The NBA draft lottery reform was "voted down" today at the league's BOG meeting, according to sources cited by Yahoo Sports' Adrian Wojnarowski. Sources said that 13 teams voted against the reform, including big-market clubs like the Bulls and Wizards, while the Kings "voted for it." Other teams voting against it were the 76ers, Bucks, Hawks, Heat, Hornets, Jazz, Pelicans, Pistons, Spurs, Suns and Thunder. Passage of the lottery reform 24 hours ago "was considered a sure-thing" and the league "was confident it had 23 teams. One team owner said, "Several teams started to wonder about unintended consequences and voted no to be able to do further study" (TWITTER.com, 10/22). USA TODAY's Jeff Zillgitt noted the draft reform was going to de-emphasize "losing in an attempt to secure one of the top picks in the June draft." The team that finishes the season with the worst record currently "has a 25% chance of getting the No. 1 pick and the worst it can get is the No. 4 pick." The club with second-worst record can "get no worse than the fifth pick and the third-worst team can't fall lower than the sixth pick." But because the "idea of 'tanking' ... carries such a negative image," the league was considering changes that included the teams with the four-worst records having an "equal shot at the No. 1 pick" (USATODAY.com, 10/21).
STANDING UP FOR THE LITTLE GUY: YAHOO SPORTS' Wojnarowski noted Thunder GM Sam Presti has become an "improbable voice that has risen in recent weeks, advocating a stay of execution for the current system." In conversations with small-market execs, Presti, a member of the "influential NBA competition committee, has tried to warn peers that changing the system is a risky proposition for small-market teams." Presti's case, "laid out to others, is this: The big-market teams badly want this change because it'll give them one more advantage over small markets in securing top talent." Big-market teams "have an advantage signing superstar free agents and an advantage trading for them because those players are far more apt to agree to sign a contract extension." Now, the big-market teams will "get better access to top players higher in the draft." Sources said that Presti "hasn't so much campaigned for 'no' votes ... as much as he's used his platform on the competition committee to remind teams of the possible consequences for smaller-market franchises." Still, most execs "don't see this issue as big market vs. small, but rather a short-term opportunity to get a better pick, perhaps a longer-term play to discourage tanking" (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 10/21).
