The Tank Thread

[KB21]

13 hours ago, sturt said:

That's utter nonsense, and you know it.

Many, many high talent players started their careers in losing situations and eventually evolved into winning situations.

And the philosophy underlying the decision to draft Kobe or Steph or to draft whoever is irrelevant. At the end of the day, they still are who they are no matter who the GM is.

 

This is because, over time, things tend to regress towards average.  So, a team like Sacramento who hasn't experienced the playoffs in years will eventually trend towards average, and then all you pro tankers will be like "See, they got better through the draft."  

[CBAreject]

15 hours ago, KB21 said:

So basically, how long it takes has no bearing on anything then.  So, if the Hawks win a championship 20 years from now, it's because they decided to tank.   I see.

Whoops—there’s another straw man from you (your favorite).  

[KB21]

1 minute ago, CBAreject said:

Whoops—there’s another straw man from you (your favorite).  

It's not a straw man argument because it's very clearly the case.  The pro tankers do not care how long this takes.

[KB21]

What's even more funny is that all the posters who are wringing their hands over Trae Young's early struggles are the very ones who were most supportive of tanking.  So, which is it?  Do you want the player to make an immediate impact and ruin your tanking philosophy, or do you want to tank?

Remember the part about tanking where the young draft pick plays more than his production warrants, therefore putting you into a position to draft high again next year?

I got news for you.  This was going to happen regardless of who was drafted.  Rookies do not make a big impact in the NBA.  The majority of them have a negative impact.  But, you wanted this team in a position where they had to play the rookies major minutes, so you are getting exactly what you wanted.  

Here's a newsflash for ya as well.  It's going to happen again next year!  

[CBAreject]

20 minutes ago, KB21 said:

It's not a straw man argument because it's very clearly the case.  The pro tankers do not care how long this takes.

It’s a straw man because you’re attributing things to me that I didn’t say.  Sentences that start with “so basically” or “so you’re saying” are frequently straw men.  So...most of your posts.  

[TheNorthCydeRises]

On 7/5/2018 at 7:44 AM, Vol4ever said:

We haven't had a GM since Ted Turner was the owner.  

 

Great article on him written in August 1986.   Wow . . 32 years ago.

http://www.pophistorydig.com/topics/ted-turner-cnn-1980s-1990s/

[KB21]

10 minutes ago, CBAreject said:

It’s a straw man because you’re attributing things to me that I didn’t say.  Sentences that start with “so basically” or “so you’re saying” are frequently straw men.  So...most of your posts.  

Way to continue to ignore the topic.

[sturt]

13 hours ago, sturt said:

When you put good players into losing situations, they become losing players.

 

28 minutes ago, KB21 said:

This is because, over time, things tend to regress towards average. 

 

Wait. Can't have it both ways here.

So they get worse and become losing players? Or they get better and crest at "average?"

 

Keep twisting and spinning. It obviously is so convincing.

 

All that's been accomplished for me, though, is I went from someone who was mostly agnostic on the issue to, after further study, pretty much convinced that Schlenk made the right call on this one.

 

I only wish we could have retained Bud. That would have been ideal.

[KB21]

1 minute ago, sturt said:

 

 

Wait. Can't have it both ways here.

So they get worse and become losing players? Or they get better and crest at "average?"

 

Keep twisting and spinning. It obviously is so convincing.

 

All that's been accomplished for me, though, is I went from someone who was mostly agnostic on the issue to, after further study, pretty much convinced that Schlenk made the right call on this one.

 

I only wish we could have retained Bud. That would have been ideal.

There's no twisting here.

Tanking teams create losing environments.  Proper player development does not happen in losing environments.  Over time, regression to the mean happens.  

[nathan2331]

 

 

There's no twisting here.

Tanking teams create losing environments.  Proper player development does not happen in losing environments.  Over time, regression to the mean happens.  

 

According to you, how many teams have tanked before? Because player development is happening more and more outside of teams. In other sports I'd agree with you, but the NBA is different these days.

[KB21]

7 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

 

 

 

 

According to you, how many teams have tanked before? Because player development is happening more and more outside of teams. In other sports I'd agree with you, but the NBA is different these days.

Exactly, how is the NBA different other than the fact that the NBA is relying on players who are not ready to play as rookies?

[nathan2331]

Exactly, how is the NBA different other than the fact that the NBA is relying on players who are not ready to play as rookies?

Was Jayson Tatum not ready? Ben Simmons? Donovan Mitchell? I would've taken any of those guys over what we had in Millsap and Horford, the kind of vets you prize so much.

[KB21]

46 minutes ago, nathan2331 said:

52 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Exactly, how is the NBA different other than the fact that the NBA is relying on players who are not ready to play as rookies?

 

Was Jayson Tatum not ready? Ben Simmons? Donovan Mitchell? I would've taken any of those guys over what we had in Millsap and Horford, the kind of vets you prize so much.

Jayson Tatum benefited from being on a winning team that has a winning culture.  Same goes for Mitchell.

Simmons is a zebra.

[AHF]

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

What's even more funny is that all the posters who are wringing their hands over Trae Young's early struggles are the very ones who were most supportive of tanking.  So, which is it?  Do you want the player to make an immediate impact and ruin your tanking philosophy, or do you want to tank?

Pretty sure those people want us to maximize our top picks by taking the best players and that Young's struggles set them off because they are now worried we just drafted a bust.  Despite my questions about Young and unhappiness with the pick, I'm not wringing my hands because it is waayyy too early, the sample size in miniscule and SL has so much noise (lack of organization, D-league talent, etc.) that is not at all predictive.  

[KB21]

Good gracious the Kings are so poorly run.  First, they take Marvin Bagley over Luka Doncic.  So what do they do to top that?  They give Zach Lavine an $80 million offer sheet.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Good gracious the Kings are so poorly run.  First, they take Marvin Bagley over Luka Doncic.  So what do they do to top that?  They give Zach Lavine an $80 million offer sheet.

That's what desperation does to you.  They can't attract free agents to come to them, so they have to take chances on young guys like Lavine.

Wow . . . fully guaranteed with no options?   OK Chicago.  Whatugonnado?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Side note.   Sue Bird is 93 years old . . and still balling like she's 22.   Killing the Dream tonight.

 

[AHF]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

Good gracious the Kings are so poorly run.  First, they take Marvin Bagley over Luka Doncic.  So what do they do to top that?  They give Zach Lavine an $80 million offer sheet.

They trade away their first round pick for losers like J.J. Hickson and give away another unprotected first round pick to clear cap space to sign Rondo, Wes Matthews or Monta Ellis.....all flawed limited players who should only have been had on cheapo contracts but they were desperate to win now.

[Macknsweetjones]

1 hour ago, KB21 said:

Yeah.  The team has to build that losing culture and make sure they are consistently in the lottery and have no shot at the playoffs.  They have to make sure that the young players do not develop properly, because instead of teaching them how to win games, you are letting them play in a way that allows you to lose.  

You do realize that the roster putting the team in the top 5 is part of the tank?

“Losing culture” is something you made up in your head, losing doesn’t stop player development period, if that’s the case John Collins wouldn’t be showing his progress right now, this is what you’re making up in your head to push a tired ass argument for your sake of wanting a playoff run that will result in nothing but a small ego boost for you. Nobody and I mean nobody but a few none logical fans like yourself wants to sit up and watch an above average team get bounced from the playoffs in the 1st round every year. 

 

6 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Apparently there are no superstars in next year's draft either.  But like I said, if the roster lands you in the top 5 so be it.  There should be no reason to try to lose games anymore. Plus you can get to the top of the draft without being the worst team.  Image being the 3rd worst team and ending up with the 6th picks and the team with the 6th worse team or better ends up with top 3 pick or higher.  You might change that tune if that happens next year.

Nobody would know if there’s a superstar in the draft of 2019 period because none of those kids have played an nba game, it’s an assumption/gamble with every draft. 3 lottery picks are better than two..especially when 2 of those picks have a stipulation on them.

[KB21]

7 minutes ago, Macknsweetjones said:

“Losing culture” is something you made up in your head, losing doesn’t stop player development period, if that’s the case John Collins wouldn’t be showing his progress right now, this is what you’re making up in your head to push a tired ass argument for your sake of wanting a playoff run that will result in nothing but a small ego boost for you. Nobody and I mean nobody but a few none logical fans like yourself wants to sit up and watch an above average team get bounced from the playoffs in the 1st round every year. 

 

Nobody would know if there’s a superstar in the draft of 2019 period because none of those kids have played an nba game, it’s an assumption/gamble with every draft. 3 lottery picks are better than two..especially when 2 of those picks have a stipulation on them.

Another poster who has never played sports and doesn't believe in culture.