The Tank Thread

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

We got to the conference finals once in 50 years, and we got brutally swept, so did our method “work”?

Yes.  It absolutely did work.  Danny Ferry rebuilt a team without bottoming out.  Atlanta dropped to 38 wins in 2013-14 and won 60 in 2014-15.  That was definitely a championship caliber team.  

[AtlKauzie]

11 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Yes.  It absolutely did work.  Danny Ferry rebuilt a team without bottoming out.  Atlanta dropped to 38 wins in 2013-14 and won 60 in 2014-15.  That was definitely a championship caliber team.  

Obviously not considering we got swept by lebron without kyrie or love.

[KB21]

7 minutes ago, AtlKauzie said:

Obviously not considering we got swept by lebron without kyrie or love.

The Hawks were also without Korver and Carroll.

[CBAreject]

Let’s ignore for the sake of arguments that the arguable best player on that team was our own #3 pick.  

But if some team tanked and went to the ECF once in 50 years, would you call that a success?  Of course not.  You use two diametrically opposite standards to judge the two models.  Tanking only works if you get a championship contender within 5 years.  Not tanking works if you get a championship contender twice a century.  

If Philly or Minnesota goes to the ECF next year, will it prove you wrong?  Does OKC going to the NBA finals with their own top-5 picks prove you wrong?  What would it take to falsify your hypothesis that “tanking doesn’t work”?

[KB21]

1 minute ago, CBAreject said:

Let’s ignore for the sake of arguments that the arguable best player on that team was our own #3 pick.  

But if some team tanked and went to the ECF once in 50 years, would you call that a success?  Of course not.  You use two diametrically opposite standards to judge the two models.  Tanking only works if you get a championship contender within 5 years.  Not tanking works if you get a championship contender twice a century.  

If Philly or Minnesota goes to the ECF next year, will it prove you wrong?  Does OKC going to the NBA finals with their own top-5 picks prove you wrong?  What would it take to falsify your hypothesis that “tanking doesn’t work”?

First, you are the one inferring anything about one ECF in 50 years.  Not me.  That ECF was built when Danny Ferry decided to get out from under Joe Johnson's contract and instead of tanking, he signed Paul Millsap and DeMarre Carroll, traded for Kyle Korver, and signed Thabo Sefolosha, signed Pero Antic...etc..  So, Danny Ferry did what you would call a middle build, and he built a championship contender.  The Hawks made the ECF within one year of their down season, which was 38 wins.  

When someone builds a championship level team after going scorched earth within 5 years of their down season, and it is repeatable, then you can talk to me about tanking actually works.  Until then, I will not be convinced.   I'm not willing to spend the next 5 plus years losing in the name of tanking.

[CBAreject]

13 minutes ago, KB21 said:

So, Danny Ferry did what you would call a middle build, and he built a championship contender.  The Hawks made the ECF within one year of their down season, which was 38 wins.  

 

Will you consider the times that “middle builds” didn’t work, or will you use one example and assume it is repeatable at will?  

Will you consider that a team with Horford and Teague in their primes was in a different position than a team with an aging Millsap and Howard as its best players?

What would you have suggested?  Sticking with a Howard-Millsap core and adding a Harrison Barnes or reupping THJ?  Would that have made us a contender?

[davis171]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

Give them 3 years?  After they have already taken 5 years to get to this point?  That's my entire point.  Tanking doesn't work if it still takes you 8-10 years to get to where you want to be.  

Better than the 10+ you JUST spent being completely mediocre. I would much rather be where they are now than where we were in 2016 because in the end everyone knew that the hawks weren't actually winning anything. I think the 76ers decided no one is beating Lebron in his prime while in the east especially an aging 76ers team so why not stockpile assets for when he is out of his prime.

[davis171]

27 minutes ago, KB21 said:

First, you are the one inferring anything about one ECF in 50 years.  Not me.  That ECF was built when Danny Ferry decided to get out from under Joe Johnson's contract and instead of tanking, he signed Paul Millsap and DeMarre Carroll, traded for Kyle Korver, and signed Thabo Sefolosha, signed Pero Antic...etc..  So, Danny Ferry did what you would call a middle build, and he built a championship contender.  The Hawks made the ECF within one year of their down season, which was 38 wins.  

When someone builds a championship level team after going scorched earth within 5 years of their down season, and it is repeatable, then you can talk to me about tanking actually works.  Until then, I will not be convinced.   I'm not willing to spend the next 5 plus years losing in the name of tanking.

100% believe that no one on earth thought the 2016 season was able to be replicated otherwise everyone would do it. You think you know something every GM in the NBA does not know?

[davis171]

54 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The Hawks were also without Korver and Carroll.

Okay maybe we win a game MAYBE yippee AND the Cavs were without a healthy Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving. Who are 100x the player each of Korver and Carroll combined

Edited February 25, 2018 by davis171

[KB21]

2 hours ago, davis171 said:

100% believe that no one on earth thought the 2016 season was able to be replicated otherwise everyone would do it. You think you know something every GM in the NBA does not know?

Well, I know that tanking doesn't work.

[KB21]

2 hours ago, davis171 said:

Better than the 10+ you JUST spent being completely mediocre. I would much rather be where they are now than where we were in 2016 because in the end everyone knew that the hawks weren't actually winning anything. I think the 76ers decided no one is beating Lebron in his prime while in the east especially an aging 76ers team so why not stockpile assets for when he is out of his prime.

In what fantasy land has the 76ers last 5 years been better than the Hawks last 10?

[Lurker]

Once again, there is only one thing to criticize here, and to get down to the nitty gritty of it, it's the failure to look for an actual GM after the Danny Ferry situation in 14/15.

Travis Schlenk has nothing to do with this, Mike Budenholzer on the administrative side with Wes Wilcox, sadly has a lot to do with it. He and Wilcox were not ready and hurt the organization as a pairing.

[Lurker]

14/15 was a combination of the us against the world mentality with the Ferry situation with the year 2 jump you almost always see with coaches that produced that season. It was a good team, but **60 win** status was not going to be sustained, or ever returned to.

[thescout]

I would much rather tank and perhaps hopefully get lucky during the draft as opposed to what we had before a team whose max potential was to get to the semifinals and get creamed. This was the year where the new run and gun Warrior type offense became the new league norm and the Hawks were at the forefront of that movement. Funny thing happened the league adjusted and the Hawks became less dominant. Even winning did not draw top free agents to Atlanta. Teams must have at least one superstar if not more to have a realistic chance of winning it all and being competitive to win championships .The Hawks had maxed out, were not going to get any superstar free agents thus remain in the middle of the pack for what 15 yrs or how ever many. Tanking doesn't asure any team of building a championship team however for clubs like Sacramento ,Phoenix,Dallas,Atlanta it might be their one shot of getting a possible super star and as we see its a huge race for the worst record from many of these teams.

 

All having the most ping pong balls do is allows you to get the player you want if drafting 1st. Its up to the GM to evaluate the talent correctly and make the right pick no matter where you draft. I'd rather have first shot than 4th or 5th getting the player you want than missing out on him. Who knows who will exactly be a superstar (Bridges,JJJ,Ayton) but you have to hope you make the right pick. 

[KB21]

7 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Once again, there is only one thing to criticize here, and to get down to the nitty gritty of it, it's the failure to look for an actual GM after the Danny Ferry situation in 14/15.

Travis Schlenk has nothing to do with this, Mike Budenholzer on the administrative side with Wes Wilcox, sadly has a lot to do with it. He and Wilcox were not ready and hurt the organization as a pairing.

Travis Schlenk is the guy that bottomed this roster out, not Mike Budenholzer.

[KB21]

It's truly a shame that the media has glorified the tanking strategy to the point that it has brainwashed a fan base into thinking this is a strategy the team should employ.  Like I have said before, the ONLY thing tanking guarantees is 3-5 years of losing.

[Lurker]

Your opinion. The BudCox regimen made a lot of mistakes that cornered the team into really just two choices. Keep everyone and slowly get worse and worse just like we all saw with Dallas, or bottom out. I'm honestly not sure 17/18 is a playoff team if everyone stays. I think at best it's a team that just misses, and it continues a pattern of steadily getting worse and worse, just like the Mavs.

There was no option C and that is part of the fault of Mike Budenholzer, the guy you adore. There was no option with every player that was feasible in which everyone played the "right way" and was teaching young players to play the "right way", and you could slowly bleed into the future. Because there was no planning into it. There is only 1 team that does that well, and it's the San Antonio Spurs.

It's obvious that Bud did not learn from it.

[Lurker]

I've just been emotionally traumatized so much by both pro and college sports, it's very hard to give two rips about a team that plays hard, plays the right way, and doesn't accept losing. 

[CBAreject]

57 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Once again, there is only one thing to criticize here, and to get down to the nitty gritty of it, it's the failure to look for an actual GM after the Danny Ferry situation in 14/15.

Travis Schlenk has nothing to do with this, Mike Budenholzer on the administrative side with Wes Wilcox, sadly has a lot to do with it. He and Wilcox were not ready and hurt the organization as a pairing.

Yes because Wilcox was not hired for his skill at being a GM but for his vapid SJW sentiments.  The great irony is that the team ended up punishing him for making a virtue signaling comment about his wife and family that was misinterpreted.  Management totally deserves what they got when they fired the best GM we ever lucked into.  The fans, though...we didn’t deserve this crap.  

Edited February 26, 2018 by CBAreject

[KB21]

6 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

Yes because Wilcox was not hired for his skill at being a GM but for his vapid SJW sentiments.  The great irony is that the team ended up punishing him for making a virtue signaling comment about his wife and family that was misinterpreted.  Management totally deserves what they got when they fired the best GM we ever lucked into.  The fans, though...we didn’t deserve this crap.  

Something we will agree on.  Danny Ferry should not have been fired.  In fact, we should have corrected that wrong and hired him back instead of Travis Schlenk this past off season.  Instead, we have a numb skull who is in over his head.