Well, why don't you just get an opinion instead of standing on the fence on this one?
I do think the league did something about it this year. I think the league forced the firing of Hinkie. They simply are not going to tolerate blatant tanking. If you do it as a GM as a matter of philosophy, you are going to lose your job. You at least have to make it look like you are trying to field a decent team.
Yeah, I know, but I keep hearing it and seriously, I worry about it gaining steam this way. I still remember watching something like this unfold in college basketball when Dick Vitale complained about the alternating possession rule. He said it often enough that it picked up support and the NCAA changed it to award the defensive effort (like Dick wanted). It turned out to be one of the worst rules changes ever and they quickly turned it back the next season but for one year, it was a real joke.
I could see the same thing happening with this rule change if it gains enough grass roots support. Organizations like Phoenix would suffer but the LA's of the league have so much power, we'd probably never get it changed back unlike the NCAA rule.
As for Hinkie, I think the league stepped in for all the reasons other than tanking. Had he maintained decent relationships with the rest of the league (agents etc.) he'd probably still be there. But Hinkie was not fired. He took his ball and went home. He was insulted so he quit, quite self righteously too, with his million page manifesto to the board (okay, it was only 7,000 words). But you should read that letter, it might change your mind on whether he was forced out.
In his letter he basically admits his shortcomings with the way he interacted with his peers, media and agents because he was afraid that other teams would copy his tanking methods if they knew how successful he was being. The guy's a loon IMO, a genius, but a loon.