The Wisdom of an NBA Crowd

The Wisdom of Crowds suggests that groups of people, not experts, make better decisions. As an example, the book cites Who Wants to be a Millionaire, where crowds were correct over 90% of the time, while experts gave the correct answer about 60% of the time. In our society, we believe in the value of the expert. We listen when an expert speaks, even when we have a hard time believing the expert or when two experts disagree.

In a small article in ESPN the Mag, a writer used The Wisdom of Crowds to suggest NBA fans as an answer to the NBA's officiating problems. Since crowds make better decisions that experts, the Mag suggested using crowds to decide close calls.

A better idea, I believe, would be to use NBA fans to run an NBA franchise. With the Internet, blogs, cable television, NBA TV and more, die-hard NBA fans are more educated than ever. They watch games and discuss every angle on blogs and message forums. Sites exist to track prospects for the next NBA Draft and to suggest potential trades. A quick google search provides contract information for any player in the league.

ESPN writer Bill Simmons gained the support of many in Milwaukee this spring when he used his ESPN the Magazine column to lobby for the job as General Manager of the Milwaukee Bucks, even though he has no experience in basketball, other than writing his wordy columns. The Bucks' fans embraced Simmons, I think, because of his proximity to the fans. While most General Managers sit in a luxury box or hide from the public, offering few words or explanations to the public, Simmons is a man of the people. Bucks' fans believed that Simmons would represent the fans, rather than the ownership, as the General Manager.

Drafting players is an inexact science. For every Gilbert Arenas plucked in the Second Round, there is a Darko Milicic drafted at the top of the lottery. Signing free agents also has an element of risk, especially with the money involved and the precious space under the salary cap. Personnel decisions often are made by a small group, including scouts, coaches and the General Manager, but typically the General Manager makes the final decision. The GM, after all, is hired as an expert on NBA players and teams. That is his job - compile a roster to win a championship - and most General Managers are well-paid.

Imagine the NBA organization that embraces the idea that crowds make better decisions than experts and fires its General Manager in favor of the fans. An NBA owner could empower the fans to make the decisions on draft picks, player signings, coach hirings and more. This sounds like a recipe for disaster, allowing the inmates to run the asylum, but if The Wisdom of Crowds is correct, why is the idea so far-fetched? NBA fans have just as much access to players as NBA personnel, and in some cases, more access, as NBA fans can watch high school games, while NBA personnel are now barred. The NBA team could open its pre-draft workouts to the public and even tape the workouts to show on their web site.

Imagine the interest the fans would have in the organization. Imagine the pride. These fans would be the most loyal fans ever because they would be responsible for the success of the franchise. Could the fans do any worse than the mess Clay Bennett created in Seattle/Oklahoma City?

The Los Angeles Clippers are a financially-conservative franchise located in a city where they play second fiddle to the Los Angeles Lakers. Firing their General Manager and hiring the fans could turn the Clippers into the new "It" franchise in Los Angeles. People would wear red and blue rather than purple and gold. The Clippers would save money on the GM's salary which could be invested into the organization. With the fans making the decisions, they would no longer need college scouts, European scouts and more. They could replace an entire department with fans. Imagine the savings in salary and travel expenses.

A General Manager hires the Head Coach, makes draft picks and searches for trades. Most GMs have other roles, but the administrative roles could be sourced to an administrator for less money, maybe even outsourced to India for even bigger savings!

Of course, there would have to be some security precautions to prevent opponent's fans from altering the voting: let's say anyone who buys any kind of season ticket package gets a vote. Instantly, rather than relying on a "guru," the franchise would empower 10,000 or more people to make decisions. Wouldn't everyone in Los Angeles want to buy season tickets to get such influence on the team's future?

On draft day, the Clippers web site would feature a poll with five players narrowed from the list by pre-draft voting. As the Clippers time ticked down, season ticket holders would vote and the poll results would decide the new pick.

The problem, of course, is the nimbleness to make a trade. This would be the problem with the system. Potential trades cannot be public information as other teams might make a better offer and players' egos may be affected if they are constantly seeing the fans trying to trade them. For this reason, the season ticket holders with voting rights would need access to a secure site where they could discuss and vote on potential trades.

Hiring a coach could proceed in the same manner, though voting to fire a coach would be more problematic. You cannot have a weekly vote on the fate of the coach. So, fans would forfeit their right to fire the coach in the middle of the season - unless there was a transgression that led to an immediate vote of confidence - and the voters would vote at the end of each season on the future of the coach.

The criticism, of course, is that fans are notoriously fickle. However, with over 10,000 people, the vote evens out.

Now, this will never happen. No organization would risk their investment by empowering the fans. A group in England started a web site (http://www.myfootballclub.co.uk/) to purchase and run a team, but the club was so small, few fans knew the players well-enough to make informed decisions, so they voted to give the manager many of the powers. However, they make many decision regarding the club. In the NBA, fans have so much access to information and players, this would not be an issue.

I could see a minor league team trying this method, like the English group. Imagine a fledgling Major League Soccer or Triple A baseball team handing over soccer or baseball decisions to its fans by way of majority vote. Wouldn't you pay closer attention to your hometown team? Wouldn't you visit the team's web site more frequently to get more information? Wouldn't the local papers have to cover the team more in more depth, if for no other reason than the local citizens would want more information? If you're a struggling franchise, how much could it hurt? Maybe The Wisdom of Crowds has the answer for the struggling Los Angeles Galaxy, rather than the Los Angeles Clippers.