The Tanking Epidemic: Silver's Empty Promise?
Adam Silver stood there Wednesday, sounding like a man who just discovered water is wet. "Fundamental changes to the league's draft system are coming," he declared, all to fix the "tanking problem." Here's the thing: everyone in basketball, from the guy selling popcorn at the arena to LeBron James, knows teams deliberately lose for better draft picks. This isn't breaking news; it's been the NBA's dirty little secret for decades.
Think back to the Philadelphia 76ers' "Process" under Sam Hinkie. They spent three seasons actively trying to lose, winning just 10 games in 2015-16. That netted them Joel Embiid and Ben Simmons – a pretty good haul if you ask me. Or the Oklahoma City Thunder, who sat Al Horford and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander for stretches in 2020-21, finishing 21-51, then landed Josh Giddey with the sixth pick. The incentivization is clear: lose now, win later. Silver's acknowledgment is fine, but his proposed "fundamental changes" feel like a band-aid on a gushing wound.
The Lottery's Flawed Fix
The league already tried to curb tanking in 2019, flattening the lottery odds. Before that, the worst team had a 25% chance at the No. 1 pick. Now, the three worst teams each get a 14% shot. That's a decent reduction, but it still means finishing dead last gives you the best odds, tied with two other teams. It didn't stop the Rockets from going 17-55 in 2020-21 or the Pistons from winning just 17 games in 2022-23. The incentive is still there to be *bad*, even if not *worst*.
Look, no one wants to see a franchise like the Orlando Magic struggle for years, consistently drafting high and still not quite getting there. They've had top-10 picks in 11 of the last 15 drafts, including Paolo Banchero at No. 1 in 2022, and still haven't won a playoff series since 2010. But teams aren't tanking to be Orlando. They're tanking to be the Spurs, who after Tim Duncan's retirement, found themselves with a 22-60 record in 2022-23, then landed Victor Wembanyama. That's the dream. That's why teams will keep doing it, no matter what Silver tweaks.
Silver's Real Problem
Silver talks about competitive integrity, and that's fair. Nobody wants to pay good money to watch a G-League roster trot out for 48 minutes in March. But the real issue isn't just the lottery; it's the sheer power of a single superstar in the NBA. One generational talent can transform a franchise. Michael Jordan in Chicago, LeBron in Cleveland, Steph Curry in Golden State. If you don't have that guy, you're usually not winning a title. And the easiest, most cost-effective way to get that guy is through the draft.
Until Silver figures out a way to dilute the impact of one player, or perhaps reward sustained mediocrity with a better shot at a pick (which would be a terrible idea, by the way), teams will always chase the top talent. My hot take? Whatever "fundamental changes" Silver rolls out, they'll be cosmetic at best. Teams will find new, creative ways to lose just enough to stay in the lottery hunt. The NBA loves its star power too much to truly break the system that creates it.
The real solution is simple, but radical: a weighted lottery based on *multiple* seasons, not just one. Make it harder for a team to just crash and burn for a single year and get rewarded. But I don't see that happening.
I predict that by 2027, at least two teams will still finish with fewer than 20 wins, actively prioritizing draft position over on-court success.