Joshyjosh31
Starter
How much attitude can he have his NIL is reportedly between 1.3 - 3 million this year he could’ve simply sat out and still went top 3 but decided to play hurt
Race to the Bottom thread
- Thread starter iowamcnabb
- Start date
How much attitude can he have his NIL is reportedly between 1.3 - 3 million this year he could’ve simply sat out and still went top 3 but decided to play hurt
Folsomkingsfan
Starter
Everyone knew this was going to happen. What is going on right now is the least shocking outcome possible if you've followed this team for a while.
Joshyjosh31
Starter
Pelicans tanking an important game for there pick front office playing 3D chess
The tank is so blatant this year that the Kings are 3-7 in their last ten, and NO team that is out of the playoffs is better than that.
Section 101
All-Star
Tie breaker should be best record in last 10!
HndsmCelt
Hall of Famer
From your lips to silver’s ears
Krunker
Northernmost Kings Fan
I would be okay with that, random pick for 3, 4, and 5! It seems like there is a good chance, Jazz won't win anymore games and probably neither will we (better chance we beat GSW or PDX though). Nets should beat Indy and lose the rest.
Caccia
Starter
What happens then? Capt. Factorial says that a two-way tie results in a coin toss, but three?
coolhandluke
Starter
"Tied lottery teams split their ping pong balls evenly, and any odd remainder and the better draft order position are given to the random drawing winner" as per Tankathon
Caccia
Starter
Thanks, coolhandluke.
sono
Starter
The bottom 6 teams should split the ping pong evenly, no matter their position.
QWERTYLICIOUS
Starter
Absolutely not.
Joshyjosh31
Starter
https://twitter(.)com/UnderdogNBA/status/2041963605445505171
Why have 6 teams tank when you can get 16 teams to tank pure comedy..
Why have 6 teams tank when you can get 16 teams to tank pure comedy..
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah that doesn't solve tanking. Just solves teams not needing to tank as hard.
Last edited by a moderator:
Insomniacal Fan
Starter
Hey, late season games are valuable gambling income. The integrity of meaningless games allows the NBA's partners to squeeze every last drop out of sports gambling addicts.
What it does is it makes it much harder for bad teams to get good players. If they implement this, the Kings had better hit the lottery this year, because as a small market franchise we're bound to be lovable losers, doing our absolute best to finish .300 and then picking 16th anyway while teams that lose in the playoffs get lucky and nab superstars.
It's (almost) amazing to me that the league simply can't see that a lottery system does not and cannot simultaneously solve the tanking problem and the get-bad-teams-better-picks problem, it can only solve one at the expense of the other. But they don't have the imagination to scrap it and start over with a system designed to solve both problems.
Telemachus
Starter
Here's my solution to stop tanking.
1. Give team a warning
2. Fine team (pick an amount)
3. They are no longer eligible to pick in the top 4 (or whatever that number changes to after expansion).
1. Give team a warning
2. Fine team (pick an amount)
3. They are no longer eligible to pick in the top 4 (or whatever that number changes to after expansion).
Section 101
All-Star
Best option is teams cant win the lottery 2 years in a row with their own draft pick. There would have to be some rule about lotto teams not trading picks to cirmcumvent.
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
this is happening because last Junes NBA Finals participant now has a opportunity to get first overall oh and can't forget Ainge's sit every starter approach
coolhandluke
Starter
This.
There is no perfect, foolproof system. Any system, no matter how fair, can be gamed.
If Adam Silver really cared about the integrity of the game and wanted to prevent tanking, he should enforce punishment that is punitive. The cost to the business should make it not worth to tank. All anti-tanking measures should be announced to the teams ahead of the season.
My proposal would be (in terms of escalation):
1. Give team a warning
2. Fine team (minimum of $2M) and this cost will count towards the salary cap for the season
3. Move the pick to the bottom of the lottery
4. Pick would be forfeited
gunks
Hall of Famer
Prior to this BS I would have accepted us dropping as bad luck and hoped for the best with whoever we end up with.
Now if we end up at 7 or whatever I'm probably going full tin foil hat crash out and will never watch the NBA again (which might not be a bad idea considering the product, both franchise and league level).
BuddyBuckets
Bench
Just read that the Warriors are now locked into the 10th seed. Add in the Kings supposedly getting investigated for that foul. I'm positive Kings are beating the Warriors next game to lock in 5th place
Mike
Bench
Would these be implemented in one go or in escalation (ie it takes three tanking seasons to get every punishment)?
I think most teams wouldn’t care about the first two punishments if the managed to land at least one star player as a result of tanking. Both are tantamount to a slap on the wrist and arguably worth taking to acquire franchise changing talents.
In someways the league almost has to go harder to prevent tanking. For example, if proven, then the team forfeits their next first round draft pick. That way it prevents them tanking two years straight. I guess they could always skip a year and tank again the following one, but that could then get a greater punishment. For example, if proven, then a team forfeits their next two first round draft picks (and if necessary, fined a portion of their salary cap).
Perhaps a page could be taken out of other sports leagues in the form of having a transfer ban if a team is found guilty of tanking? For example, teams can’t go out into FA or make trades for one window, and can only make additions after the transfer ban is lifted.
Ultimately it comes down to having the will to stop teams from tanking. I’m not convinced any of the existing measures will make a big difference, and may end up hurting some of the smaller market teams.
Telemachus
Starter
No, this would all be in the same season. When a team is seen blatantly making moves to lose a game, they get a warning. The next time, a fine. Then losing the ability to pick at the top.
KingsFanSince85
All-Star
KINGS being investigated for a foul in a competitive game? While having won 7 of 16 games over the past month (since March 8th)??
You got a go back 2 months to total 7 wins for Brooklyn. You gotta go back nearly 3 months to total 7 wins for Utah, Indiana, and Washington.
But, yeah, let’s investigate the franchise that’s actually been winning games the past month and even playing vets heavy minutes from time to time in order to do so. The team that went from having the worst record in the league to leap frogging 3 teams over the span of a week or two.
The NBA is a JOKE.
R2D2
Bench
My twopence re enhancing the draft system:
Key assumptions:
1. The key objective of the draft is to balance competitiveness while supplying teams with new talent in a controlled and strategic manner.
2. No system is foolproof; every system can be manipulated. That said, it should be designed so that it is as difficult and as undesirable as possible to rig.
Proposal:
Replace the current lottery-based system with a multi-year performance ranking, whereby draft order is determined by cumulative team records over the previous four seasons, with randomisation used only to break ties.
Key advantages:
1. Eliminates perceived unfairness and “Lottery Luck”
2. Reduces incentives for short-term tanking (especially for perceived 'strong' draft vintages)
3. Better supports chronically underperforming teams
4. Aligns incentives with long-term team building
5. Improves development outcomes for rookies (top talent join teams with clear rebuilding timelines and alignment between rookie contract windows and team development cycles)
6. Enhances fan engagement and league integrity
Weaknesses:
1. A team stuck in a multi-year slump could continue to get top picks indefinitely
2. Harder for mid-tier teams to break into elite talent
3. Remove chance, which fans can find exciting
Simulation:
The results of the 2025 draft (top 8 picks) versus how they would have appeared under the proposed approach (exclusive of trades):
Pick Actual Team Proposed Team Total W over the previous 4 years
1 Dallas Detroit 98
2 SA Washington 103
3 Philly Charlotte 110
4 Charlotte SA 112
5 Utah Portland 117
6 Washington Utah 134
7 New Orleans Houston 135
8 Nets Toronto/Orlando 144
Projected top 8 picks (2026)
1 Washington
2 Charlotte
3 Utah
4 Nets
5 Portland
6 Detroit
7 New Orleans
8 SA
Kings perspective:
Over those four seasons, the Kings’ cumulative record is 164‑164 (.500), which would have netted them the 16th pick in the 2025 draft.
As we know, last year the current draft system landed them with the no. 13 overall pick, which was conveyed to Atlanta.
If the Kings win 22 games this season their cumulative four-year record would drop to 156-172 (still outside a top 10 pick, likely around #14).
Other considerations:
1. Is a four-year period optimal?
Whilst it might be slightly slower in responsiveness to genuinely improving teams, it smooths out anomalies (injuries, one-off rebuild years) and more accurately captures true organisational strength/weakness compared to a shorter period (e.g., two or three years). It also better addresses tanking incentives.
2. The NBA draft could use weighted cumulative losses: e.g., 50% from current season, 50% from past three years. This hybrid approach balances rewarding consistent underperformers while keeping the lottery chance alive for borderline teams, but increases the risk of following a short-term tanking strategy. It may also account quicker for instances of drafting generational talents with immidiate impact.
Source: annual records downloaded from TNT Sports (https://www.tntsports.co.uk/basketball/nba/2024-2025/standings.shtml). I used AI tools to calculate accumulated data, so please point to any errors you identify.
Key assumptions:
1. The key objective of the draft is to balance competitiveness while supplying teams with new talent in a controlled and strategic manner.
2. No system is foolproof; every system can be manipulated. That said, it should be designed so that it is as difficult and as undesirable as possible to rig.
Proposal:
Replace the current lottery-based system with a multi-year performance ranking, whereby draft order is determined by cumulative team records over the previous four seasons, with randomisation used only to break ties.
Key advantages:
1. Eliminates perceived unfairness and “Lottery Luck”
2. Reduces incentives for short-term tanking (especially for perceived 'strong' draft vintages)
3. Better supports chronically underperforming teams
4. Aligns incentives with long-term team building
5. Improves development outcomes for rookies (top talent join teams with clear rebuilding timelines and alignment between rookie contract windows and team development cycles)
6. Enhances fan engagement and league integrity
Weaknesses:
1. A team stuck in a multi-year slump could continue to get top picks indefinitely
2. Harder for mid-tier teams to break into elite talent
3. Remove chance, which fans can find exciting
Simulation:
The results of the 2025 draft (top 8 picks) versus how they would have appeared under the proposed approach (exclusive of trades):
Pick Actual Team Proposed Team Total W over the previous 4 years
1 Dallas Detroit 98
2 SA Washington 103
3 Philly Charlotte 110
4 Charlotte SA 112
5 Utah Portland 117
6 Washington Utah 134
7 New Orleans Houston 135
8 Nets Toronto/Orlando 144
Projected top 8 picks (2026)
1 Washington
2 Charlotte
3 Utah
4 Nets
5 Portland
6 Detroit
7 New Orleans
8 SA
Kings perspective:
Over those four seasons, the Kings’ cumulative record is 164‑164 (.500), which would have netted them the 16th pick in the 2025 draft.
As we know, last year the current draft system landed them with the no. 13 overall pick, which was conveyed to Atlanta.
If the Kings win 22 games this season their cumulative four-year record would drop to 156-172 (still outside a top 10 pick, likely around #14).
Other considerations:
1. Is a four-year period optimal?
Whilst it might be slightly slower in responsiveness to genuinely improving teams, it smooths out anomalies (injuries, one-off rebuild years) and more accurately captures true organisational strength/weakness compared to a shorter period (e.g., two or three years). It also better addresses tanking incentives.
2. The NBA draft could use weighted cumulative losses: e.g., 50% from current season, 50% from past three years. This hybrid approach balances rewarding consistent underperformers while keeping the lottery chance alive for borderline teams, but increases the risk of following a short-term tanking strategy. It may also account quicker for instances of drafting generational talents with immidiate impact.
Source: annual records downloaded from TNT Sports (https://www.tntsports.co.uk/basketball/nba/2024-2025/standings.shtml). I used AI tools to calculate accumulated data, so please point to any errors you identify.
