The Tank Thread

[Peoriabird]

16 minutes ago, KB21 said:

No, because you are now unattractive to that undervalued vet.  When we signed Paul and DeMarre, we were a 40 plus win team.  No vet is going to willingly come to a sub 20 win team.

Yep...In 2004-05 the Hawks won 13 games.  They signed Joe Johnson that off season.  Myth busters strike again!! LOL!

[Peoriabird]

3 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

He was a sign-and-trade to a 13-win team, but basically yes.  Interestingly, the Joe Johnson acquisition was one that the anti-tank camp applauded.  It got us into the playoffs a lot faster, but it committed us to a decade of mediocrity.

He was signed as a restricted free agent...Phoenix did not want to match so they agreed to a sign and trade

[CBAreject]

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22573750/how-nba-bottom-dwellers-putting-tanking-clinic-nba

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/22573750/how-nba-bottom-dwellers-putting-tanking-clinic-nba

Like I said, we have the media glorifying the strategy and a bunch of fans who are buying into the idea that accepting losing is OK.

[CBAreject]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

Like I said, we have the media glorifying the strategy and a bunch of fans who are buying into the idea that accepting losing is OK.

I’m not sure they’re glorifying it.  They’re calling attention to the brazenness of it.  This will probably lead to even more aggressive rule changes.  

The NBA is a joke for more reasons than just tanking.  Superstars play by different in-game rules, and the new cap structure has fostered the creation of super teams.  This creates a bottom heavy league that is unwatchable.  

In the 06/07 season, we won 30 games.  We had the 4th worst record and drafted 3rd (Horford).  Only 2 teams had fewer than 25 wins that year.  This year, there will be 8 such teams. 

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

I’m not sure they’re glorifying it.  They’re calling attention to the brazenness of it.  This will probably lead to even more aggressive rule changes.  

The NBA is a joke for more reasons than just tanking.  Superstars play by different in-game rules, and the new cap structure has fostered the creation of super teams.  This creates a bottom heavy league that is unwatchable.  

In the 06/07 season, we won 30 games.  We had the 4th worst record and drafted 3rd (Horford).  Only 2 teams had fewer than 25 wins that year.  This year, there will be 8 such teams. 

The league's owners will never go for an all out ban on tanking, because tanking represents at least a short term profit for them.  It's not a surprise that the Hawks decided to tank when their revenue went up due to TV deals and sponsorships.  Tanking gives the owners a short term period of time where they can control the costs of the roster while they make a profit, and in Ressler's case, that profit will likely go towards funding "The Gulch" that he is wanting to develop.  At some point though, that profit will start to wane, and Ressler will be pushing to put a competitive team on the floor again.

[deester11]

10 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Like I said, we have the media glorifying the strategy and a bunch of fans who are buying into the idea that accepting losing is OK.

You claim fans are accepting losing but I see people wanting to go deeper in the playoffs and not stick with a team that won enough to be in the playoffs but no realistic chance of competing for a title.  I don't know that tanking is worth it, but I do know it would have been beyond dumb to keep Sap and Dwight and be mediocre anyway.

In any case, moan as you may, we're in it.  I'd rather see what Travis can do after cleaning up the BudCox stench. 

[KB21]

45 minutes ago, deester11 said:

You claim fans are accepting losing but I see people wanting to go deeper in the playoffs and not stick with a team that won enough to be in the playoffs but no realistic chance of competing for a title.  I don't know that tanking is worth it, but I do know it would have been beyond dumb to keep Sap and Dwight and be mediocre anyway.

In any case, moan as you may, we're in it.  I'd rather see what Travis can do after cleaning up the BudCox stench. 

Whose going to come in and clean up Travis's tanking stench?

What sense does it make to say you want to go deeper in the playoffs but support tanking and being at the bottom of the NBA standings?  How do you go deeper in the playoffs when you are the worst team in the league?

[deester11]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Whose going to come in and clean up Travis's tanking stench?

What sense does it make to say you want to go deeper in the playoffs but support tanking and being at the bottom of the NBA standings?  How do you go deeper in the playoffs when you are the worst team in the league?

Travis of the "less than one year on the job?"

And for you, I'll spell it out...one and done in the playoffs may spell success  for you, but not me.  Oh...happy day. Get swept  or win a game or two in the playoffs  with overpaid, aging players.  That's success to you? We have no star, no chance of one signing in Atlanta and you think we should have kept our eye on the grand notion of successfully saying we made the playoffs.  That's comical.

It's torn down.  The team now....ugh.  But I've been a fan a long  time and I'd rather build for long term success and have a chance at a championship than to wear a"success" cap of failed first round exits.  And before you say tanking is no guarantee, 20 years of terrible...yada, yada...how many championships do the Hawk's have in the last 20 years....?

[KB21]

1 hour ago, Peoriabird said:

And by the way, do you think that next year's team will win fewer games than this year's team.  We currently have 18 wins with 22 games to go to be a sub 20 win team

Yes.  Next year's team will be worse than this year's team.

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, deester11 said:

Travis of the "less than one year on the job?"

And for you, I'll spell it out...one and done in the playoffs may spell success  for you, but not me.  Oh...happy day. Get swept  or win a game or two in the playoffs  with overpaid, aging players.  That's success to you? We have no star, no chance of one signing in Atlanta and you think we should have kept our eye on the grand notion of successfully saying we made the playoffs.  That's comical.

It's torn down.  The team now....ugh.  But I've been a fan a long  time and I'd rather build for long term success and have a chance at a championship than to wear a"success" cap of failed first round exits.  And before you say tanking is no guarantee, 20 years of terrible...yada, yada...how many championships do the Hawk's have in the last 20 years....?

How many championships does any team have over the past 20 years?  Only 9 different teams have won the championship in the past 20 years.  

I guess success to you is winning the draft lottery and having absolutely no hope of ever competing for a championship.

 

Edited February 26, 2018 by KB21

[Sothron]

I can tell by the amount of ignored users post that someone has decided to haunt the boards again. Whee.

[KB21]

2 hours ago, CBAreject said:

Where did I say how long it would take us to get good again?  For the record, I expect to be in the lottery for at least four years.   I’m ok with that.  If we whiff on this year’s pick, it adds at least one more year.  Multiple whiffs and this thing gets really ugly.  I’m still ok with the gamble after decades of being a first-round fluffer for actual contenders.  

So you openly admit that you support a strategy that doesn't work?  Because if the Hawks are in the lottery for 4 years, the strategy has not worked.

[Watchman]

1 hour ago, deester11 said:

You claim fans are accepting losing but I see people wanting to go deeper in the playoffs and not stick with a team that won enough to be in the playoffs but no realistic chance of competing for a title.  I don't know that tanking is worth it, but I do know it would have been beyond dumb to keep Sap and Dwight and be mediocre anyway.

In any case, moan as you may, we're in it.  I'd rather see what Travis can do after cleaning up the BudCox stench. 

Why do you assume that our only options were keep Sap and Dwight or blow it all up?  Besides, we all know we do not retain our own free agents, so sooner or later, our "superstar" draft picks will leave at their earliest opportunity.

[KB21]

1 minute ago, Watchman said:

Why do you assume that our only options were keep Sap and Dwight or blow it all up?  Besides, we all know we do not retain our own free agents, so sooner or later, our "superstar" draft picks will leave at their earliest opportunity.

Yes.  The "Superstar" draft pick will get tired of the losing and want to go to a team that can win.

[davis171]

@KB21 we get it you know something everyone else doesn't congrats but unless you give me a strategy they could lead us to contending in the next 10 years for a championship I'm going to continue to support rebuilding because their wasn't much the hawks could do but rebuild.

Edited February 26, 2018 by davis171

[CBAreject]

14 minutes ago, KB21 said:

So you openly admit that you support a strategy that doesn't work?  Because if the Hawks are in the lottery for 4 years, the strategy has not worked.

You’re being obtuse and argumentative.  We obviously have different definitions of “work”.  You create an impossibly high standard of success for tanking (championship contender within 2 years) and a laughably low standard for success for other strategies (first round playoff exits in perpetuity) and use them as your “proofs” that your favored strategy succeeds more frequently.  

Edited February 26, 2018 by CBAreject

[deester11]

8 minutes ago, Watchman said:

Why do you assume that our only options were keep Sap and Dwight or blow it all up?  Besides, we all know we do not retain our own free agents, so sooner or later, our "superstar" draft picks will leave at their earliest opportunity.

and why do you assume thought those were the only options?

 

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Yes.  The "Superstar" draft pick will get tired of the losing and want to go to a team that can win.

Here's a novel thought. Offer up something other than the we're going to lose  schtick.  Or buy the team and help us out of the pit of despair.  Funny thing is, you're half reading posts.  I've not said I want the highest draft pick, or we can tank our way to the top.  I didn't want to keep doing the same nonsense....so yeah, I'm supporting my team and expect better however it may come.

[deester11]

2 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

You’re being obtuse and argumentative.  We obviously have different definitions of “work”.  You create an impossibly high standard of success for tanking (championship contender within 2 years) and a laughably low standard for success for other strategies (first round playoff exits in perpetuity) and use them as your “proofs” that your favored strategy succeeds. 

Yes. And yes.

[DBac]

15 minutes ago, Watchman said:

Why do you assume that our only options were keep Sap and Dwight or blow it all up?  Besides, we all know we do not retain our own free agents, so sooner or later, our "superstar" draft picks will leave at their earliest opportunity.

9 years down the road.