J.D. Skeets

Are you up or down on this being the front runner here for this draft reform?

I know we've talked about this before.

Hold on, hold on.

Isn't the point of this to fix tanking?

Moving to an 18-team lottery wouldn't completely solve the tanking issue, which we've said is very tough to completely solve.

But the idea is to disincentivize the league's worst teams, the bottom of the bottom teams, from losing on purpose.

by keeping them in contention for top odds because it's going to change nothing.

You're going to have that percentage, 8%.

The counter-argument, though, and sort of what you're alluding here to, Tess, is doesn't this give more teams a shot at the number one pick?

And maybe you're moving the tanking from the bottom of the league potentially to the middle of the league now because teams could be making a calculated decision on like...

well, we're just going to get waxed in a play in here.

I mean, why don't we – or getting into the playoffs, we'll get crushed.

So let's just hang back here and give ourselves a whatever, 2.5%.

Are you up or down on this?

I think I'm up.

I think this was the plan I liked the most.

I remember you saying it.

The three that were thrown out.

The two-year plan, to me, mostly addresses a team like the Pacers, who are just going to have a down year, so they completely bottom out and try and lose this game.

many games as possible that makes so that doesn't happen as regularly the double lottery didn't ever make any sense to me uh because you could have the worst record and drop to number 10 like that just didn't have any sort of reality uh to me but i think you uh austin rivers i think you hit on the heads geats uh the worst teams won't be as bad three teams this year won 20 or fewer games the nets the pacers and the wizards i think those teams win like 24 games