Sixers & Bucks: "Mission Accomplished"

May 20th cannot come fast enough. Well I guess it can for Andrew Wiggins, or whoever will be picked by the seller-dwellers of professional basketball. A phrase to describe the 2013-14 76ers & Milwaukee Bucks could be: "mission accomplished." It is no secret the objective of the season for both franchises was to lose as many games as possible to get the best chance at the first pick in the draft, or at least a top pick to give the team a major chance to become great.

But does it really matter?

The Bucks (somehow) finished with the worst record in the NBA. I say somehow because of how horribly the Sixers threw the season away at the trade deadline and employed a bunch of d-leaguers. As the worst team in the NBA, they have a 25% chance of getting the first pick, highest among all 14 lottery teams. Any 3rd grader realizes that is still a 75% chance of not getting it. Not only is there a better chance of them not getting it, but of all the possible picks they could have, which is 1-4, probability is in favor of them getting the 4th pick at a 35.7%.

And the Sixers? They also have a better chance at 4th at 31.9%. They even have a better chance at 1 than they do 2, by .1%.

How about that 4th to last team, the Utah Jazz? The Sixers and Bucks take up well over half the percentage of the 4th pick so they must have the rest, right? Utah ends up with a 9.9% chance at no. 4.

Here is the rest of this corrupt system:

This draft is a endless pool of talent. You won't see tanking like this for a long time, believe me. But it is still a disgrace to the NBA that you do not see in any other sport, with exception to the Houston Astros, who have been tanking for years.

So do you get rid of the lottery so the worst team actually gets what they deserve? I think you would see teams just stand around and blatantly lose the game on purpose. That would only make it worse.

Do you change the draft to a wheel system where teams get a top 5 pick every 6 years and the number 1 pick every 30? This could never work because the top team should have absolutely no chance to get the first pick, and I doubt the NBA will have 30 even teams for 30 years. This process would need an unfair makeover somewhere down the road.

Teams tank because they know there is no way they can keep up with the elites during an 82-game season. But how about a 50-game season? Give the bad teams more motivation to work toward championship potential in one season. The NFL, MLB, and NHL all have teams that come out of nowhere and compete. The NBA does not have that because when it comes down to it, teams realize it is better to suck and then develop future stars. You don't need an 82-game season to prove the Heat and Pacers are 10 games better than everyone else in the East.

But before you do that, make the first round or maybe even first two rounds of the Playoffs a best of 5 game series. Give the lower seeds a better chance. March Madness gets attention through the upsets. The NBA could too.

I am not naive. I know this will never happen. All this would do is reduce the amount of money being brought in through ticket sales, something the NBA does not want to risk. But the NFL is the most prosperous league through sponsors, and their teams play 16 games a year. Making each game more meaningful could be the key.