Houston Astros, guys.
They had a MLB salary level a fraction of many other teams. They lost 111 games. I would have no problem with a HBD GM losing 111 games, w/o going to the FA market if they approached it like the 'stros. They decided that this was going to be their year to roll their young players out there day after day...and let them develop.
But they did it at the MLB level and not at the AAA level. They didn't stash talent in OKC and wait, they rolled their best guys (all young) out in Houston, on a daily basis. Heck, they only had two players at the AAA level play more than 91 games. One was in his 4th full AAA season and the other isn't very good. I admire what they did. They kept payroll down, but played their very best players, all young guys, in the majors.
Do that, and you're not tanking.
I still think the HBD draft is majorly messed up....it's too predictable. Players shouldn't grow on such a predictable schedule. The IFA market is messed up, too. Too many great players come around each and every year. The incentive for many GMs is to stash the max in that line item and wait. The IFA solution would be to have no projections on them, until they are signed. Your Int. budget would just locate IFA's, but not give you much/anything in terms of projected growth.
I think I would also make a team forfeit their 1st two Draft picks if they haven't manually established their own top 64 ratings. What kind of team lets the computer choose their top two picks? Teams cherish those.
Leagues should institute an anti-tanking draft policy where you lose your top pick if 66% (or 60%...or 50%...pick the appropriate %) of the league's owners agree that tanking has taken place.
De-incentivise the predictability of the IFA market. Makes GM's invest time in the draft (and make it a pit less predictable). Deny draft picks to tankers and gamers.
There you go.