“What the Utah Jazz are doing is messing around with the integrity of the game.”
Bobby Marks took to national television to reiterate the discourse that has been poisoning recent NBA discussion — the Utah Jazz are dismantling the sanctity of competition. They’re shredding the fabric of competition; defiling the tapestry of professional basketball. How are they doing this? By losing basketball games
The Utah Jazz have been at the forefront of NBA debate for the past few months, taking digital body blows from outraged observers and tanking scrutinizers.
Assuming you haven’t kept a tight watch on the bottom of the NBA standings, you’d understandably assume that a team sparking so much controversy would be far and away the ugliest example of their strategy. Surely, considering the growing wave of scrutiny, the Utah Jazz must have the worst record in the league, right?
Nope.
Bottom three?
Wrong again.
Utah sits with a 17-37 record, which is currently sixth-worst in the NBA and 5.5 games ahead of the last-place Kings. So what’s the rub?
I have a theory, but let me warn you that I’m about to get biblical.
On the Day of Atonement, the ancient Israelites would ritualistically place the burden of their nation’s sin upon a goat. This animal’s role removed all guilt of wrongdoing from its community as it carried the nation’s burden into the wilderness. Distancing themselves from all of their shortcomings and wrongdoings
The Utah Jazz are not the villains of the NBA; they’re the scapegoats. The poster boy for the tankathon. They’re the tanking franchise bearing the weight of the basketball world’s sins.
The Utah Jazz are not the villains of the NBA; they’re the scapegoats.
The fans paid for tickets to watch the Utah Jazz, and that is exactly what they got: Lauri Markkanen, Keyonte George, Ace Bailey, and the newly-acquired Jaren Jackson Jr each appeared in this game to Utah’s advantage, pushing the visiting Jazz ahead by as many as 17 points before the game turned to the fourth quarter and those starters reclined on the bench. Fingers laced behind their heads, legs outstretched with ankles crossed, Utah’s stars would not re-enter the game even as the Magic whittled their lead down to single-digits, then one possession, until eventually claiming the lead and victory away from the tanking Jazz.
Coach Will Hardy employed a similar strategy in the next game, pulling his starters in the fourth quarter and watching as the second unit beat Miami outright, thanks in part to a clutch three-pointer courtesy of third-year player and former first-round pick, Brice Sensabaugh.
Will Hardy has every right to employ the lineups of his choice — that’s what it means to be a head coach — and the NBA won’t punish him or the Jazz for the players he opted to play in crunch time. The moment Adam Silver steps in to declare who can and cannot play in the fourth quarter of a basketball game, that is when the integrity of competition will be compromised, not when a subpar team gives playing time to its bench.
Possibly the loudest whistle-blowers regarding Utah’s sins are the Dallas Mavericks. Yes, that’s right, the very same team that traded away Luka Doncic for Anthony Davis in a ‘win-now’ move to push themselves closer to championship contention. That team was rewarded with a shocking jump to the number-one pick and Cooper Flagg. Just one year prior, the Mavs were hit with a $750,000 fine for tanking, the largest such fine in league history.
Yet it’s Dallas, the team with the seventh-worst record, just behind the Utah Jazz, who choose to virtue signal, casting the finger of shame toward the unethical Utah Jazz all across social media. They started the movement, and the NBA community is running with it.
‘Ethical tanking’ is a myth. It’s baffling to suggest that one team’s intentional losing is commendable while another’s is vile. It’s hypocrisy. It’s selective outrage. Yet this perspective has leaked into the mainstream, as evidenced by Mark’s ESPN spot.
‘Ethical tanking’ is a myth.
Where is the outcry toward Washington, a team resting its two All-Star acquisitions, as Davis was announced out for the season, and Young still awaits his debut? Where is the hatred for Sacramento as they sit their core on the way to a league-worst standing? The Indiana Pacers, last year’s NBA Finals runners-up who are clinging to a top-four protected pick, announced that their newest center, Ivica Zubac, won’t be making his debut any time soon.
But the Utah Jazz are ridiculed for running their best players for three quarters and cratering in the fourth? Those outraged at the Jazz’s tanking methods are misguided. Tanking is tanking is tanking. Regardless of execution, plenty more NBA teams are losing deliberately — they just have far less press coverage.
Internet sleuths have their magnifying glass hovering directly over the Jazz; there’s no escaping their dutiful watch now. But the Jazz didn’t invent tanking, nor are they the only one of the NBA’s 30 teams to employ tanking strategies this season or any of the last decade-plus since Philadelphia installed “The Process”.
The system is flawed, and smart teams (especially those who historically struggle to lure in top free agents) are taking advantage. Don’t hate the player, hate the game, because the Utah Jazz are just one cog in the tanking machine.
So what can we do about tanking?
Seemingly, everyone has an idea about how to solve tanking in the NBA. Ideas span from flattening draft odds, employing lottery bans for teams that received a top pick, and even eliminating the lottery altogether, opting for a 30-team rotation that shifts one spot every season.
I won’t pretend to know the solution for the NBA’s tanking problem — and yes, it is a problem that teams don’t want to win — but I’d suggest that all proposals are taken to Occam’s Razor. In other words, the best solution is often the simplest solution. I don’t subscribe to the idea that small-market teams should be barred from building through the draft in subsequent years. A one-and-done type of draft would be both complicated and unusual.
Basketball is a simple game at its core; complication isn’t the cure for its shortcomings.
Flattening the odds accomplished its original purpose: being detrimental to the worst records in the league and minimizing the reward for hunting that bottom spot in the standings. Since flattening lottery odds, the number-one odds have never been actualized into the number one pick.
Few understand this better than Utah (a franchise that has never had the pleasure of drafting first overall), which finished with the top lottery odds and a 52.1% chance of landing in the top four before sliding to five and picking up Rutgers’ Ace Bailey with their pick. Bailey is the symbol of Utah’s punishment for playing the game the ‘right way’ in 2025. He’s evidence that being the very worst guarantees nothing in the draft lottery, and the physical manifestation of his team’s shortcomings.
The idea behind dissuading tanking was sound, but more teams than ever are still hunting lottery odds. Utah is no exception, nor are they a red stain on the flawless reputation of the NBA. There are at least seven Utah Jazz equivalents in 2025-26, and it’s time we stop singling out the Jazz for their part in the movement.
Calvin Barrett is a writer, editor, and prolific Mario Kart racer located in Tokyo, Japan. He has covered the NBA and College Sports since 2024.
Visit 
