The Show.

The NBA Lottery is about chance, which makes part of the Draft about chance. Tuesday night we saw 14 teams lend their futures to the hands of fate and luck, and after seeing the outcome defy the odds and chances, it becomes clear that this is the way drafts should be in every league.

Most leagues don't distribute their draft picks by luck-of-the-draw. In most leagues, the worse the team, the higher the pick. Why should it be that way though? Why should teams be rewarded for being the worst? I understand that it's an attempt to balance the playing field, but I think there should be a little more excitement, a little more chance, and a little more effort, because that's what sports themselves are all about. Now this is for my open-minded friends if they're out there: in my ideal sports world, teams would compete for higher draft picks. Take the 6 worst teams in a league and play a round-robin. Of course, most people would say, "The worst team would lose all their games though," to which I would respond with a few handy statistics and some logic. Let's take the NBA for instance - this year, the Nets were the worst team in basketball by far. They won 12 games. This is common knowledge for most, but what a lot of people tend to overlook are some of the quality wins New Jersey had this year. They beat San Antonio, Boston, Chicago twice and Charlotte twice. These were all playoff teams, so it's not like the Nets were incapable of winning a tough game. With that in mind, let's say we took the 6 worst teams in the NBA this year - the Nets, Sacramento, Washington, Minnesota, Golden State and Philadelphia. Have them play a round-robin where the winningest team gets the highest pick. A lot of people would think that it's be unfair to the worst team, but why not make a team earn a high pick? Plus, now that they actually have something to play for, the results and effort might be a little different than you'd think. I think the fact that the Nets had nothing to play for pretty much all year explains some of their losses, but in a system in which they have something to play for, you might see a different team.

Now for all the nay-sayers out there, don't get too upset because this would never happen. I'm just trying to prove a point. I think teams should have to earn their picks if they're that desperate to get better. This is partly why I think the NBA Draft Lottery is a great thing - it doesn't guarantee that the worst team gets the best pick. Why not adopt a system like this in all sports drafts? I think it's great that the Nets didn't get the first pick - now we'll see if the organization has what it takes to deal with what they've been given in their attempt to rise from the ashes. We're never going to see a system in which teams have to earn a pick unfortunately, but the next best thing would be lending their futures to chance - that seems fair enough. Chance plays such a big part in sports - when you watch a game it's full of players and coaches taking chances, taking risks, and the uncertainty makes the games exciting! So why not extend the excitement to the offseason. Make it so a terrible team has to deal with the cards they've been dealt, rather than being handed the pot.