat again.  That is good.
> Bentz
> bocelts@usit.net <<<<
> 
> You know...I've always scoffed when fans / sports media have
> insinuated that the NBA Draft Lottery selection is somehow fixed.  That
> said, it does seem more than a little ironic that the Chicago Bulls--glamour
> team of both the NBA and NBC for so many years--would score the first
> pick after only one post-Jordan season.  When I saw it on Saturday, I
> couldn't help but shake my head, as it seemed a bit artificial...
> 
> >From a devil's advocate perspective:  would the league shamelessly
> "stack the deck," thereby enabling the big-market, former headline
> attraction team to theoretically procure the player that would make them
> glamorous again ?
> 
> Ryan
> 
> PS-- For the record, I'm not necessarily suggesting that Magette, Brand,
> Davis et al are players of that caliber.

Don't be concerned there is not a true #1 pick in this years draft, just
a bunch of #10's. No bad team will get that much help from the top few
picks. All of the players vying for #1 pick are just merely nice players
with no impact on the team that draft them.

Hart