Welcome to Part III of a four-part series taking a look at the proposed changes to the NBA Draft Lottery that are being put before the Board of Governors to prevent tanking. If you’d like to catch up, check out Part I and Part II. Before we take a look at the second proposal, it’s important to reiterate the current draft rules.

As it stands, the 14 teams that do not make the Playoffs are eligible for the lottery. Don’t confuse making the Play In Tournament with making the Playoffs – they are not the same. 16 teams make the Playoffs when all is said and done, with 14 heading to the lottery. Lottery odds are flat (14%) for the three worst teams, with the odds decreasing from there down to the 14th worst team (0.5%). The team with the worst record can receive no worse than the 5th pick, as the lottery only determines picks 1-4 with the rest of the draft order following inversely of a team’s record.

Option 2 – increase the number of lottery teams significantly, draft position based on record across two seasons

Key aspects of the proposal include:

If we thought the first proposal was a no-nonsense bid by the NBA, this proposal is truly next level. This scenario leaves only eight teams in the league outside the lottery. With the four first round losers entering the mix, there is plenty of room for insanity to ensue.

Since 1984 when the Playoffs expanded to 16 teams, there have been six 1 seeds to lose to the 8 seed in the first round of the Playoffs. The Seattle Sonics (1994), Miami Heat (1999), Mavericks (2007), San Antonio Spurs (2011), Chicago Bulls (2012) and Milwaukee Bucks (2023) all hold the dubious distinction. It is rare, but happens. This proposal means the best team in the league could possibly secure the 1 pick in the NBA Draft. Imagine the Thunder adding a Darryn Peterson or Cam Boozer because of one flukey Playoff loss. Highly unlikely, but when it happens, all but a single fanbase is going to be grabbing their pitchforks and torches.

The two-season lookback also adds potential chaos. Let’s use the Indiana Pacers as an example. In 2024-25, they won 50 games and took a trip to the NBA Finals. In 2025-26, they are on pace to win 18 games, largely due to the season-long absence of Tyrese Haliburton. That would put them at an average of 34 wins under this proposal, greatly increasing their chances of a higher pick despite being an otherwise elite team. On the other hand, the Mavericks were a 50-win Finals team in 2023-24 before imploding their franchise with one of the most notorious trades in sports history. Both teams would have their draft odds skewed in the wrong direction based largely on anomalous occurrences.

What it could mean for the Mavericks

Chaos is difficult to predict, and this scenario at least invites chaos, however unlikely it may be. The two-season lookback doesn’t strike me as doing the Mavericks or any other team any real favors. I actually think the overall proposal could encourage tanking. Case in point: the Pacers are doing it right now and they don’t even have the incentive this proposal affords teams. If a good team gets some bad injury luck, they are highly incentivized to completely tank the following season to better their draft odds. Add in a win floor and teams will simply use that number of wins as their tank-target.

My best guess is that Dallas ought to hope this proposal isn’t the winner. The Mavs likely won’t have control of their own pick (after this offseason) until 2031. Following up a few years of no pick control with a much wider field of lottery teams could really send Dallas on a long walk of poor draft outcomes.

I invite you to follow me @_80MPH on X, and check back often at Mavs Moneyball for all the latest on the Dallas Mavericks.