The Tank Thread

[KB21]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidberri/2017/12/03/bad-incentives-are-why-the-phoenix-suns-keep-riding-the-lottery-treadmill/#bf0516c17054

Quote

The basic theory behind this idea is that teams that lose more get to select players in the NBA lottery. And lottery picks — because they are selected first in the draft — are typically better players. Therefore, tanking leads to better players, and more wins in the future.

Unfortunately for fans of the Suns, the issue isn’t whether Phoenix should start with this strategy. The problem is that the Suns have been essentially following this strategy and the losing hasn’t stopped. And one reason is that the incentives facing lottery picks are not consistent with winning basketball games.

Another lottery treadmill team.  When is that championship coming?

 

[KB21]

https://sports.vice.com/en_ca/article/mgzgv3/why-nba-teams-get-stuck-on-the-draft-lottery-treadmill

And this gets to the core of why this will be at least a 5 year process:

Quote

● Team takes a player in the lottery.

● As economic research indicates, high draft picks tend to get more minutes than their productivity justifies. In addition, rookies tend to be below-average NBA players.

● Giving extended minutes to a below-average player makes it likely a team will end up back in the lottery.

● With the return-trip lottery pick, the team selects another player who, as a rookie, gets more minutes than his below-average production would indicate.

● Giving that player more minutes increases the odds the team will once again be back in the lottery.

● Back to Step 1.

also,

Quote

The thing is, the Thunder are a rare, best-case scenario. Far more often, teams get stuck in neutral. Since the draft lottery was instituted in 1984, 21 of the NBA's 30 teams have found themselves out of the playoffs for five or more consecutive seasons. That's more than two-thirds of the league! So what gives? Well, super-productive, game-changing players like Durant and Westbrook don't come along very often. Landing one takes a lot of luck.

I'm sure this will be summarily ignored, or the typical response of "I don't care that it will take 5 years" will come out.

[AHF]

40 minutes ago, KB21 said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidberri/2017/12/03/bad-incentives-are-why-the-phoenix-suns-keep-riding-the-lottery-treadmill/#bf0516c17054

Another lottery treadmill team.  When is that championship coming?

 

Ask Golden State and their years of lottery picks or the Cavs.  Nothing is guaranteed and there is a wide range of outcomes.  Most people will fail who try to rebuild through the lottery.  In the quest to win a ring, 29 of 30 teams will fail every year.  Of the teams that get rings, the vast, vast majority drafted their core talent in the lottery and built from there.

On the 5 year stat, are you arguing that 21 of 30 teams have tanked?  That speaks of rebuilding cycles in general to me.  We were on a hard path to rebuilding ourselves even if we resigned people this year.  We would have ended up like the Grizzlies in the near term.

[KB21]

https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/articles/can-the-draft-lottery-compete-with-the-treadmill-of-mediocrity

Quote

The number one picks beats the number fifteen pick 18-8 in terms of producing a better player. But that should be troubling. This is not a faceoff between the number one and number five pick. No, this is supposed to be the best prospect in the NBA and a fate worse than being bad (according to the Treadmill theory) And yet, almost 1/3 of the time, teams would rather have ended up with the fifteenth pick. 

The aspect that gets overlooked here, and the central theme of my position on this topic is this.  Yes.  Getting that #1 pick gives you a better chance of getting a good player, but the disparity isn't enough to offset what you have to do to be bad enough to get that #1 pick.  This isn't a situation where you dip down for a year and get lucky unless you are already a good team that was ravaged by injuries.  This is a situation where you are removing veteran players to play younger players who are below average based on their age and experience levels, and as a result, the losses pile up.  You establish a losing culture, and that is the most difficult aspect to overcome.  Players end up getting used to losing.  They end up making habits out of doing things that cause them to lose games such as taking bad shots and missing, not rotating on defense properly, not blocking out on rebounds, not making the extra pass, and not playing under control.  No one is going to be able to convince me that you can stress doing things the right way when your goal is losing.

[KB21]

https://www.royalsreview.com/2016/2/4/10905584/tanking-astros-luhnow-owners-boras

And here we get to the real reason why tanking exists, and why none of the leagues, who are controlled by ownership, will actually do anything to stop tanking:

Quote

However, tanking is clearly not the only way to reboot a franchise, so it seems as though the main objective is profit — which is no surprise considering the influx of executives with backgrounds in invest banking and hedge fund management. Teams like the Athletics, Cardinals, and Giants have shown that consistent success is more than possible without resorting to tanking — a strategy that only has fringe benefits in terms of acquiring talent.

 

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

https://www.boxscoregeeks.com/articles/can-the-draft-lottery-compete-with-the-treadmill-of-mediocrity

The aspect that gets overlooked here, and the central theme of my position on this topic is this.  Yes.  Getting that #1 pick gives you a better chance of getting a good player, but the disparity isn't enough to offset what you have to do to be bad enough to get that #1 pick.  This isn't a situation where you dip down for a year and get lucky unless you are already a good team that was ravaged by injuries.  This is a situation where you are removing veteran players to play younger players who are below average based on their age and experience levels, and as a result, the losses pile up.  You establish a losing culture, and that is the most difficult aspect to overcome.  Players end up getting used to losing.  They end up making habits out of doing things that cause them to lose games such as taking bad shots and missing, not rotating on defense properly, not blocking out on rebounds, not making the extra pass, and not playing under control.  No one is going to be able to convince me that you can stress doing things the right way when your goal is losing.

This article super proves the point,  The author obviously cherry picked the 15th pick since there have been 3 great players picked there - Steve Nash, Gianis and Kawhi.  Even taking that superstar production that you don't get at any pick near the 15th, here are the average wins produced for each draft spot over the rookie contract:

#1 - 38.4

#15 - 9.75

So your average #1 pick is 4x as good as the 15th pick.  

Speaking even more eloquently, of the top 15 win producers listed here for the term of their rookie contracts 14 of the top 15 were #1 picks.  The whole point of drafting in this range is hitting on a star.  

The per minute numbers are similar, among the players listed with a .150 or higher WP/48 12 of the 14 are #1 picks.  

How about Finals MVPs won by these guys?

#1 picks - 9

#15 picks - 1

 

Are #1 picks free of busts?  Hell no.  Nobody claims that.  But for potential to get a star?  For average production?  It isn't remotely close.

[AHF]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

https://www.royalsreview.com/2016/2/4/10905584/tanking-astros-luhnow-owners-boras

And here we get to the real reason why tanking exists, and why none of the leagues, who are controlled by ownership, will actually do anything to stop tanking:

 

Funny that baseball's last several champions blatantly tanked and their tanking directly led to their championships but let's pretend that was a coincidence on the way to profits?

[DS5]

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

Funny that baseball's last several champions blatantly tanked and their tanking directly led to their championships but let's pretend that was a coincidence on the way to profits?

So you are still pretending that this is a credible team building strategy that takes years upon years to complete despite all the evidence that proves it is not a credible team building strategy?

It still hasn't sunk in that this team is completely sunk for the next 5 years because of this strategy.  But hey, whatever allows Tony Ressler to make a profit off this team in the name of "rebuilding".

[KB21]

3 minutes ago, DS5 said:

It's not a dead horse, because those of you who support this strategy still do not understand how this strategy has completely sunk this franchise onto the lottery treadmill for the next 5 years.  You still think that the Hawks are going to draft a generational talent that is going to change the fortunes of the franchise forever <--- the central thesis in the lie that tanking is a credible long term team building strategy.

Edited April 6, 2018 by KB21

[NBASupes]

Just now, KB21 said:

So you are still pretending that this is a credible team building strategy that takes years upon years to complete despite all the evidence that proves it is not a credible team building strategy?

It still hasn't sunk in that this team is completely sunk for the next 5 years because of this strategy.  But hey, whatever allows Tony Ressler to make a profit off this team in the name of "rebuilding".

I think you have two strategies. The full tank and build or the trade for top 5 player and trade for another or sign one. Preferably the best player. This usually wins you rings. 

 

Rings or Rings. Any other ideal is a fail. 

[DS5]

5 minutes ago, KB21 said:

It's not a dead horse

Oh yes it is buddy....

[JSmooooove]

6 minutes ago, KB21 said:

It's not a dead horse, because those of you who support this strategy still do not understand how this strategy has completely sunk this franchise onto the lottery treadmill for the next 5 years.  You still think that the Hawks are going to draft a generational talent that is going to change the fortunes of the franchise forever <--- the central thesis in the lie that tanking is a credible long term team building strategy.

SO WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT? USE YOUR TIME MACHINE??? WE GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[KB21]

Just now, DS5 said:

Oh yes it is buddy....

OK.  So when did everyone realize that this is going to be a very long term undertaking that will more than likely not have the results you think it will?

[AHF]

5 minutes ago, NBASupes said:

I think you have two strategies. The full tank and build or the trade for top 5 player and trade for another or sign one. Preferably the best player. This usually wins you rings. 

 

Rings or Rings. Any other ideal is a fail. 

I would phrase it differently.  Usually the teams that win rings built lost a ton of games and built through the draft and this allowed them to win rings.  Most teams that build through the draft do not win rings.

[Buzzard]

1 minute ago, NBASupes said:

I think you have two strategies. The full tank and build or the trade for top 5 player and trade for another or sign one. Preferably the best player. This usually wins you rings. 

 

Rings or Rings. Any other ideal is a fail. 

And no matter what strategy you take, championship teams will be full of lottery picks. Here is a hint that we were going nowhere fast: last years team did not have any; and resigning Millsap would have added a big zero to that count.

[DS5]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

OK.  So when did everyone realize that this is going to be a very long term undertaking that will more than likely not have the results you think it will?

I'm admittedly a moron for getting trolled back into this conversation... but here it goes:

Nobody has GUARANTEED that this will be a short fix. Nobody has GUARANTEED championships because of tanking. Everyone knows the draft is a crapshoot, but one with better odds of a really good player when you have a higher pick. Again, NOT GUARANTEED to anything. NOT GUARANTEED. 

Did I say that right? NOT GUARANTEED. 

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, DS5 said:

I'm admittedly a moron for getting trolled back into this conversation... but here it goes:

Nobody has GUARANTEED that this will be a short fix. Nobody has GUARANTEED championships because of tanking. Everyone knows the draft is a crapshoot, but one with better odds of a really good player when you have a higher pick. Again, NOT GUARANTEED to anything. NOT GUARANTEED. 

Did I say that right? NOT GUARANTEED. 

That's not what I'm seeing.  The team already had a player on the team that they would be very fortunate to get a player of his quality with a high draft pick in Paul Millsap.

[AHF]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

That's not what I'm seeing.  The team already had a player on the team that they would be very fortunate to get a player of his quality with a high draft pick in Paul Millsap.

Everyone is telling you there are no guarantees.  Hope you start seeing what they are typing.

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

Everyone is telling you there are no guarantees.  Hope you start seeing what they are typing.

If there are no guarantees, then why adopt a strategy that actually does guarantee that you will be losing over multiple years?