How Lottery Reform Could Impact the Boston Celtics' Ability To Do Business

Changes seem to be coming, and it looks like Brad Stevens and his front office will have another set of challenges to navigate as they try to remake the roster around Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown

May 25, 2021; Brooklyn, New York, USA; Boston Celtics head coach Brad Stevens coaches his team against the Brooklyn Nets during the first quarter of game two of the first round of the 2021 NBA Playoffs at Barclays Center. Mandatory Credit: Brad Penner-Imagn Images | Brad Penner-Imagn Images

NBA lottery reform seems to be inevitable. In the NBA’s eyes, the tanking was too blatant at the bottom of the league this past season, even if it was because of a draft that many see as franchise changing for at least the top four teams. 

To get to the top, you must race to the bottom. 

The league has apparently decided that it is not willing to wait and see if a lesser draft changes the losing habits of its worst teams. The tanking crossed a line that was unacceptable, and now the league feels the need to make a change. 

Enter the “3-2-1” system, which is widely expected to replace the current lottery system. Here are the basics: 

► 16 teams will enter the lottery, up from 14. That means the bottom two play-in teams are eligible for the lottery. 
► Odds will be flattened, so the fourth-through-10th-worst teams would have equal, 8.1% chances at winning the lottery. 
►The three worst teams would also be punished for being bad, with the goal of creating competitive games at the bottom to avoid reduced odds. The three worst teams would have 5.4% odds of winning, the same as the 11th-14th-worst teams. The 15th and 16th-worst teams, the play-in losers, would get 2.7% chances of winning. 
► Teams would not be able to protect first-round picks in the 12-15 slots. 

The last note is the most important for the Boston Celtics because that will impact how their business is done. Pick protections have become a common piece of trades. They make it more palatable for some teams to include picks in deals for useful players because they understand that they have a safety net if things go awry.

The Celtics are squarely in first-round pick-trading territory, whether it be to give or receive. They have a $27.7 million traded player exception that could bring in a very good player with no requirement for players in return, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have to give up anything. A player in that range can be a game-changer for a team like the Celtics, who have two established superstars. 

But he could also be a bust. He could be a Myles Turner-type who fits great in one situation, but struggles in another. He would certainly require a first-round pick, but what if certain protections aren’t allowed, how willing would Boston be to give that up?

In a recent piece in The Athletic, some NBA executives predicted “that it would make most first-rounders more valuable because the flatter odds would make each pick more likely to land high in the lottery. That could create more friction in the transaction market, when trades are already harder to do because of the first apron and where free agency has petered out in recent years. Teams could be reticent to trade firsts, even if they project the team that owns it would have a record outside one of the league’s 10 worst.”

This comes at a time where NIL is keeping some of the lesser-talented players in college for longer, which is draining talent from the bottom of the first and top of the second rounds. On top of that, the CBA’s second-round exception is putting some upward pressure on the salaries of players taken in the 30-40 range, since it’s commonly accepted that players selected between 20-40 are fairly equal talent-wise. 

The net effect is teams selecting in that range are being tied to guaranteed salary for talent that isn’t as good as it used to be. That's not as appealing as picks at the top of the second round used to be. If teams are now less likely to include first rounders above that area, especially because the protections aren’t there, how will some of these trades get done? 

Will they not get done at all? Will it lead to more young talent being included in deals rather than picks? 

It’s hard to say right now. But with executives already musing about trades being more difficult, it feels likely that lottery reform will impact Boston’s ability to make moves somehow. The kicker, as if you needed one, is that a three-year expiration date will apparently be built into the new system, which means it might only exist during the three most important years remaining in the Jayson Tatum/Jaylen Brown era. 

Brad Stevens and his front office have been tested with the new CBA and recent changes in the league, and now it seems they have another challenge to navigate.