As the NBA season winds down, a different kind of race is heating up-a race to the bottom. The Nets, Pacers, Wizards, Grizzlies, and Jazz are all vying for prime lottery positions, each with just one or two wins in their last ten games. This scramble has the NBA’s Board of Governors revisiting the draft lottery system, aiming to curb tanking with new proposals.
On Wednesday, the league introduced three anti-tanking concepts to team owners. These ideas aim to expand the lottery pool, flatten the odds, and make losing less appealing. But each proposal has sparked debate, as they seem to shift rather than solve the problem.
The first concept suggests expanding the lottery to 18 teams, giving the bottom 10 teams an 8% chance each to snag the top pick. The remaining odds would be spread among the next eight teams, with a drawing for all 18 picks. Critics argue this could lead to more teams justifying late-season losses, expanding the pool of teams engaging in strategic losing.
The second proposal takes it further, involving a 22-team lottery that includes teams ousted in the first playoff round. It introduces a two-year record component and a minimum win threshold to deter extreme tanking.
However, this raises concerns about subjectivity and potential penalties for teams that struggle due to factors beyond their control. It might also skew incentives for teams near playoff contention, where losing at the right moment could become advantageous.
The third idea, the “5 by 5” model, gives equal odds to the bottom five teams for the top five picks, with a second drawing ensuring these teams don’t fall below pick 10. While this aims to prevent a race to be the absolute worst, it might simply shift the focus to finishing within the bottom five.
Fans also express concerns about the complexity of these proposals. Expanding the pool, using multi-year records, and running multiple drawings could make the lottery process more confusing and less transparent.
Timing plays a crucial role in the discomfort surrounding these ideas. The league’s response to a season marked by rampant tanking feels like an overreaction.
When multiple teams are posting identical poor records, it’s tempting to make sweeping changes. However, there’s a risk that these changes could unfairly impact teams that are genuinely rebuilding or struggling with injuries, while savvy tankers adapt to new loopholes.
Ultimately, the tension lies in the fact that as long as the draft remains the primary route to securing elite talent, teams will continue to seek the most defensible ways to lose strategically.