3 lottery tweaks that would address the NBA's tanking problem

The first step towards dealing with a problem is admitting you have one, and we should all be able to acknowledge that the NBA has a tanking problem. Again.

Nearly a third of the league will spend the final month of this season trying to lose, and there's no way around the fact that's bad for business, even if franchises are selling for record prices and a mammoth new media-rights deal is already locked in.

The most egregious tanking examples cheapen and degrade the NBA product, and further lead to uncomfortable integrity questions for a league that encourages its fans to wager responsibly on games. So, what to do about it?

The only ways to completely eradicate tanking would be to give every team in the league an equal shot at the No. 1 pick, to replace the draft lottery with something more creative like The Wheel (which would see teams assigned one of 30 picks every 30 years), or to abolish the draft entirely.

Such radical change seems unlikely. A two-thirds majority of owners would need to vote in favor, and most owners still want to sell hope through the draft when they can't sell wins, sell tickets, or sell established superstars on their respective markets.

The goal right now should be to find more realistic solutions. Tweaks to the current lottery system can still go a long way towards curbing the most shameless examples of intentional ineptitude.

Flatten the odds

Twenty-eight of 30 owners supported flattened odds in 2019 when the lottery format was changed so that the three worst teams each received a 14% chance of landing the No. 1 pick, rather than the worst team receiving a league-leading 25% chance.

That 2019 adjustment paid dividends: the league's gone six straight years without the last-place team winning the No. 1 pick after the four lotteries leading up to the change were all won by the worst team. Still, it's clear the NBA didn't go far enough, as evidenced by the depths teams are stooping to ahead of this spring's Cooper Flagg sweepstakes.

The first and most obvious fix is to further flatten the odds. The worst teams can still have a slight mathematical advantage, but the difference between each slot should be so minuscule that trying to maneuver from, say, sixth worst to fifth worst is pointless. The trade-off of dropping a spot or two in the overall standings shouldn't be worth the fines the NBA imposes on teams for ripping off paying customers by sitting healthy players.

However, you also can't go too far by giving every lottery team equal odds, as that would lead to lower-seeded postseason clubs having far more incentive to tank out of the playoff picture and into the lottery.

Remove the floor

After flattening the odds, the NBA must next increase the risk for tankers.

This idea builds on another change already agreed to in 2019, but one that didn't go far enough. The NBA currently uses a lottery to draw the draft's top four selections, up from three prior to 2019. It's a nice start, as lottery teams can now fall four spots in the draft from their corresponding place in the standings. (The Pistons fell to fifth in 2023 and 2024 despite owning the worst record both years.)

But the subtle change still came with too much of a guarantee for the league's most pitiful teams, as the last-place club is assured a top-five pick. Instead, every lottery pick should be determined via the draw, leaving no floor for teams to fall back on.

Imagine this: the best-case scenario for the league's worst team is a 1-in-10 shot at the No. 1 pick, with a chance its selection could fall anywhere in the top 14, instead of a top-five guarantee and a 14% chance of picking first overall.

The law of probabilities would make sliding 13 spots quite unlikely, but the fear alone would be enough to make prospective tankers think twice.

No repeat winners

Finally, the NBA should prohibit teams from winning the lottery in consecutive years.

Would Flagg's new team still look at a loaded 2026 draft class more favorably than a low-seeded postseason berth? Sure, but if the team knew its pick could fall anywhere from second to 14th, it may not be so eager to waste Year 1 of its new franchise player's career (and valuable rookie-scale contract).

This change would prove unfortunate for teams that win the lottery in a down year for prospects (hello, 2024 Hawks), but: too bad. This is pro sports, and the system's already designed to prop up bad teams.

Tanking on some level will always be part of the equation as long as North America's top leagues insist on sending the best young talent to save their worst-run franchises. (Even the PWHL's "Gold Plan," where teams are encouraged to stack wins after being eliminated from playoff contention, would likely tempt some squads into hoarding losses earlier in the season.) That goes double for basketball, a game uniquely vulnerable to the powers and whims of singular talents.

And that's fine, to some extent. Sports' nature means teams will always be navigating different phases of the competitive cycle and making decisions based on where they are on that journey. But more can and should be done to discourage teams from punting on entire seasons, or large chunks of one.

Promising young talent and the luck of the draw should inspire hope for fans of losing teams. But more losing should never be seen as the easiest way out.

Joseph Casciaro is theScore's lead Raptors and NBA reporter.