Rethinking Tanking: What the “Gold Plan” Would Mean for the NBA Draft

A major recent topic surrounding the health of the National Basketball Association is how to address tanking late in the season. Under the current draft lottery system, losing is, at least to some extent, rewarded. As a result, roughly a third of the league can end up deprioritizing wins by the midpoint of the season, opting instead to maximize draft position.

It’s hard to fault teams for this. They’re simply operating within the incentives the league has created. But when those incentives consistently produce non-competitive basketball games, it’s worth rethinking the structure.

This has led to a wave of alternative proposals from analysts, fans, and front offices alike. One idea that hasn’t received as much attention as expected is the “Gold Plan,” currently used by the Professional Women’s Hockey League.

What is the Gold Plan?

The concept is simple:

• Once a team is mathematically eliminated from playoff contention, it begins accumulating points for each win.
• Draft order is then determined by these post-elimination wins.
• The team with the most points earns the No. 1 overall pick, and so on.
• In the event of a tie, the worse overall team receives the higher pick.

In short, the system flips the incentive: instead of rewarding losing, it rewards teams that continue to compete.

Applying the Gold Plan to the 2026 NBA Draft

This raised an interesting question: what would the draft order have looked like under this system?

To approximate this, I calculated when each team was effectively eliminated, not from the play-in, but from realistically reaching a top-six seed. With the play-in tournament extending postseason hope for many teams beyond what’s practical, using the six-seed cutoff better reflects when teams truly shift priorities.

From that point forward, teams accumulated “Gold Plan” points based on wins.

The Biggest Loser: Washington

No team is impacted more dramatically than the Washington Wizards. Despite finishing with the league’s worst record, they managed just one win after elimination. Under this system, they would fall all the way to the 14th pick.

That’s a harsh outcome, but arguably a logical one. A system designed to reward competitive play would naturally penalize a team that failed to show it down the stretch. Washington’s season, which included multiple career-high performances allowed to opposing players (including Bam Adebayo), becomes a case study in what the Gold Plan seeks to discourage.

Of course, it’s worth noting that behavior would likely change under this system. If the Gold Plan were in place, eliminated teams would have stronger incentives to compete, which could meaningfully alter these results.

Other Takeaways

Portland benefits significantly

The Portland Trail Blazers emerge as a major winner. Because point accumulation begins once teams are out of realistic playoff contention, mid-tier teams gain a new pathway to top draft talent. This could help accelerate rebuilds without requiring a full-season tank.

Bad teams still rise to the top

Importantly, the system doesn’t completely detach draft position from team quality. The teams earning the top picks are still, broadly speaking, those most in need of talent upgrades. The difference is that they must demonstrate some level of competitiveness to secure those spots.

Final Thoughts

The Gold Plan isn’t a perfect solution. It introduces new strategic considerations and wouldn’t eliminate all forms of tanking. But it does something the current system struggles with: it rewards winning, even after a season appears lost.

At a minimum, it offers a compelling alternative to the NBA’s current cycle of incremental lottery tweaks. Before continuing down a path of trial-and-error adjustments, this is a structure worth more serious consideration.