The NBA cleared Doug Christie of tanking accusations after the Sacramento Kings lost 110-105 to the Golden State Warriors on Tuesday night, ending a brief investigation into a late intentional foul on Seth Curry.
Christie directed Kings guard Doug McDermott to foul Curry with 3:15 left, sending him to the line for two free throws. Sacramento had three timeouts left at the time, and Christie said he ordered the foul to preserve one before the game clock dipped below the three-minute mark and to set up a play on the next possession. The Warriors won anyway, and the league later said Christie made no intentional effort to give Golden State a shooting foul or to help Sacramento lose.
The moment mattered because the Kings were already in the bonus when Christie chose to foul. They were also trying to avoid a label that had followed them for months. Sacramento had gone 9-13 since Feb. 21, when it was 12-46 and held a three-game lead over Indiana for the league’s worst record. But the recent stretch also included a comeback from 13 points down with 1:38 left in the third quarter against the Warriors, a 17-2 run that put the Kings ahead 97-95 with 9:40 remaining.
That comeback is part of why the tanking charge never fit cleanly. Christie had said after a win over Utah on March 15 that tanking was the last thing he would do, and a Kings official said earlier, “If we wanted to tank, we’re doing an awful job of it.” On Tuesday, Golden State had already sent Steph Curry and Draymond Green to the bench after the third quarter, then had to bring them back at the 5:53 mark after Sacramento went in front. A play designed for McDermott led to a corner 3-pointer and a three-point Kings lead with 2:53 left, before the Warriors closed the game from there.
The NBA has been trying to curb tanking concerns, and it has fined the Utah Jazz and Indiana Pacers in recent months. For Sacramento, the ruling closes one more episode in a season that has made the Kings look more competitive than the standings once suggested. For Christie, it leaves the same basic answer intact: he says he was protecting possessions, not games.
What remains is the league’s larger problem. Teams know the line between strategy and suspicion can be thin, especially in late-season games, and officials will keep watching the same decisions that invite the question in the first place.
