Ignorance is bliss

[Ryan, Patrick S Maj RES USAFR 439 MSG]

I got the memo - I just chose to ignore it.
 
In the short term, you'd probably be right, teams would actively try to
lose. My first thought is "who cares", but beyond an emotional response, I
don't believe that would always be the case because if a good number of
teams did actively try to lose, because of the large number of playoff teams
per conference allowed in the end of year playoff suddenly if there were
more then two or three teams doing this it would actually bring all of them
back into contention. This year is a perfect example - how many under .500
teams are going to the playoffs from the East? 1? 2? More? 
 
Your thought process automatically assumes that teams will make the "tank"
decision early, and gradually more and more teams will follow suit. If
you're in the Atlantic Division this year you could be eight or nine game
under .500 and still feel you have a shot at the playoffs and once you
finally do feel you can't - say a couple weeks after the All-Star break as
an example, the team that truly has been tanking is so far "ahead" of you
(and the impact players really only being picks 1-3 let's say) that even if
you do start throwing the ball in your own bucket you'd never catch up.
 
I don't see the risk you do Kestas.  I still only see realistically 2-3
teams actively tanking all season sowing mass chaos with no lottery and in
actuality see MORE teams tanking post-All-Star break WITH a lottery because
statistically (thanks to the post BDodgers put up yesterday) the #7 and #8
worst records often get the number one overall pick so you can tank LATE and
still get the prize.  That seems like more of incentive to me (see last
year's Boston Celtics - although without the #1 pick actually falling to
them so Ainge could've traded it for Telfair).
 
-------------------------------------
Huh? I thought we've covered that ground, but I guess you didn't get that
memo. 
Going by draft order under the present system would ensure that a
significant
minority of teams would be actively trying to lose all their games by now.
What
effect do you think it will have on the competition and player development?
 
The lottery is good precisely because it adds even more uncertainty.  The
only
question is whether the weighting is optimal.  
 
Then again, because of this increased uncertainty, it favors GMs that can
reason
well in those conditions (i.e., not Danny Ainge).  
 Kestas