The recent regular season left many observers frustrated by lopsided finales and a spike in uncompetitive games, outcomes widely attributed to teams intentionally weakening their rosters to chase higher draft picks. Analysts pointed to a record average margin of victory of 13.3 points and an unusually large number of blowouts — including 96 games decided by 30 points or more — as symptoms of a system that sometimes rewards failure. With commissioner Adam Silver pledging to “fix” the problem, debate has centered on how to realign incentives so teams keep their best players on the floor.
Tanking can be described as the deliberate strategy of fielding a poorer-performing roster to improve draft lottery odds. The league’s move to flatten lottery odds in recent years reduced the worst teams’ guaranteed advantage but perversely encouraged middling clubs to pursue losing as a path to a higher pick. Several complex anti-tanking proposals have been floated, but they still leave lower-ranked teams with better lottery chances, preserving the motivation to lose late-season contests.
The Gold Plan explained
The Gold Plan offers a straightforward alternative. Conceived by data scientist Adam Gold in 2008 and later published (2010) and presented at MIT Sloan (2012), the idea flips the late-season calculus. Under the plan, teams that are mathematically eliminated from playoff contention begin to accumulate draft-order points for each win (and for overtime or shootout losses in sports that use them). At the end of the regular season those points determine draft priority, meaning teams must earn their positioning rather than passively accept it.
How the mechanism alters incentives
Because a team that falls out of contention earlier has more remaining games in which to gain points, the system still favors clubs that performed poorly in the standings without rewarding intentional collapse. The Gold Plan therefore turns the prize into something to be competed for: rather than the “biggest loser” getting the league’s biggest reward, lower-performing teams must play to secure their advantage. The approach is intentionally flexible — leagues can decide whether to use it for only the top pick or to arrange several positions — making it adaptable to different competitive structures.
Real-world test: the PWHL
A powerful argument for the Gold Plan is that it is not merely theoretical. The Professional Women’s Hockey League adopted the system in 2026 as a way to generate interest and discourage tanking in its first seasons. With a small league footprint initially — six teams, four of which made the playoffs — the mechanism did not radically reshuffle draft order at first. As the PWHL grew to eight teams, however, competition within the Gold Plan chase tightened: late-season standings shifted and teams jockeyed for position, illustrating the model’s capacity to produce meaningful incentives for competitive play.
Would it work in the NBA? and other ideas to consider
Applied to a larger league, the Gold Plan would likely produce more pronounced changes. Simulations for other North American leagues show that it can reorder lottery outcomes significantly and reduce the advantage of passive losing. It is worth noting, too, that the NBA faces a related issue: star players are missing many games, whether through injury or intentional rest. One angle seldom discussed is minute management. For example, the season’s leading scorer logged about 36 minutes per game on average, while the NHL’s top scorer averaged roughly 23 minutes per game — a contrast that suggests alternative workload plans might preserve player health and keep stars available for more games.
Complementary reforms
Implementing the Gold Plan need not be the league’s only step. Adjusting rotational minutes, strengthening injury reporting standards and refining the lottery structure could operate in concert to reduce both tanking and the prevalence of star absences. The key is experimentation: the NBA can study the PWHL experience, run pilots, and combine solutions rather than relying on a single incremental tweak that leaves perverse incentives intact.
There is no magic bullet, but the Gold Plan provides a tested, conceptually simple alternative to proposals that merely tinker at the edges. By converting the draft into a prize that must be earned on the court, leagues can restore late-season competitiveness and give fans more reasons to watch every game. If preserving competitive integrity is truly a priority, the NBA should at least pilot this already-proven approach and see whether a proven hockey solution can translate to basketball.
