NBA Tanking Is Back in the Spotlight-Is It Finally Time to Revisit the Draft Wheel?
Tanking is once again front and center in the NBA conversation. With the league office recently handing out fines to the Pacers and Jazz for what it deemed “tanking behavior,” and at least seven more teams seemingly pivoting toward the bottom of the standings post-All-Star break, the issue is becoming harder to ignore.
The current draft lottery system, designed to discourage losing, might actually be doing the opposite. Teams near the bottom of the standings are still incentivized to chase losses, hoping the ping-pong balls bounce their way and deliver a franchise-altering talent. It’s a gamble, but for some front offices, it’s worth the risk-especially in seasons where the draft class features potential generational stars.
There’s a growing consensus that the system needs a shake-up. But the challenge is finding a solution that doesn’t just swap one set of problems for another. That’s where an old idea is starting to pick up steam again: the draft wheel.
The Draft Wheel: A Radical Rethink
Originally proposed back in 2013 by Celtics executive Mike Zarren, the draft wheel is a concept that would completely remove record-based incentives from the draft process. Instead of a lottery, each team would be slotted into a rotating draft position cycle, selecting from every pick (1 through 30) over a 30-year span.
No more tanking. No more lottery luck. Just a predetermined, rotating system where every team knows exactly when they’ll have a top pick-and when they won’t.
It’s a bold idea. By decoupling draft position from team performance, the wheel eliminates any strategic benefit to losing games.
That’s the main selling point. But it’s also the source of some pushback.
Critics argue that the system could leave struggling teams stuck in place, with no immediate path to improvement. On the flip side, contenders could end up with top picks, potentially widening the gap between the league’s haves and have-nots.
Still, with so many teams actively angling for the bottom, it’s hard not to wonder if a drastic change like this might be worth exploring.
A Modern Spin on the Wheel
The idea has recently resurfaced in a new form, thanks to a proposal from Kevin O’Connor of Yahoo! Sports.
His version takes Zarren’s original wheel and adds a layer of flexibility. Instead of locking teams into specific draft positions, O’Connor’s model introduces five tiers of six teams each.
Within each tier, teams would have equal odds in the lottery.
Here’s where it gets interesting: the odds would rotate between teams over time, just like the original wheel, but the rotation would happen more frequently and with more variability. And unlike the original model, these odds could be traded-adding a new strategic wrinkle for front offices to consider.
The goal remains the same: remove the incentive to lose by removing the link between record and draft position. It’s not a perfect system-no draft format will ever be-but it’s a creative attempt to address a problem that clearly isn’t going away.
Where the League Stands Now
With the league office already handing out penalties and Commissioner Adam Silver signaling a willingness to consider reform, the door is open for innovative ideas. The NBA has never been shy about experimenting-just look at the success of the Play-In Tournament and the inaugural In-Season Tournament-and this could be the next frontier.
Mike Zarren’s draft wheel may have been ahead of its time when it was first proposed. But in today’s climate, where tanking is once again casting a shadow over the second half of the season, it might finally be time to give it another look.
After all, if the goal is to keep competition honest and teams focused on winning, then the league has to be willing to rethink the way it rewards losing. The wheel might not be the final answer-but it’s a compelling place to start.