Here’s a shocking truth: the NBA’s battle against tanking—teams intentionally losing for long-term gain—is failing, and it’s worse than ever. But here’s where it gets controversial: even fans are rooting for their teams to lose, believing it’s the fastest path to success. NBA Commissioner Adam Silver admitted as much this weekend, stating bluntly, ‘What we’re doing right now is not working.’ So, what’s the real issue, and why is it so hard to fix?
This week, the Utah Jazz were fined a staggering $500,000 for benching star players in back-to-back games—a move widely seen as tanking. Yet, Jazz owner Ryan Smith fired back sarcastically, ‘We won the game in Miami and got fined? That makes sense.’ This highlights the deeper problem: the NBA’s draft system rewards failure, giving the worst teams first dibs on top young talent. With the 2026 draft class hyped as one of the best in years, the stakes are higher than ever.
And this is the part most people miss: Silver himself questioned whether the worst-performing teams are truly the most deserving of top picks. ‘Is the 30th-ranked team really that much worse than the 22nd?’ he asked. It’s a conundrum that exposes the misaligned incentives driving tanking. Modern analytics have made it clear: losing now can mean winning later. Even fans are buying into this logic, creating a culture where tanking feels almost acceptable.
The NBA has tried to combat this by introducing a weighted draft lottery, but it’s not enough. Silver admits the league needs ‘fresh thinking’ to tackle this 80-year-old problem. Some, like talk show host Colin Cowherd, suggest Silver take a page from his predecessor David Stern’s playbook: ‘People feared David Stern.’ But is fear the answer, or is there a better way?
Here’s the real question: Is tanking an inevitable part of the NBA’s structure, or can the league redesign its system to reward competitiveness without sacrificing long-term success? What do you think? Is Silver right to call for radical change, or is tanking just a necessary evil in the pursuit of parity? Let’s debate this in the comments—because if there’s one thing clear, it’s that the status quo isn’t cutting it.
