 Tanking, the term used to describe an individual or team who shamelessly surrenders in hopes of long-term gain. It's no secret that this unsportsmanlike conduct runs rampant throughout professional sports. However, the NBA prevents this calculated sabotage through their draft lottery system. Despite the protections in place, there are multiple franchises every season who have incentive to lose. The question is, should they? There's two schools of thought. First, tanking is good. The worst record in the league means the worst pick you can have is fifth. A top five pick means a legitimate chance at landing the next big superstar. The second, tanking is bad. It enables and expedites a culture of losing, which perpetuates for years to come. This year's test subject is the Oklahoma City Thunder, a team which liquidated its roster of stars, stacked draft assets to the moon, and publicly advertised its rebuilding intentions. But little did they know, the rebuilders were armed and dangerous. Led by rising star Shay Gilgis Alexander and his legion of dorts, rovies, pokus, and maledons, this roster refuses to stop showing promise. For the Thunder to properly tank and finish with the worst record in the league, they're going to have to bench these guys. But what cost? Is stunting their growth worth at best a 14% chance of landing the number one pick? In OKC's case, some would say yes. Yes, because many superstar free agents don't want to live in Oklahoma City if the team is not a championship contender. The cities they choose are LA, NYC, and Miami, for reasons which Oklahoma can never compete with. It's a harsh hypothesis, but true nevertheless. Because of this precedent, the only chance small markets have is to build through the draft. But at some point, this whole process of stunting growth to tank reaches diminishing returns. If you tank too much and don't let the draft picks develop properly, you become the Steve Mills era Knicks. If you don't tank, you become the Hornets, stuck in a relevant 9th place purgatory for eternity. There is a balance in the force. The Warriors and Nets were ravaged by bad trades, bad contracts, bad management, for years. They liked the Suns this season. They rose from the ashes like a phoenix, building championship contenders through young player development, which later served as bait to attract the big-name superstars. Should fans cheer after Lou Dort drills the game-winning three at the buzzer? Or cringe knowing it may have just cost them 10 years of Cade Cunningham? It's an impossible situation. All of those draft picks Sam Presti has stockpiled have no value if he just uses them to keep tanking. At some point, like Sam Hinckley's 76ers, you have to say enough is enough and fix bayonets with the soldiers you have in preparation for the charge. But if history suggests a proper course of action, franchises who leave their fate in the hands of ping-pong balls don't lose the battle. It's those who create their own luck win the war.