Overview of Tiers for the 10 Tanking Teams | Real Ones
This episode of Real Ones (The Ringer) organizes the NBA’s 10 most clearly non-playoff teams into three “optimist” tiers — Joy, Hope, and Sorrow — and debates which losing franchises still have real reason to believe for the near future. Hosts Logan Murdoch, Howard Beck and Raja Bell each made lists and then argued their cases, trading takes on roster outlooks, front-office competence, draft capital, and development risk. The show closes with listener mailbag questions about dark‑horse playoff teams, a Hawks development concern, and whether the Knicks are true Eastern contenders.
Episode structure and definitions
- Tier of Joy: teams that are bad now but the panelists feel genuinely good about for the near future (star(s) in place, coach/front office stability, or obvious path back).
- Tier of Hope: teams with real positives but meaningful doubts (injury risk, aging stars, unclear roster construction).
- Tier of Sorrow: teams the panel thinks are likely to struggle for several seasons (bad ownership, costly aging contracts, thin or wasted assets).
Tier of Joy — who made the “we actually feel good” list
Consensus/majority picks:
- Indiana Pacers
- Why Joy: Tyrese Haliburton expected to return to form, Pascal Siakam is a proven star they added, plus solid coaching (Rick Carlisle) and draft/pick assets; immediate bounce-back looks realistic.
- Utah Jazz
- Why Joy (with caveats): panelists like Utah’s combination of returning veterans and promising young pieces. Primary concern: whether the culture/habits of a losing season are easily flipped when healthy and expected to win.
Contested Joy entries:
- Dallas Mavericks
- Pro-joy case: Cooper Flagg (prospect/young talent) and Kyrie Irving’s scoring upside, plus pieces that could pair well with Luka/Dallas infrastructure — reason to be optimistic that they can improve quickly.
- Skeptical view: still a developmental team with question marks around health and fit; placed by some in Hope instead of Joy.
- Brooklyn Nets (only on one host’s Joy list)
- Pro case: huge market, lots of draft capital and cap flexibility — the “blank canvas” argument.
- Counterpoint: no clear star and weak recent draft returns make the outcome uncertain.
Tier of Hope — “glimmer of sunshine, but doubts remain”
Teams named by hosts in this middle tier included variants of:
- Dallas Mavericks (on some lists here)
- Washington Wizards
- Why Hope: trades to add veterans/established scorers give a shot in the short term, but injuries and age (and fit with younger players) create uncertainty.
- Chicago Bulls
- Why Hope: cap space and draft assets give them flexibility to reset; ownership and front-office history reduce confidence.
- Milwaukee Bucks
- Why Hope (controversial): expectation that Giannis Antetokounmpo will be moved and the Bucks will receive assets and a top‑10 pick; hope depends entirely on how the rebuild/trade goes.
- Memphis Grizzlies
- Why Hope: young players with upside, smart front office and a war chest of picks after a reset — but Ja Morant’s situation (on-court and off-court issues) clouds the outlook.
- New Orleans Pelicans (on some panels’ Hope lists)
- Why Hope: when healthy, Zion Williamson still has superstar-level scoring; team has several useful complementary players — but health, asset management and ownership priorities are major worries.
Notes:
- Many teams landed near the line between Hope and Sorrow. Panels emphasized the difference between having “pieces and picks” vs. having a trustworthy star + structure.
Tier of Sorrow — teams the panel thinks are stuck for a while
Common picks and reasons:
- Sacramento Kings (unanimous sorrow)
- Why Sorrow: toxic ownership perception (Vivek Ranadivé), repeated poor decision-making, aging expensive roster, and a sense that the organization routinely self-sabotages rebuilds.
- New Orleans Pelicans (on some hosts’ sorrow lists)
- Why Sorrow: health uncertainty around Zion, poor asset management (loss of draft pick assets), and a franchise culture that doesn’t prioritize basketball development according to the panel.
- Brooklyn Nets (placed here by some hosts)
- Why Sorrow: lack of a clear star, recent poor draft outcomes (multiple first-round misses), and an uncertain roster identity despite market advantages.
- Chicago Bulls (placed here by some hosts)
- Why Sorrow: ownership/front office skepticism, history of short-sighted moves and overpaying/paying on faith for picks that haven’t become foundational stars.
- Memphis Grizzlies / Milwaukee Bucks (on some hosts’ sorrow lists depending on scenario)
- Why Sorrow (Memphis): Ja Morant’s tradeability and friction with staff, market limitations, and development concerns.
- Why Sorrow (Bucks): trading or losing Giannis is effectively the end of the current competitive window; outcomes depend entirely on the return package and the front office’s next moves.
Mailbag highlights (selected listener Q&A)
- Dark‑horse playoff teams
- Panel pick that scares them from lower seeding: LA Clippers — after a dreadful start they have posted an excellent record in the longer recent stretch; Kawhi Leonard’s two-way ceiling and the Clippers’ turnaround make them a dangerous matchup if they sneak into the play‑in.
- Other mentions: Charlotte Hornets and the Phoenix Suns (health permitting) are potential trouble for opponents; Philly could also slide into a better seed if they click late.
- Hawks development question (listener about a young player and Quin Snyder)
- Answer summary: coaches often see defensive, effort, or fit issues that fans don’t; the Hawks have already given significant minutes to the youngster in question, and the team may prioritize winning now over long-term developmental reps.
- Knicks as Eastern contenders
- Panel view: Knicks deserve more respect; they can make a deep East run if health and role clarity line up. But there isn’t a clear-cut Eastern favorite — the conference looks like a dogfight, and the Knicks’ frontcourt continuity/fit (and whether recent acquisitions can consistently perform) remain open questions.
Notable insights & recurring themes
- Availability > talent: many conversations circled back to the idea that top players are only as good as the minutes they can play — injury-prone stars limit realistic optimism.
- Organizational competence matters as much as talent: franchises with smart, stable front offices (even with less star power) earned more benefit of the doubt than teams with questionable ownership or streaks of poor decision-making.
- Draft capital is valuable but not a guarantee: multiple hosts pointed out that having picks and cap space is a platform, but turning that into a viable playoff team still requires hits in drafts/trades and coaching stability.
- Role friction is real after quick rebuilds: teams that tank or heavily retool can create awkward role change moments for young breakouts when veterans return — handling that transition is a non-trivial challenge.
Quick takeaways & predictions
- Safest bounce-back pick: Indiana Pacers (most hosts) — established star pairing + coach = immediate upside.
- Most likely “sleeper playoff team” from this group: Utah or Dallas (depending on health and fit).
- Most hopeless on the shortlist: Sacramento Kings (panel consensus) — ownership/front-office dysfunction weighs heavily.
- Wild cards to watch: how the Giannis situation unfolds in Milwaukee, Ja Morant’s tradeability/impact in Memphis, and Brooklyn’s ability to convert picks/market into a star or cohesive roster.
Teams to watch next offseason
- Brooklyn: will they convert draft capital into a bona fide star/buildable core?
- Milwaukee: the Giannis trade/rebuild direction will define their future window.
- Memphis: whether they move Ja Morant and how they leverage picks will determine their timeline.
- Sacramento/New Orleans: both are organizational stories — decisions by ownership/front office will dictate recovery (or continued sorrow).
If you want a one-sentence summary: the panel spread optimism unevenly — a few teams (Indiana, Utah, maybe Dallas) have credible short-term rebound cases, several teams are middling bets with real question marks (Washington, Bulls, Grizzlies, Pelicans), and a handful (Sacramento, parts of Brooklyn) look stuck unless major changes occur.