Merged: Discussion on Tanking

[Buzzard]

how many of those team had terrible management that made bad decision after bad decision? The OKC thunder were only a lottery team in their first season under new ownership.

It other teams own fault they were in lottery land for so long. of course you are going to be in lottery land if you have guys like isiah thomas and donald sterling running your team.

You are missing the main points. Durant was drafted in 07, Wesbrook in 08. Guess what? OKC made the playoffs for the first time in four years in 09/10. Draft picks and the lottery are all about the stars aligning just right.

The ping pong balls have to bounce just right

Teams ahead of you have to pass on both Durant and Westbrook

You have to pick them

Any of those three things change, two of which you have no control over, and OKC is looking at five or six years in the lottery.

[yungsta]

You are missing the main points. Durant was drafted in 07, Wesbrook in 08. Guess what? OKC made the playoffs for the first time in four years in 09/10. Draft picks and the lottery are all about the stars aligning just right.

The ping pong balls have to bounce just right

Teams ahead of you have to pass on both Durant and Westbrook

You have to pick them

Any of those three things change, two of which you have no control over, and OKC is looking at five or six years in the lottery.

my point is that teams you listed had clown management that made terrible decision after terrible decision which is why they were in the lottery so long.

[Buzzard]

my point is that teams you listed had clown management that made terrible decision after terrible decision which is why they were in the lottery so long.

And if Portland had taken Durant over Oden and anyone else had taken Westbrook; or the ping pong balls went against them, you would be calling OKC ownership clowns as well for tanking and playing the lottery.

You think OKC was smart because Durant and Westbrook just happened to be there for them to pick. They were lucky as hell to get one of them much less both in successive drafts.

Put it to you this way, how many Durants and Westbrooks do you see in this draft? Players of their caliber do not grow on trees every draft. You want to tank and pray players like them are coming out, pray they get passed on, and then pray your GM picks them should they be there.

OKC did right by picking them. But them just being there was so much luck its not even calculable.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Buzzard

[Diesel]

Some teams have great players in place (which they found during a slide in the standing) and they built great programs around them. San Antonio and LA both spring to mind in that they had great management, made the right deals, and had some luck. But how is trying to copy that luck/success pattern any different than trying to mimic what the Bulls did and draft Michael Jordan?

The Hawks are not the Lakers, Atlanta is not New York, and we do not have Tim Duncan... If we are not drafting talent high, and we don't have the assets to acquire great talent through trades, then we expect the top tier talent to just look at us and want to be here because we say, "Hey! We're the new Spurs! Come make us great!"

We are already a laughing stock. Sliding into the bottom half of the league isn't going to change that. The only thing that's going to change it is a player that can turn heads. If we strike out on CP3/Howard, clearly our best shot at acquiring such a talent, then how can we expect it to be any different when we don't have the best shot at a marquee FA? We have the PERFECT storm right now and we STILL might not sign one of these guys...

I'd much rather chance the draft and be in a position to NOT miss out on CP3 or Deron or Howard...than to watch a floundering middle of the pack team throw away years that we could be acquiring talent and throw away cap space.

OK. I agree about taking a chance on the lottery rather than floundering. However, you build value so that you don't have to flounder.

Let's look at something:

Spurs, Heat, Celtics, Lakers, OKC, Mavericks.

These teams have dominated the championship picture for the last 10 years. Only OKC has benefited from lottery draft picks.

The Lakers, Celts, Mavs, and Heat benefited greatly from trades and Free agents.

The Spurs have benefited from being able to find great players in the later first and second round of the draft.

These are teams that never tank and they are always in the championship picture.

On the other hand:

Toronto, LAC, Milwaukee, ATL, Charlotte, New Orleans, PTL, SacTown, Washington, NJ.

Over the last 10 -20 years, these teams have been in the lottery, gotten high draftpicks and have not sniffed a conference championship game.

Then you have Chicago, Houston, Memphis, Cleveland, Golden State, Indy and NY.

These are teams that have gone to the lottery, gotten good players and now waiver between being good and not good.

You have to notice that there's a trend that's here. The best teams know how to retool. What model do you want to follow?

[yungsta]

And if Portland had taken Durant over Oden and anyone else had taken Westbrook; or the ping pong balls went against them, you would be calling OKC ownership clowns as well for tanking and playing the lottery.

You think OKC was smart because Durant and Westbrook just happened to be there for them to pick. They were lucky as hell to get one of them much less both in successive drafts.

Put it to you this way, how many Durants and Westbrooks do you see in this draft? Players of their caliber do not grow on trees every draft. You want to tank and pray players like them are coming out, pray they get passed on, and then pray your GM picks them should they be there.

OKC did right by picking them. But them just being there was so much luck its not even calculable.

they got lucky on durant but picks like james harden, westbrook, and serge ibaka wasnt luck it was due to good scouting. they were projected to be picked later.

[yungsta]

OK. I agree about taking a chance on the lottery rather than floundering. However, you build value so that you don't have to flounder.

Let's look at something:

Spurs, Heat, Celtics, Lakers, OKC, Mavericks.

These teams have dominated the championship picture for the last 10 years. Only OKC has benefited from lottery draft picks.

The Lakers, Celts, Mavs, and Heat benefited greatly from trades and Free agents.

The Spurs have benefited from being able to find great players in the later first and second round of the draft.

These are teams that never tank and they are always in the championship picture.

On the other hand:

Toronto, LAC, Milwaukee, ATL, Charlotte, New Orleans, PTL, SacTown, Washington, NJ.

Over the last 10 -20 years, these teams have been in the lottery, gotten high draftpicks and have not sniffed a conference championship game.

Then you have Chicago, Houston, Memphis, Cleveland, Golden State, Indy and NY.

These are teams that have gone to the lottery, gotten good players and now waiver between being good and not good.

You have to notice that there's a trend that's here. The best teams know how to retool. What model do you want to follow?

the teams you mentioned that dominated for the last 10 years. b4 they started dominating they got that special guy in the draft to start things up.

[Buzzard]

they got lucky on durant but picks like james harden, westbrook, and serge ibaka wasnt luck it was due to good scouting. they were projected to be picked later.

Westbrook was the #2 PG in that draft behind only Rose. A lot were shocked that Beasley and Mayo were taken ahead of him. And here is a little tidbit for you on that draft, the so called really smart Memphis management traded the #5 pick Kevin Love to Minnesota so they could land OJ Mayo at #3.

[yungsta]

Westbrook was the #2 PG in that draft behind only Rose. A lot were shocked that Beasley and Mayo were taken ahead of him. And here is a little tidbit for you on that draft, the so called really smart Memphis management traded the #5 pick Kevin Love to Minnesota so they could land OJ Mayo at #3.

LOOOOOL at people being shocked when beasley and mayo was picked b4. beasley and mayo were super hyped. Beasley came off 1 of the best freshmen seasons and was argued to go ahead of rose. OJ mayo was still super hyped from his high school days as the next kobe/LBJ or w.e

Westbrook was considered as a bust when OKC picked him.

Russell Westbrook was a bit of an enigma coming into the 2008 NBA Draft. After averaging just 3.4 points and less than one assist, rebound or steal per game in a disappointing freshman season he sort of exploded onto the scene as a sophomore, at least as much as one can while still averaging just 12.7 points, 4.3 assists, 3.9 rebounds and 1.6 steals per game.

Oklahoma City Thunder brass, however, loved what they saw in pre-draft workouts and selected Westbrook with the fourth pick, one spot ahead of college teammate and ultra-productive big man Kevin Love as well as three spots ahead of Indiana University’s sensational Eric Gordon who poured in 20.9 points per game as a freshman and seven spots ahead of Arizona University’s Jerryd Bayless who averaged 19.7 points and 4.0 assists per game in his magnificent freshman campaign as well.

The sophomore Westbrook was also selected five spots ahead of the player widelyconsidered to be the best sophomore point guard in America, D.J. Augustin. After two years running the point at Texas, Augustin had career averages of 16.9 points, 6.2 assists, 2.9 rebounds and 1.4 steals per game while shooting a remarkable 40.2 percent from three point range and 80.7 percent from the charity stripe. Westbrook on the other hand had career averages of 8.3 points, 2.5 assists, 2.4 rebounds and 1.0 steals per game while shooting an unremarkable 35.3 percent from three-point range and a horrendous 68.5 percent from the charity stripe. Yet somehow the Thunder had the foresight to draft Russell Westbrook.

Many fans felt the Thunder had made a huge mistake drafting what could be considered a “project point guard”. They couldn’t have been more wrong.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1208896-nba-draft-history-5-players-destined-to-bust-but-didnt/page/6

I dont like bleacher report but this was the quickest thing I can find didnt want to waste much time.

when did I say memphis management was smart? I said they were terrible which is why they were in the lottery so long.

Edited June 20, 2013 by yungsta

[Buzzard]

LOOOOOL at people being shocked when beasley and mayo was picked b4. beasley and mayo were super hyped. Beasley came off 1 of the best freshmen seasons and was argued to go ahead of rose. OJ mayo was still super hyped from his high school days as the next kobe/LBJ or w.e

Westbrook was considered as a bust when OKC picked him.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1208896-nba-draft-history-5-players-destined-to-bust-but-didnt/page/6

I dont like bleacher report but this was the quickest thing I can find didnt want to waste much time.

when did I say memphis management was smart? I said they were terrible which is why they were in the lottery so long.

Memphis was only in the lottery four years; same as OKC!

I am done arguing with you. You obviously think the ping pong balls are all skill. And every year the player you want will be there no matter which draft it is you are in. I will leave you with this quote from draft express on Westbrooks final season before the draft.

"NCAA Weekly Performers, 3/4/08-- Part One

March 5, 2008

There might not be a more improved player in the country over the last year or two than UCLA sophomore guardRussell Westbrook. Considered a mid-major recruit leading into his senior year of high school, drawing scholarship offers from schools such as San Diego, Wyoming, Creighton and Kent State, Westbrook benefited from a late growth spurt that saw him shoot up from just 5-10 to 6-3 late in his prep career, and is now a key cog on a Final Four contending team and one of the hottest draft prospects in the country as of late. Obviously a late bloomer, Westbrook remains a raw prospect as far as his skill-level is concerned, but has just about as much upside to continue to improve as any guard in the NCAA not namedDerrick Rose.

From DraftExpress.comhttp://www.draftexpress.com#ixzz2Wl6bvImH

http://www.draftexpress.com

[yungsta]

wtf I said if you make smart management decisions you wont be stuck in lottery land for awhile.

[BrazilianHawk]

That's a good question....what you do with Al if you rebuild. I don't think you can keep Al and Teague, because the combination of those two with some decent vets is going to get you LATE lottery at best and maybe (probably) a playoff birth. Especially if you don't have Smoove in there gunking up the offense with jumpers.

Now I'm confused. You say Teague and Horford alone could win enough games to make the playoffs next season but you still think we should rebuild if we don't land CP3/D12.

Wouldn't it be easier to build a contender with another free agents (there's a whole lot of good players there, not just decent vets) than taking the road to futility? Especially if we don't have JBrick gunking up the offense with jumpers?

I say give Horf a chance to be the man! He's a winner, he loves to be a Hawk, he just needs better team mates. And to develop a low post game, of course.

Edited June 20, 2013 by BrazilianHawk

[Buzzard]

wtf I said if you make smart management decisions you wont be stuck in lottery land for awhile.

You said Westbrook was seen as a bust. I just showed a respected site that had Westbrook as the #2 PG in that draft behind only Rose. Bleacher report vs Draft Express. Is this really even a contest?

[yungsta]

You said Westbrook was seen as a bust. I just showed a respected site that had Westbrook as the #2 PG in that draft behind only Rose. Bleacher report vs Draft Express. Is this really even a contest?

yes westbrook was considered as a reach at that pick and wasnt the consensus pick. He had potential but no1 projected him to be picked that high and was far from a sure thing.

edit: lol I thought you said you were going to stop arguing with me

Edited June 20, 2013 by yungsta

[Admin]

wtf I said if you make smart management decisions you wont be stuck in lottery land for awhile.

Smart management is very important but you gotta have a lot of luck to actually get the players that you've extensively scouted. I think you've been ignoring that point that Buzzard was making. You can have the best scouting if Durant, Westbrook, Harden, etc but if you get unlucky in the lottery and another team jumps you and take those guys then you're screwed. That's why there's a lot more to tanking than being smart and doing good scouting. There's quite a bit of luck that goes into it as well.

[AHF]

You said Westbrook was seen as a bust. I just showed a respected site that had Westbrook as the #2 PG in that draft behind only Rose. Bleacher report vs Draft Express. Is this really even a contest?

I am not sure I understand this. Beasley was a forward and projected by DraftExpress to go ahead of Westbrook. What does Westbrook being the #2 PG have to do with OJ Mayo or Beasley?

[AHF]

Smart management is very important but you gotta have a lot of luck to actually get the players that you've extensively scouted. I think you've been ignoring that point that Buzzard was making. You can have the best scouting if Durant, Westbrook, Harden, etc but if you get unlucky in the lottery and another team jumps you and take those guys then you're screwed. That's why there's a lot more to tanking than being smart and doing good scouting. There's quite a bit of luck that goes into it as well.

No disagreement. But you can't get lucky in the lottery if you don't play and all those championship teams had their lottery luck stud except the Detroit Pistons (the 1 time champion Pistons, the 2 time champion Pistons had their lottery luck).

[IllestPamfilis]

Don't get me wrong, I want this Andrew Wiggins kid as much as any other, but tanking= losers and we're done with being "Losers" as a franchise. With our new staff, losing will not be acceptable. If you're building your team like San Antonio, you add winners and a couple "tough guys" and keep on improving. Say no to Tanking!

[MaceCase]

OKC was in the lottery four straight seasons before making the playoffs

Memphis was in the lottery four straight seasons before making the playoffs

NY Knicks were in the lottery six straight seasons before making the playoffs

NY Nets were in the lottery five straight seasons before making the playoffs

LA Clippers were in the lottery five straight season before making the playoffs

GS Warriors were in the lottery five straight seasons before making the playoffs

Everybody thinks its easy to build by sucking. Even if you get lucky as hell and draft a Durant and Westbrook, or a Gasol, Conley and pick up a Zbo, tanking is a very long and painful experience. Miss out on one franchise or good player and four years of being a bottom feeder turns into five or six.

Are you really ready for that?

This is rather funny considering that nearly every one of those teams has just as many if not many more second round and beyond wins in the playoffs as the Hawks do after spending 6 whole years in the post season. This is what Wretch is speaking about, people want to maintain mediocrity while hoping that some actually good team has a bad break here or an injury there to finally see the promised land while all of those other teams that are being made fun of for sucking have already and will continue to leapfrog the Hawks in the regular season standings and playoff success.

Give me 5 years of sucking if it gives me a chance of being a perennial favorite to play in the Conference Finals and beyond rather than 5 years of 45-50 wins praying to avoid Lebron or whoever else in the 2nd round when a 1st round victory isn't even guaranteed.

As for Westbrook, he was considered a reach when he was drafted. How his ranking as the 2nd best PG prospect matters is rather dubious because he didn't even play PG in college and being 2nd best at a position doesn't make you the 2nd best overall prospect.

An excerpt from the credible Seattle Times on him getting drafted:

When NBA commissioner David Stern announced Westbrook's name, Sonics fans and draft analysts scratched their heads as the former UCLA Bruin strolled to the stage at New York's Theatre of Madison Square Garden to shake hands and pose for pictures with Stern........

............"They might have some explaining to do," NBA analysts Mark Jackson said.

"It doesn't make sense," said college basketball analyst d*ck Vitale. "Seattle will look back on this and realize they made a big, big mistake. Love would have been fantastic for them."

http://seattletimes.com/html/nba/2008020313_soni27.html

Another funny part is that you cite Draftexpress yet here is the grade that they gave Seattle/OKC for their draft that year:

C Possibly more than any team in the league, Seattle’s adventure on Thursday is one that cannot really be properly evaluated for at least 2-3 years. Russell Westbrook is a player that may or may not prove to be worthy of starting at either backcourt position in the NBA, and taking him fourth was definitely a surprise looking at some of the other players that were on the board here. Is Westbrook enough of a playmaker to be a starting NBA point guard in time? And if not, is he big enough, and a good enough ball-handler, outside shooter and all-around scorer to start at the 2? He can surely defend well enough at either position, but considering that he might need a very particular type of lead-guard alongside him—was he worthy of being drafted fourth overall? On first glance the answer to that seems to be no, but Sam Presti might know something that we don’t…

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/2008-NBA-Draft-Report-Card-2956/

[Wretch]

Now I'm confused. You say Teague and Horford alone could win enough games to make the playoffs next season but you still think we should rebuild if we don't land CP3/D12.

Wouldn't it be easier to build a contender with another free agents (there's a whole lot of good players there, not just decent vets) than taking the road to futility? Especially if we don't have JBrick gunking up the offense with jumpers?

I say give Horf a chance to be the man! He's a winner, he loves to be a Hawk, he just needs better team mates. And to develop a low post game, of course.

Well, building a contender means one thing in the NBA - it means you need an engine. Building around really good payers like Horford is fool's gold. He's not an engine. Horford is like JJ in his prime - he's a fantastic complimentary player. Joe Johnson would look great as LeBron's #2 in Cleveland - and they would have been much better off offering that max to JJ instead of Hughes BTW. If you build around Horford, then this is the guy you look to when the going gets tough. Which is what happens pretty much the final minutes of ANY playoff game. Picture Horford working against that frantic Miami defense late in a game.

Not pretty. I will admit that I'm KIND OF intrigued by Jefferson just because he's a true low post threat and he would look good next to Horford. But Utah is willing to let him walk for a reason - how many top tier players (LeBron, CP3, Carmelo) can you think of that their incumbent teams seemed to just disconnect from during their free agency? You're not going to get Jefferson cheaply. Dude is already making $15 million, he's not going to take an $4 million paycut to play for the Hawks. He'd just as soon take that money from Dallas. Likely, if we're lucky, we'd have to offer him a deal starting around the $13m range.

...and the bigger problem with all this is that if this team can't get out of the 2nd round, then what? Draft pick won't help. No cap room. Lateral move isn't going to push us further. It's an endless cycle of being mediocre and irrelevant - is that any better than fishing for the future stars that are ONLY found in the top half of the lottery? Is it better than stockpiling assets like a Gallinari, Bledsoe, or Green that we could flip for Carmelo, CP3, or Ray Allen?

?

OKC was in the lottery four straight seasons before making the playoffs

Memphis was in the lottery four straight seasons before making the playoffs

NY Knicks were in the lottery six straight seasons before making the playoffs

NY Nets were in the lottery five straight seasons before making the playoffs

LA Clippers were in the lottery five straight season before making the playoffs

GS Warriors were in the lottery five straight seasons before making the playoffs

Everybody thinks its easy to build by sucking. Even if you get lucky as hell and draft a Durant and Westbrook, or a Gasol, Conley and pick up a Zbo, tanking is a very long and painful experience. Miss out on one franchise or good player and four years of being a bottom feeder turns into five or six.

Are you really ready for that?

Part of the disconnect here is the notion that we believe building through the lottery is easy. Not once have I said that and the people who believe that it's easy are the ones you want to direct that conversation towards. In the words of the Great ZaZa...NOTHING EASY! It's just a fact of life. Anything worth having is going to take some work. When you're scouting players, you also need a decent amount of scrutiny, some common sense, and just like everything else in the NBA...you need some luck. The latter you can't plan for, so you just move forward.

Am I ready for that?

The alternative is watching a team make the playoffs every year, but failing to advance to the ECF's. It is more painful for me to be irrelevant every single year. We have had good teams. We have had very good teams. In fact, to quote Gearon:

"I look at us, and you measure a team on its results: How are we doing vs. the league? There are three teams the last three years that have advanced past the first round. The Lakers—who everybody loves the Lakers—the Celtics and the Atlanta Hawks. It’s not the Dallas Mavericks, it’s not the Miami Heat, it’s not the New York Knicks, it’s not the Oklahoma City Thunder, it’s not the Orlando Magic. It’s just those three."

http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2011/12/17/atlanta-hawks-michael-gearon-jr-q-and-a/

But winning has -NOT- brought us notoriety. It's had the opposite affect on our franchise because we have won just enough games to miss out on the elite talent high in the draft and get our asses handed to us in the playoffs. Then we end up drafting role players and scrubs. We end up being irrelevant year after year. How do you NOT see this as spinning our wheels in the mud? And you think this is going to change with Al Jefferson? I like the guy too, but signing B-List players makes us another GOOD team. We have seen what "good" does in the playoffs.

Also, don't fool yourself into thinking that this is a start to rebuilding. It's not. It's a quickfix. It's a knee-jerk move and it's driven by FEAR that we will be stuck in the lottery forever. It's rebuilt and "now let's win!" But if we sign just two decent/average players like Teague/Jefferson then we have no room for serious improvement. Literally, this is IT...THIS is your team and then you tweak that with the left over role players. A good example is Korver (whom we all seem to love so much). How do we keep him? Given the choice of money between us and Chicago, he's going to Chicago! I would. Wouldn't you? What would make me stay in ATL? A couple extra million - again EATING MORE CAP SPACE. This isn't a start, this is the end of retooling.

Trades to get better? How? Nobody wants your junk players. They're looking for the "engine" too. So what? Make a lateral move? Jefferson for Milsap? Lou Williams for Tyreke Evans? Teague for Goran Dragic? You're not going to trade these kinds of players for a Tier 1 star and you're not going to make a dent in your record with these kinds of lateral moves. So what? Package a couple of guys together?

Lou + Teague? Still not getting much back. Jefferson/Teague? or Horford/Teague? or Horford/Jefferson? Now you're gutting your talent and OKC still will not give you Durant for any number of those combinations or all three guys. So, you make that move for a guy looking to break out like James Harden...only, you don't know if he's going to be Joe Johnson 2.0...and you are either a lottery team (which you are adamantly against) or you're still stuck in the middle. You're still drafting teens or later. You are not making progress. You can repeat that cycle for 4-5 years and end up with what?

What do WE have to show right now for our losses...excuse me, our successful births into the NBA playoffs?

What do we have?

We certainly don't have the attention of the free agent world. We don't have any franchise changing talent acquired with our mid-late 1st round draft picks. We aren't seen as a winning/championship/contending franchise. We have acquired exactly JACK SHIT. Were it not for the fact that we dumped the same B-List kind of player you guys want to sign, we wouldn't even have rumors of our team in the free agent hunt.

Doing what you guys are proposing is only going to add years to my signature.

This is rather funny considering that nearly every one of those teams has just as many if not many more second round and beyond wins in the playoffs as the Hawks do after spending 6 whole years in the post season. This is what Wretch is speaking about, people want to maintain mediocrity while hoping that some actually good team has a bad break here or an injury there to finally see the promised land while all of those other teams that are being made fun of for sucking have already and will continue to leapfrog the Hawks in the regular season standings and playoff success.

Give me 5 years of sucking if it gives me a chance of being a perennial favorite to play in the Conference Finals and beyond rather than 5 years of 45-50 wins praying to avoid Lebron or whoever else in the 2nd round when a 1st round victory isn't even guaranteed.

As for Westbrook, he was considered a reach when he was drafted. How his ranking as the 2nd best PG prospect matters is rather dubious because he didn't even play PG in college and being 2nd best at a position doesn't make you the 2nd best overall prospect.

An excerpt from the credible Seattle Times on him getting drafted:

http://seattletimes.com/html/nba/2008020313_soni27.html

Another funny part is that you cite Draftexpress yet here is the grade that they gave Seattle/OKC for their draft that year:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/2008-NBA-Draft-Report-Card-2956/

Wish I could like this twice......

[Buzzard]

I am not sure I understand this. Beasley was a forward and projected by DraftExpress to go ahead of Westbrook. What does Westbrook being the #2 PG have to do with OJ Mayo or Beasley?

The same as CP3 # 1 PG and Deron #2 PG going after Marvin Williams. The top five picks outside of Rose could have gone anywhere. Miami had Wade and needed a big. Of course most mocks and projections was Beasely.