The NBA’s push to curb tanking shifted from theory to urgency Thursday, a change that feels especially relevant for the Nets.
Commissioner Adam Silver informed the league’s 30 general managers that the NBA intends to implement anti-tanking rule changes as soon as next season, according to ESPN’s Shams Charania. The message wasn’t subtle. Silver was described as forceful in stressing the need to safeguard competitive integrity, with league executives continuing a series of conversations that began months ago and have only intensified.
Back in December, the league began floating ideas during Board of Governors discussions, gathering input from owners and general managers on how to eliminate incentives tied to losing. The focus wasn’t on rebuilding itself, but on the gray area that emerges late in the year when draft positioning, protected picks and lineup decisions intersect in ways that can blur competitive intent.
Thursday’s update reflected that same direction, but with sharper edges. Multiple concepts were discussed, including limiting first-round pick protections to only top-four or outside-the-lottery selections, freezing lottery odds at the trade deadline or another late-season checkpoint and preventing teams from drafting in the top four in consecutive years or after consecutive bottom-three finishes. Other proposals included allocating lottery odds based on two-year records, extending the lottery pool to include play-in teams and flattening odds across the board.
The throughline is simple. The league wants fewer incentives to manipulate results once draft math starts to outweigh on-court priorities.
Silver’s comments during All-Star weekend underscored the urgency, calling tanking “worse this year than we’ve seen in recent memory” and noting that every possible remedy was under consideration. That sentiment has extended beyond the league office. Phoenix Suns owner Mat Ishbia publicly called the issue “much worse than any prop bet scandal,” while the NBA recently fined the Utah Jazz $500,000 and the Indiana Pacers $100,000 for sitting healthy players, reinforcing that moves perceived to compromise integrity won’t be tolerated.
For Brooklyn, the conversation lands differently than it might for some of its peers.
The Nets are rebuilding, but their approach hasn’t leaned on shutdowns or strategic losses. Healthy veterans have played, for the most part. Young players have earned opportunities through performance. Losses have largely come as a byproduct of growth rather than a calculated slide down the standings. That matters in a league trying to protect teams that compete while still developing. Stricter anti-tanking rules could, in many ways, reward that approach.
If late-season results become less tied to draft odds, teams have less reason to manage availability for positioning purposes. A lottery freeze at the deadline, for example, would disconnect April outcomes from draft placement entirely, allowing rebuilding teams to prioritize development without worrying about harming long-term assets. Limiting pick protections or preventing consecutive top-four selections would similarly remove the incentive to hover in the middle ground between competing and quietly preserving draft value.
For a Nets roster built around young guards gaining real-game reps and a coaching staff emphasizing effort, pressure and accountability, that shift would align with habits already in place. The organization’s rebuild has centered on evaluation through competition, not avoidance of it, and a league-wide move toward discouraging manipulation would make that philosophy less of an outlier.
None of the proposals discussed Thursday have been finalized, and Silver made clear that dialogue will continue through the coming months. But the direction feels unmistakable. The league is searching for structural ways to separate rebuilding from tanking, to remove incentives that distort late-season basketball and to restore clarity around player availability.
The Nets have spent this season learning, losing and competing in equal measure, navigating the difficult space between development and results without abandoning effort. If the league succeeds in shrinking the reward for losing on purpose, teams operating in that space may find themselves better positioned than ever.
And in a season defined by growth more than wins, that may be the point.
