The Incentive to Lose: Can Tanking Be Fixed?

The National Basketball Association (NBA) is facing a systemic challenge regarding the integrity of its games as teams increasingly engage in tanking—the practice of losing games on purpose to secure higher positions in the draft. This phenomenon has reached a point where nearly one-third of the league is reportedly tanking to position themselves for a historically loaded draft class.

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver acknowledged the issue during All-Star weekend, stating that the incentives for winning games and securing the best incoming players are misaligned. The league’s current structure creates a business incentive for teams to not try to win, or to actively attempt to lose, once a season is deemed lost.

The Mechanics of Tanking

The incentive to tank is driven by the high value of elite talent. Because only five players are on the court at once, a single special player can fundamentally change a team’s trajectory. Historical examples include the San Antonio Spurs acquiring Victor Wembanyama, the Minnesota Timberwolves acquiring Anthony Edwards, and the Detroit Pistons acquiring Cade Cunningham through this process.

While more prevalent in the NBA, the trend also exists in the NFL. In the final weeks of the 2025 season, the Raiders appeared to facilitate a path toward the No. 1 overall pick by shutting down their top two players, tight end Brock Bowers and defensive end Maxx Crosby. While this strategy secured the top pick, reports suggest the team may have lost Crosby as a result.

Proposed Solutions and Structural Changes

Various analysts and former league figures have proposed radical shifts to the NBA’s structure to eliminate the incentive to lose. These proposals focus on decoupling draft order from win-loss records.

Former coach Stan Van Gundy has proposed the complete abolition of the draft. Under this system, every player entering the league would be a free agent. Teams would still operate under a salary cap, but they would compete for incoming talent via contracts rather than draft picks.

Critics of this approach argue that removing the draft would create a different imbalance by favoring teams in more desirable big markets, who would have a natural advantage in attracting free-agent rookies.

Other proposed alternatives include:

• A Pure Lottery: Converting the draft order into a complete lottery where every team has an equal chance, regardless of their record, to remove any incentive to tank.
• Promotion and Relegation: Implementing a system of promotion and relegation to change the incentives for teams at the bottom of the standings.
• Enhanced Incentives: Increasing the rewards for success to outweigh the potential benefits of a high draft pick.

The Impact on Game Integrity

The rise of legalized gambling has added urgency to the league’s need to align incentives. To ensure the full integrity of the games, the league must ensure every team is trying its best to win every single game.

Any effort to tie draft order to performance, or lack thereof, will incentivize a business decision to not try to win, or to actively try to lose.

Mike Florio, Yahoo Sports

The current climate has left the NBA at what some analysts describe as an existential crossroads. While the league is seeing an abundance of talent and a competitive postseason, the ethical grounding of the game is questioned by the actions of teams at the bottom of the standings.