By Tim Bontemps, 2026-05-29 03:20:00
亚当·肖华 (Adam Silver) 明确表示，NBA选秀乐透制度即将迎来变革。
“会议室里大家似乎达成了一致，我们必须做出改变，而且必须在下个赛季就做出改变，”自2014年起担任NBA总裁的肖华在今年3月的联盟董事会会议上表示。
“激励机制需要修正。我们会解决这个问题。”
联盟已经找到了解决方案。周四，NBA董事会以29比1的投票结果通过了反摆烂新规。新规将乐透区球队从14支扩大到16支，进一步平分抽签概率，并设立了一个“降级区”，对战绩最差的三支球队进行惩罚，降低他们获得状元签的概率。
这项被称为“3-2-1乐透”的改革对选秀制度进行了相当彻底的颠覆，旨在立即遏制联盟每年一度的“争状元摆烂大战”，并激励更多球队在赛季末期保持竞争。
以下是新乐透模式的利弊分析，以及它们对未来选秀乐透、NBA阵容构建和资产管理可能产生的影响。
利：减少明目张胆的摆烂行为
在联盟与摆烂行为长达一代人的斗争中，各种应对措施都曾被讨论过，包括一些激进的解决方案，比如将最好的球队给予高顺位选秀权，甚至完全取消选秀。
尽管没有完美的制度——与许多实行升降级制的欧洲体育联赛不同，输球的NBA球队没有动力去摆脱垫底的命运——但这种新模式应该能遏制最极端的摆烂行为。
本赛季，华盛顿奇才队在最后28场比赛中输掉了27场，以17胜65负的战绩锁定了联盟最差战绩。为了确保获得一个前五顺位的选秀权，他们的两位重磅强援——12月加盟的特雷·杨 (Trae Young) 和2月交易截止日前加盟的安东尼·戴维斯 (Anthony Davis)——总共只打了5场比赛。
无独有偶，孟菲斯灰熊队在常规赛收官阶段打出5胜28负的战绩，跌至联盟倒数第六——这与费城76人队在2024-25赛季末期的做法如出一辙，当时76人队试图保住那个前六保护的选秀权，该选秀权最终变成了最佳新秀候选人VJ·艾奇科姆 (VJ Edgecombe)。
但16支球队的乐透系统——该系统还防止了对12至15顺位选秀权进行保护以确保留住它们——消除了球队在赛季末期故意输球的绝大部分借口。随着各支球队都想逃离倒数前三而不是加入其中，弱队现在有了赢球的动力。（尽管这种动力可能还不够大。）
弊：对连续中签者的选秀权限制
鉴于这种模式极大地倾向于随机运气，加入减少这种随机性的限制就显得有些奇怪了：一支球队不能连续两年赢得乐透签，也不能连续三年在选秀中获得前五顺位的选秀权。
这是联盟非常明显的举措，旨在防止出现圣安东尼奥马刺队在2023年、2024年和2025年选秀中所经历的情况——当时圣安东尼奥分别获得了状元签、4号签和榜眼签，并用它们选中了维克托·文班亚马 (Victor Wembanyama)、斯蒂芬·卡斯尔 (Stephon Castle) 和迪伦·哈珀 (Dylan Harper)。
尽管如此巨大的好运在圣安东尼奥备受欢呼，因为它可能为一支极易成为下一个NBA王朝的球队奠定了基础，但如果可能的话，联盟更希望将天赋分布得更均匀一些。
问题在于：并非每一届选秀的质量都相同。虽然有文班亚马、勒布朗·詹姆斯 (LeBron James) 甚至2026届这样星光熠熠的选秀，但也有像安德里亚·巴格纳尼 (Andrea Bargnani)、安东尼·本内特 (Anthony Bennett) 和格雷格·奥登 (Greg Oden) 这样未能兑现天赋的状元秀。如果一支球队及其球迷在选秀小年拿到了状元签，却因此失去在下一年选秀大年再次拿到高顺位签的机会，这无疑令人沮丧。
像圣安东尼奥那样拿到了状元签和4号签，然后规定球队不能连续三个赛季在前五顺位选人，这是一回事。在新模式下，马刺队在今年夏天就无法在第2顺位选下哈珀。但如果一支球队连续两年拿到5号签，第三年就无法再拿到前五顺位，这完全是另一回事。
对于一个已经能很好实现联盟愿景的系统来说，这感觉像是多此一举。
利：激励附加赛球队继续拼搏
16支球队的乐透区可能会导致一种疯狂的局面：一支球队在5月份看到自己的选秀权跃升为状元签，随后却一路杀入NBA总决赛——就像2023年身为东部八号种子的迈阿密热火队那样。
但通过将7-8名附加赛的负者以及9号和10号种子球队纳入乐透区，更多的球队将有理由继续冲击季后赛。这是对竞技公平性的又一次胜利。
自最初的提案提出以来，一个被提及的问题是，为什么NBA选择将乐透区限制在16支球队。扩大到18支球队可以让每支附加赛球队至少获得一个乒乓球（乐透签概率），并消除球队为了留在乐透区而故意输掉附加赛的可能性。但增加两支球队意味着，那些真正实力不济的烂队选秀顺位可能会进一步下滑。
而且，NBA的目标再次是尽可能消除球队因有理由输球而操纵比赛的任何途径。（一个极端的例子是在选秀第二轮中将前16支球队的选秀顺序倒转，而不是仅仅按战绩排序——这一步感觉有些过头，但也消除了球队输球的另一个潜在动力）。
系统中唯一仍考虑到这一点的地方是，排名第11位的球队拥有3个乒乓球，而排名第10位的球队则降为2个，但即便如此，你也是在给一支球队打进季后赛的机会，同时还能在乐透抽签中获得向上交易的机会，这是平衡风险的一个相当不错的方法。
弊：已交易未来选秀权的价值发生变化
这可能是规则改变带来的最具争议的连锁反应。
因为这与联盟此前在选秀中的运作方式大相径庭，许多已经在2027年、2028年和2029年选秀中被交易的选秀权，现在的估值可能会大不相同。
一个立即受到影响的球队是孟菲斯。因为犹他爵士队去年拥有5号签，今年拥有2号签，他们的选秀权在下个赛季将无法落在前五顺位。这让孟菲斯在仅仅三个半月前通过交易杰伦·杰克逊 (Jaren Jackson Jr.) 获得的资产瞬间贬值。尽管消息人士称，虽然可能性微乎其微，但该系统仍有可能进行修正，以考虑到孟菲斯的这个选秀权，从而让灰熊队有机会获得前五顺位的选秀权。
NBA在半途中做出如此重大的改变是一个奇怪的举动，这在某种形式上几乎会影响到每一支球队。但是，正如肖华在3月份所说，变革显然势在必行，而每当这种改革推进时，总会有球队陷入两难境地。不过，孟菲斯至少可以感到欣慰的是，在任何改变生效之前，他们在今年的选秀中拿到了3号签。
利：阵容构建更具创造力
这是令人兴奋的部分。多年来，联盟的底层球队都陷入了一种固定的思维模式：花上长达四年的时间输掉大量比赛并积累选秀权，然后再尝试重新回到竞争者行列。
而且这种方法确实奏效了。可以说联盟中最好的两支球队——俄克拉荷马雷霆队和圣安东尼奥马刺队——正是这样做的。与此同时，纽约尼克斯队在自由市场上签下了杰伦·布伦森 (Jalen Brunson)，并通过交易得到了首发阵容中的其他四名成员：卡尔-安东尼·唐斯 (Karl-Anthony Towns)、OG·阿奴诺比 (OG Anunoby)、米卡尔·布里奇斯 (Mikal Bridges) 和乔什·哈特 (Josh Hart)。同样，克利夫兰骑士队通过选秀中的前五顺位签选中了埃文·莫布里 (Evan Mobley)（在此之前是达里奥斯·加兰 (Darius Garland)），但随后通过交易得到了多诺万·米切尔 (Donovan Mitchell)、詹姆斯·哈登 (James Harden) 和贾勒特·阿伦 (Jarrett Allen)。
看看联盟的下一批精英球队将如何构建会非常有趣。交易中选秀权的价值会发生变化吗？球队会试图囤积尽可能多的选秀权，还是会因为知道乐透系统的随机性而变得不那么谨慎？
弊：弱队的下限相当低
降低倒数三支球队的乐透概率，已经在确保“最烂的球队实际拿到最差战绩”方面迈出了一大步。最重要的是，NBA现在表示，如果这些球队未能在乐透抽签中被选中，他们最终可能会拿到第10、第11和第12顺位的选秀权。
消息人士称，研究该课题的利益相关者之间就如何划定这些球队的顺位下限展开了激烈的辩论。一些人认为应该更接近第8顺位，而第10顺位感觉恰到好处，可以促使即使是弱队也要保持竞争力。但是，就像状元签和前五顺位的限制一样，这可能也有点过头了。
利：现场直播乐透抽签！
虽然ESPN的布莱恩·温德霍斯特 (Brian Windhorst) 曾撰文披露过那个“秘密”房间，但消息人士透露，乐透抽签本身——而不仅仅是公布结果——预计将成为一场现场直播的电视盛宴。不再有阴谋论。一切都在实时发生。这极具戏剧张力。
新乐透如何进行仍未确定。NBA目前的方法——抽出的第一个乒乓球决定状元签，以此类推——当然是一种可能，尽管这会减少很多戏剧性。作为电视节目，先抽出第16顺位的球队，然后倒退到第1顺位显然更合理。（联盟可以通过使用球队最后抽出的乒乓球，而不是第一个，来确定选秀顺位来实现这一点。）
弊：关于更多变革的讨论已在进行中
3-2-1乐透在很大程度上实现了肖华的任务，但它并不完美。事实上，从该模式创立之初，就伴随着一项“日落条款”。整个流程将在2030年选秀前重新评估。
对NBA生态系统的一个关键组成部分进行彻底改革，却可能在三年后再次推倒重来，这怎么看都不像是“遏制摆烂的长期解决方案”。或许这种模式的改变会延续到2030年之后。或许，正如联盟内部人士数周来所提到的那样，一种新的“选秀积分”系统最终将被引入，该系统将比现有规则更加强调聪明的阵容管理。
但就目前而言，在新乐透系统甚至还未生效之前就为其提供退路，传递了一个错误的信息：更多的改变可能还在后头。
由生成式人工智能翻译，译文内容可能不准确或不完整，以原文为准。
点击查看原文：The pros and cons of the new NBA draft lottery reform
The pros and cons of the new NBA draft lottery reform
Adam Silver made it clear that changes were coming to the NBA draft lottery.
“It seemed unanimous in the room that we needed to make a change and we needed to make a change for next season,” Silver, the NBA’s commissioner since 2014, said at the league’s board of governors meeting in March.
“Incentives need to be fixed. We will fix them.”
The league has landed on a solution. On Thursday, the NBA’s Board of Governors passed new anti-tanking rules – by a 29-1 vote – that expand the draft lottery from 14 to 16 teams, flatten odds even further and create a relegation zone that penalizes the bottom three teams with lessened chances for the No. 1 pick.
The “3-2-1 lottery,” a fairly revolutionary overhaul of the draft system, is designed to immediately curb the league’s annual race to the bottom and incentivize more teams to compete late in the season.
Here’s a rundown of the pros and cons of the new lottery format, and what they could mean for the future of the draft lottery and NBA roster and asset management.
Pro: Fewer egregious tankers
All types of measures have been discussed throughout the league’s generation-long battle with tanking, including radical fixes such as giving the best teams the top picks or even abolishing the draft entirely.
But though there is no perfect system – unlike in many European sports leagues that feature promotion and relegation, losing NBA franchises have no incentive to stay out of the standings basement – this format should blunt the most extreme cases of taking.
This season, the Washington Wizards lost 27 of their final 28 games to ensure the league’s worst record at 17-65. Their two high-profile additions – Trae Young in December and Anthony Davis just before the February trade deadline – played a combined five games as the franchise chased a guaranteed top-five pick.
Similarly, the Memphis Grizzlies finished the regular season 5-28 to sink to sixth worst in the league – much like the Philadelphia 76ers did down the stretch of 2024-25 in an attempt to keep the top-six-protected pick that became Rookie of the Year finalist VJ Edgecombe.
But a 16-lottery team system – one that also prevents protecting picks in the Nos. 12-15 range to guarantee keeping them – removes the vast majority of reasons teams use to justify losing down the stretch. And with teams looking to escape the bottom three instead of joining it, there will now be incentive for bad teams to win. (Though not as much as there could be.)
Con: Pick restrictions for repeat winners
Given this format heavily slants toward random luck, it’s odd to include restrictions that would reduce that: A team cannot win back-to-back lotteries or pick inside the top five for three consecutive drafts.
This is a pretty clear push from the league to prevent situations such as the one that occurred for the San Antonio Spurs over the 2023, 2024 and 2025 drafts – when San Antonio landed the first, fourth and second picks, respectively, and with them selected Victor Wembanyama, Stephon Castle and Dylan Harper.
Though that amount of good fortune will be celebrated in San Antonio, as it has potentially laid the foundation for what could easily become the next NBA dynasty, the league would prefer to spread around talent more, if possible.
The problem: not all drafts are created equal. For every Wembanyama, LeBron James or even the 2026 star-studded class, there are examples like Andrea Bargnani, Anthony Bennett and Greg Oden – No. 1 picks who never lived up to their billing. It shouldn’t be seen as a disappointment for a team, or its fans, to land the first pick in a weak draft and have no chance at doing so the next year in a better one.
It’s also one thing to say a team can’t pick in the top five three consecutive seasons when they land the first and fourth picks, as San Antonio did. Under this new format, the Spurs would not have been in position to draft Harper at No. 2 this past summer. It’s quite another to pick No. 5 two drafts in a row and then not be able to land another the following year.
This feels like an unnecessary step in a system that’s already well designed to deliver on the league’s vision.
Pro: Incentive for play-in teams to keep pushing
A 16-team lottery lends itself to a wild scenario, where a team could make the NBA Finals – such as the eight-seeded Miami Heat did in 2023 – after seeing their own draft pick vault to No. 1 in May.
But by including the loser of the 7-8 play-in game and both 9- and 10-seeds, more teams have reason to keep pushing for the playoffs. Another win for competitiveness.
One question that has come up since the original proposal was put together was why the NBA chose to stop at 16 teams in the lottery. Going to 18 would allow for every play-in team to have at least one ping-pong ball and would remove the possibility of a team losing a play-in game to stay in the lottery. But adding two teams means there is a chance a legitimately bad team could fall in the draft order.
And, again, the goal for the NBA was to eliminate as many ways for teams to manipulate any game by having a reason to lose. (One extreme example of this was inverting the draft order for the top 16 teams in the second round of the draft, rather than just going by record – a step that feels too far but also removes another potential incentive for a team to lose).
The one place in the system that still accounts for this is going from three ping-pong balls for finishing 11th in the standings to two for finishing 10th, but even then you’re giving a team a chance to make the playoffs and a shot of moving up in the lottery, which is a pretty good way to even out the risk.
Con: Changing value of traded future picks
This is probably the most controversial ripple effect of the rule change.
Because this is such a radical departure from how the league has previously done business in the draft, the fact that a lot of picks have already been moved in the 2027, 2028 and 2029 drafts now could have a much different value assigned to them.
A team immediately affected is Memphis. Because the Utah Jazz had the No. 5 pick last year, and the No. 2 pick this year, their pick will be unable to land in the top five next season. That immediately devalues an asset Memphis acquired only 3½ months ago in exchange for Jaren Jackson Jr. Though sources said there was a chance – though remote – the system could be amended to account for that Memphis pick, and thus giving the Grizzlies a chance at a top-five selection.
It’s an odd move for the NBA to make such a significant change midstream, one that would affect just about every team in some form. But, as Silver said in March, it was clear change was going to be coming, and any time a push like this is made, teams will be stuck in between. Memphis, though, can at least take solace in landing the No. 3 pick in this year’s draft before any changes take effect.
Pro: More creativity in team-building
This is the exciting part. For many years, the league’s bottom-dwellers have fallen into a standard way of thinking: spend up to four years losing a ton of games and accumulating picks before trying to flip back into contention.
And it has worked. Arguably the two best teams in the league, the Oklahoma City Thunder and San Antonio Spurs, did just that. The New York Knicks, meanwhile, signed Jalen Brunson as a free agent and traded for the other four members of their starting lineup in Karl-Anthony Towns, OG Anunoby, Mikal Bridges and Josh Hart. Similarly, the Cleveland Cavaliers landed Evan Mobley (and before him, Darius Garland) with top-five picks in the draft but later traded for Donovan Mitchell, James Harden and Jarrett Allen.
It will be interesting to see how the league’s next elite teams are built. Will the value of draft picks in trades change? Will teams try to hoard as many as possible, or be less cautious knowing how random the lottery system has become?
Con: The floor for bad teams is pretty low
Giving the bottom three teams reduced lottery odds already takes a big step toward ensuring the worst teams actually finish with the worst records. On top of that, the NBA is now saying those teams could finish with the 10th, 11th and 12th picks in the draft if they fail to be selected in the lottery before those spots.
There was robust debate among stakeholders studying the topic, sources said, about where to put the line for the floor for these teams. Some argued it should be closer to eighth, whereas 10th feels about right to push even bad teams to be competitive. But, like the No. 1 and top-five pick restrictions, this could be a step too far.
Pro: A live lottery!
While ESPN’s Brian Windhorst wrote about the “secret” room, sources expect the lottery itself – not just airing of the results – to become a live, televised event. No more conspiracy theories. All of it happening in real time. The potential for tremendous theater.
How a new lottery would play out is yet to be determined. The NBA’s current method – the first ping-pong ball selected determines the first pick, and so on – is certainly one possibility, although that would eliminate much of the drama. Picking the 16th team first and going backward to No. 1 makes more sense as a television product. (The league would accomplish this by using a team’s final drawn ping-pong ball, rather than its first, to determine draft position.)
Con: There is already talk of more changes
The 3-2-1 lottery largely accomplishes Silver’s mission, but it’s not perfect. In fact, from the moment it was created, the format has been accompanied by a “sunset” clause. The entire process will be revisited before the 2030 draft.
Overhauling a critical component of the NBA ecosystem, only to potentially do it again in three years, doesn’t exactly scream “long-term solution to curb tanking.” Perhaps the format changes will stick beyond 2030. Perhaps, as league insiders have mentioned for weeks, that a new “draft credits” system will eventually be put into place that will emphasize smart roster management even more than the current rules.
But, for now, providing the new lottery system with an out before it even takes effect sends the wrong message: More changes are probably coming.
By Tim Bontemps, via ESPN