I'm glad I didn't waste my time a couple of months back putting together a LONG post regarding how "tanking" does NOT INCREASE your chances or odds at winning a title. There are WAY too many things involved and way too many things have to fall into place to actually win a title after tanking. While there's no guarantee of better odds of winning a title by continuing to be competitive and win and make the playoffs, as the Rockets have chosen to do, it's a helluva lot more fun for the fans to endure. I don't understand all the talk recently about changing the draft and teams being bad to get better. READ THIS ARTICLE and make sure you UNDERSTAND THE ODDS OF GETTING the top pick, much less a true franchise changing player - even if you have the WORST RECORD IN THE LEAGUE. If the current system doesn't deter tanking, nothing will. In the NFL, the team with the worst record gets the first pick in next year's draft, period. In the NBA, you are far from guaranteed the first pick if you finish with the worst record. How many years did it take for Dallas to win a title with their "franchise player"? How many people on this board would have run Dirk out of here 1,000times, and called for "trading him and rebuilding" as they failed year after year to win a title. http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/40055/does-tanking-even-work http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/39546/the-oklahoma-city-unicorns No one will ever convince me the odds of winning a title are better by "tanking". It's hard, period. No matter which way a team goes. Personally, I'm proud that my team chooses to do it by continuing to stay relevant and competitive during the process.