When Tanking Is Worth It

Talk of the Celtics or Hawks tanking for the top pick is kind of ridiculous. After all, in the last twelve lotteries, the first overall pick has only twice gone to the team with the worst record. That doesn't mean, though, that teams don't sometimes have an incentive to lose down the stretch.

Today in The New York Sun, stat deity John Hollinger breaks down all the little reasons to tank. It's a long, involved story, and you probably shouldn't read it standing up. The main point, though, is that it's hard to jockey for the jackpot. But conditions placed on traded draft picks, or unfavorable playoff match-ups, could be dealt with by intentionally losing.

The most obvious example of this, which the FanHouse has touched on several times already, is the Hawks' pick this year. Unless it's in the top three, it goes to the Suns. So If Atlanta were to end up with the league's worst record, there's a pretty good chance that they would end up keeping their pick. As Hollinger puts is:

The Atlanta Hawks are another team with great incentive to lose. Unlike other lottery hopefuls that are merely hoping to end up with a top-three pick instead of, say, no. 5, for the Hawks tanking could mean the difference between a top-three pick and none at all.

Wow, what could the Hawks possibly do to bring on the losses? Suspending their best healthy player is a good start. See, that franchise isn't so stupid after all.