The NBA has disclosed to its 30 general managers a new anti-tanking, draft reform termed the “3-2-1 lottery” that includes expanding the lottery to 16 teams, flattened odds and a relegation zone where the bottom three teams will be penalized with fewer lottery balls for the No. 1 pick, starting with the 2027 draft, sources told ESPN on Tuesday.
The league office has held multiple critical meetings with its board of governors, competition committee and 30 general managers over the last few weeks to narrow toward this new singular proposal ahead of the owners’ May 28 vote, sources said. There could be minor modifications to the proposal, but the key points of the framework have a majority of the support from teams, according to those sources.
The “3-2-1 lottery” proposal, named to represent the number of lottery balls per team, would expand the lottery from 14 to 16 teams. Teams that do not qualify for the playoffs or play-in tournament but stay out of the relegation zone (spots four through 10) would receive three lottery balls each. Teams with a bottom-three record – the relegation area – would have just two lottery balls but have a floor of the 12th pick while the rest of the 13 lottery teams could fall as far as the 16th pick.
The 9th and 10th play-in seeds in each conference receive two lottery balls each while the losers of the 7-8 play-in games receive one lottery ball each.
In addition, no team would be able to win the top pick in consecutive years or be able to win three consecutive top-five picks. Teams also would not be able to protect picks in the 12 to 15 slots going forward.
The proposal includes a sunset provision so that the new system would expire following the 2029 draft, and allow the board of governors to continue the system or transition to a new one. The NBA’s current collective bargaining agreement runs through the 2029-2030 season.
The league would also have expanded disciplinary authority to regulate tanking and have the option to reduce teams’ lottery odds and/or modify teams’ draft positions under the proposal.
You must log in or # to comment.
Many better ways to do it that aren’t being explored.
I don’t think “at least they’re doing something” should buy silver much time.
Yeah there’s proposals I’ve seen over the years much better than this. I was pretty disappointed in the 3 we got.
The “relegation” part is an interesting change from the initial outline but might be a bit overkill to the truly worst teams. They’re already eliminating incentive to be at the bottom with the flattened odds so intentional losing is already a bad strategy?
I don’t understand why they are going to give the three worst teams worse odds? To stop tanking? Giving the 10 worst teams the same odds will solve it. At this point, they are just making it harder for terrible teams to improve.
No Franchise Left Behind
