Adam Silver Has Had Enough And Announced That Significant Changes Are Being Considered To Limit Tanking In The NBA
Ethan Miller. Getty Images.Given everything that's happened in the NBA around several gambling accusations and investigations, Adam Silver and the league office have announced that they've decided to make some adjustments to their betting policies
which given everything that's happened over the last few years, felt inevitable.
However, that is not the purpose of this blog. After Shams got through explaining those changes, he also dropped a pretty interesting nugget when it comes to the tanking issue in the NBA
Ah yes, tanking. Remember when the NBA flattened the Lottery odds and that was supposed to "fix" tanking? Or how the Play In was maybe supposed to help prevent it? Let's just take a quick look at how that's going
Giphy Images.
Advertisement
It's pretty obvious that all their recent ideas haven't changed dick when it comes to tanking. As long as being bad could ultimately change your franchise forever, teams will "tank". Sometimes it's not their fault like how the Pacers lost their entire roster to injury, but other times it's clearly deliberate, even with the flattened odds. While the last few Lottery's haven't exactly rewarded those who tank that hardest, the overall premise is still very much alive and well.
Now if you're one of those teams in the graphic above, you sure as shit are hoping none of these changes go into effect ahead of the 2026 Draft, considering that's supposed to be an absolutely loaded class. Especially if you're OKC. Has anyone seen the Clippers lately? That pick is going to be top 3.
So what exactly is the solve? Who the hell knows. Maybe giving every Lottery team the same odds and not just flattening the top 4? I can't imagine they'll scrap the Lottery altogether, so maybe that's the best option? Teams are always going to lose if they're on the fringe of the Lottery so they can get into the ping pong ball dance, but if there's no difference in odds from the 14th spot to the 1st pick, maybe we won't see as "aggressive" a tank job to get as close as you can to the top.
What if you invert the Lottery? What if the highest odds are actually at the 14th pick, and the worse you are, the worse your odds get? Admittedly, I am very much NOT a math guy so I don't even know if that makes sense (shoutout ASU) but I'm just spitballing here.
Some sort of "tournament of suck" would be fun, and now that we've seen the IST be successful and possible, maybe you figure out a way to have that happen towards the end of the year? That sounds like a scheduling nightmare, so I'm not sure how feasible that might be.
I do wonder if there could maybe be a rule where if you get the #1 pick, then you're out of the running for a handful of the following seasons, regardless of how shitty you are. I think Bill Simmons had an idea like that, and I don't hate it. Maybe you have it where you can only finish in the top 3 once every 5 years or something.
The idea of adjusting pick protections intrigues me, but that feels hard to do after the fact. What if you already made a trade for a certain pick with certain protections, but now those don't count? Teams have traded picks years into the future already, so how would that even work?
As you can see, there are definitely more questions than answers, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see. It's a tough blow for teams who have spent years tanking and setting their current team up for future years of tanking, but oh well. I'm sure the league will adjust around whatever new changes ultimately happen because when generational prospects are on the line who could change the entire trajectory of a franchise, front offices will find a way to lose as long as losing helps you in some way shape or form.