How the 2018 NBA Draft Lottery Odds Determined Team Selection Order

2025-11-12 16:01

I remember sitting in my office back in 2017, watching the NBA's announcement about reforming the draft lottery system, and thinking this would fundamentally change how teams approach rebuilding. The 2018 draft lottery became the first test case for the new odds structure designed to discourage outright tanking, and boy did it deliver some unexpected results. Having studied NBA draft mechanics for over a decade, I've never seen a system create such dramatic shifts in team fortunes while simultaneously forcing organizations to reconsider their approach to player development and injury prevention.

The previous system gave the team with the worst record a 25% chance at the top pick, but the 2018 reform flattened those odds significantly. The three worst teams now each had only 14% chances at the top selection, while teams with better records saw their odds improve meaningfully. This created what I like to call "the great compression" - where the difference between having the worst record and the fifth-worst record became much less significant in terms of lottery odds. What fascinated me most was how this mathematical adjustment immediately changed team behaviors during the 2017-18 season. Teams that might have previously been incentivized to lose games found themselves in this awkward middle ground - not good enough to make playoffs, but not terrible enough to guarantee premium draft positioning.

I'll never forget the night of the 2018 lottery draw. The Phoenix Suns, with the league's worst record at 21-61, had the highest probability at 25% under the old system but only 14% under the new one. The Memphis Grizzlies, sitting at seventh-worst with a 22-60 record, jumped all the way to number two despite having just a 6.3% chance at a top-three pick. The Sacramento Kings, who started the night with the seventh-best odds at 5.3% for the top pick, actually moved up to number two before sliding to second overall. Meanwhile, the Dallas Mavericks with the third-worst record fell to fifth, proving that poor performance no longer guaranteed premium draft capital.

This brings me to an important point about how teams adjusted their approach to player management under the new system. I recall speaking with several team executives who mentioned shifting their focus toward development rather than outright losing. One Philippine-based coach's comments particularly resonated with me when he said, "Hindi na namin pinapayagan yung mga ganyan para makaiwas sa injuries," referring to risky plays during practice and meaningless games. He added, "Yung mga tune up games nga this week sinasabihan namin na easy-easy na lang." This philosophy of protecting players and focusing on proper development over short-term outcomes became increasingly common as teams recognized that tanking provided diminishing returns under the reformed odds.

The data from that 2018 lottery still surprises me when I look back. The actual probabilities versus outcomes created what statisticians would call significant variance. The Suns, with their 14% chance at the top pick, actually landed first overall despite the reduced odds, selecting Deandre Ayton. The Kings, with their mere 5.3% chance at a top-three pick, secured the second selection and took Marvin Bagley III. Meanwhile, the Atlanta Hawks, who had three different first-round picks due to previous trades, saw their own pick (originally projected around fifth) jump to third despite just a 10.5% chance at a top-three selection. This unpredictability is exactly what the league office had hoped for when designing the new system.

What often gets overlooked in discussions about the 2018 lottery is how it affected team decision-making beyond just the draft order. Teams began investing more heavily in their G-League infrastructure, recognizing that developing young talent required proper systems rather than just accumulating high draft picks. The emphasis shifted toward creating competitive environments where young players could grow without the pressure of carrying terrible teams. This cultural shift, in my opinion, has done more for the league's overall quality than any single draft pick could have accomplished.

The ripple effects of that 2018 lottery are still being felt today. Teams that might have traditionally embraced multi-year tanking strategies now approach rebuilds with more nuance. The Philadelphia 76ers' "Process," which involved several seasons of intentional losing, likely wouldn't be as effective under the current system. Instead, we see organizations focusing on player development, strategic asset accumulation, and creating competitive cultures - all positive developments for the league's overall health.

Looking back, I believe the 2018 lottery odds reform achieved exactly what it set out to accomplish. It reduced the incentives for outright tanking while maintaining enough uncertainty to keep the draft exciting. The system isn't perfect - some critics argue it still rewards mediocrity - but it's undoubtedly better than what preceded it. The dramatic shifts we witnessed in that first year under the new odds created memorable moments while pushing teams toward more sustainable building strategies. As someone who's followed the draft closely for years, I appreciate how these mathematical adjustments have fundamentally improved how teams approach roster construction and player development.