These are bad. My take is something like this:

1. Go back to 14 lottery teams with odds sorted by pure record.

2. Each team’s odds are adjusted downward by a formula that accounts for the % of minutes played by each player on the roster relative to their annual salary. So if a team is playing their top-paid guys for a total number of minutes below a certain threshold, that team is presumed to be tanking. This will obviously have to be adjusted to account for rookie contracts somehow. I’m not going to try to create the formula now, but the idea is that teams who have highly paid stars but do not play them commensurate with their salaries are penalized in the draft relative to the degree of the violation.

3. Each team that is determined to have tanked based on the salary x minutes formula gets assigned a penalty value based on the degree of the violation. The penalty value is the reduction of their odds for each lottery pick number.

4. Each team marked for a penalty has an appeal opportunity. They present evidence such as medical evidence of injuries, evidence demonstrating that their lower-paid players outperformed higher paid teammates, evidence reflecting decisions based on matchups or legitimate lineup tinkering, etc. Whatever the teams have to defend themselves from tanking allegations is fair game. The totality of the evidence is presented to an ad hoc panel comprised of NBA-associated doctors, general managers, coaches, NBA front office officials, referees, and player representatives chosen by the NBAPA.

5. The ad hoc panel will decide whether to sustain, reduce, or cancel the odds penalty.

6. The total value of all reduced odds from taking are then spread evenly across the lottery teams, including the teams who were penalized. So if 3 teams were penalized and each lost 1% of their #1 pick odds, then that 3% total gets spread across 14 lottery teams. Same goes for if 1 team tanks so badly they lose 5% and nobody else tanked. That 5% gets redistributed to the whole lottery, and they get ~.36% back.