The Tank Thread

[AHF]

3 minutes ago, KB21 said:

So, who are the veterans the Hawks have gotten like the Celtics got that pushed them towards improving?  The Celtics rebuilt.  They didn't intentionally lose, and they didn't intentionally structure a multi year losing plan.

The Celtics rebuilt after tanking for a year.  

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

The Celtics rebuilt after tanking for a year.  

If the Celtics had tanked, they never would have hired Brad Stevens.  The Celtics didn't though.  If they had, they would have been stuck with a Lloyd Pierce type like Atlanta is for the next 4 years.

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, KB21 said:

If the Celtics had tanked, they never would have hired Brad Stevens.  The Celtics didn't though.  If they had, they would have been stuck with a Lloyd Pierce type like Atlanta is for the next 4 years.

So now any team hiring a college coach isn’t tanking?  

I’m literally shaking my head trying to understand how you define tanking if getting rid of your best players and structuring the roster deliberately to miss the playoffs and lose for a season to get a lottery pick doesn’t qualify.

[KB21]

26 minutes ago, AHF said:

So now any team hiring a college coach isn’t tanking?  

I’m literally shaking my head trying to understand how you define tanking if getting rid of your best players and structuring the roster deliberately to miss the playoffs and lose for a season to get a lottery pick doesn’t qualify.

Brad Stevens told them up front that if they were tanking, he wouldn't take the job.  He took it.  They didn't tank.  They had one down season and then brought in veterans to improve.  Even in the 25 win season, they tried to win.  

Travis Hinkie didn't try to win.

[AHF]

On 6/22/2018 at 11:51 PM, KB21 said:

Brad Stevens told them up front that if they were tanking, he wouldn't take the job.  He took it.  They didn't tank.  They had one down season and then brought in veterans to improve.  Even in the 25 win season, they tried to win.  

Travis Hinkie didn't try to win.

The Hawks won 43 games then tore down and won 24 games.  Celtics won 41 games then tore down ditching KG and PP and (also got rid of their only remaining big winning vet in Rondo during the season) and won 25 games.  Celtics wanted to "win" so bad they played something called Phil Pressey in 75 of their games and transferred Chris Johnson from a 10 day contract he signed in January to a career high 20 mpg over 40 games the rest of the year.

The Celtics wanted to "win" so badly their top free agent signings were Dedmon and Ilya.  Wait, wrong team.  The top FA signings for Boston were actually undrafted FAs Vitor Faveroni (owner of 1 season in his NBA career) and Mr. Pressey (owner of that sweet, sweet 39% TS% and 8.8 PER as an undrafted FA).

But the Celtics weren't designed to lose, noooooo.  Danny Ainge signed Vitor Faveroni and Phil Pressey to win a championship in 2013-14.  He totally wanted to win and pulled every lever he could to make that team as good as possible in 2013-14.  He totally didn't clear his payroll by only signing minimum dollar, barely rosterable free agents to construct a team that couldn't help but lose.  

Month by month those Celtics sure got better and competed so hard to win.  Who can forget that stretch run when the "competing" Celtics went 5-18 to finish the season?  Those tanking Hawks went 6-17 over the same period but the Celtics were totally trying to compete when they constructed that roster and had Stevens fighting sooo hard to win every game and not to make sure the team lost plenty.  I mean Atlanta finished tied for the 4th worst record in the league and Boston finished tied for the 4th worst record in the league.  Only a moron wouldn't say those two situations were totally different.

[KB21]

Did those Celtics teams stack their roster with youth and GLeague players, or did they go after veterans like Jae Crowder and IT in trades to get better instead of tanking?

[JayBirdHawk]

4 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Did those Celtics teams stack their roster with youth and GLeague players, or did they go after veterans like Jae Crowder and IT in trades to get better instead of tanking?

Jae and IT joined the Celtics the year AFTER the 25 win season.

[KB21]

2 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Jae and IT joined the Celtics the year AFTER the 25 win season.

Yeah.  If they were tanking, they would not have gotten those two players.  They would have instead fielded useless GLeague players or wasted cap space on a bad contract.

[JayBirdHawk]

Just now, KB21 said:

Yeah.  If they were tanking, they would not have gotten those two players.  They would have instead fielded useless GLeague players or wasted cap space on a bad contract.

They tanked the year BEFORE they got them when they won 25 games.

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

They tanked the year BEFORE they got them when they won 25 games.

No, they didn’t.  They rebuilt and weee bad for one year but had zero plans to tank.  Tanking is a multi year commitment to doing everything you can to lose in the name of getting high picks.  

[JayBirdHawk]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

No, they didn’t.  They rebuilt and weee bad for one year but had zero plans to tank.  Tanking is a multi year commitment to doing everything you can to lose in the name of getting high picks.  

I'mma just leave this here...

2013-14 Boston Celtics Roster and Stats | Basketball-Reference.com
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2014.html.

 

So if Dallas signs some free agents this season and are trying to win are you gonna say they didn't tank THIS past season? Riiiiight.

 

[hazer]

3 hours ago, AHF said:

The Hawks won 43 games then tore down and won 24 games.  Celtics won 41 games then tore down ditching KG and PP and (also got rid of their only remaining big winning vet in Rondo during the season) and won 25 games.  Celtics wanted to "win" so bad they played something called Phil Pressey in 75 of their games and transferred Chris Johnson from a 10 day contract he signed in January to a career high 20 mpg over 40 games the rest of the year.

The Celtics wanted to "win" so badly their top free agent signings were Dedmon and Ilya.  Wait, wrong team.  The top FA signings for Boston were actually undrafted FAs Vitor Faveroni (owner of 1 season in his NBA career) and Mr. Pressey (owner of that sweet, sweet 39% TS% and 8.8 PER as an undrafted FA).

But the Celtics weren't designed to lose, noooooo.  Danny Ainge signed Vitor Faveroni and Phil Pressey to win a championship in 2013-14.  He totally wanted to win and pulled every lever he could to make that team as good as possible in 2013-14.  He totally didn't clear his payroll by only signing minimum dollar, barely rosterable free agents to construct a team that couldn't help but lose.  

Month by month those Celtics sure got better and competed so hard to win.  Who can forget that stretch run when the "competing" Celtics went 5-18 to finish the season?  Those tanking Hawks went 6-17 over the same period but the Celtics were totally trying to compete when they constructed that roster and had Stevens fighting sooo hard to win every game and not to make sure the team lost plenty.  I mean Atlanta finished tied for the 4th worst record in the league and Boston finished tied for the 4th worst record in the league.  Only a moron wouldn't say those two situations were totally different.

 

8 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'mma just leave this here...

2013-14 Boston Celtics Roster and Stats | Basketball-Reference.com
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2014.html.

 

So if Dallas signs some free agents this season and are trying to win are you gonna say they didn't tank THIS past season? Riiiiight.

 

 

[hazer]

13 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Tanking is a multi year commitment...

GTSOH

Just now, hazer said:

GTSOH

 

[hazer]

14 hours ago, KB21 said:

Tanking is a multi year commitment...

[Spud2nique]

14 hours ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I'mma just leave this here...

2013-14 Boston Celtics Roster and Stats | Basketball-Reference.com
https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2014.html.

 

So if Dallas signs some free agents this season and are trying to win are you gonna say they didn't tank THIS past season? Riiiiight.

 

Jaybird, you told me this is a war you can’t win during the draft. Even when you win, there is more coming...lol

[JayBirdHawk]

38 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

Jaybird, you told me this is a war you can’t win during the draft. Even when you win, there is more coming...lol

Yeeaah buddy. Life goes on!!!

[KB21]

I see that people still don't understand the difference between rebuilding and tanking.  One is acceptable.  The other isn't.  

[hazer]

14 minutes ago, KB21 said:

I see that people still don't understand the difference between rebuilding and tanking.  One is acceptable.  The other isn't.  

There are many different levels of tanking, it's nuanced. It can be 1 year like the Spurs and Celts, it can be 5 years like the 6'ers, it can be perpetual like several teams. The way Schlenky communicated it, Hawks will probably land somewhere in the middle between the Spurs/Celts "quick dip" and 6'ers stumble. Which is why I've always thought and said 3 years: tank last year, focus on development this year while improving record (29 wins?) yet staying in the lottery, start spending money on good-to-great trades/FAs and shoot for the 8th seed in 3rd year, try to attract that superstar in year 4.

[KB21]

1 minute ago, hazer said:

There are many different levels of tanking, it's nuanced. It can be 1 year like the Spurs and Celts, it can be 5 years like the 6'ers, it can be perpetual like several teams. The way Schlenky communicated it, Hawks will probably land somewhere in the middle between the Spurs/Celts "quick dip" and 6'ers stumble. Which is why I've always thought and said 3 years: tank last year, focus on development this year while improving record (29 wins?) yet staying in the lottery, start spending money on good-to-great trades/FAs and shoot for the 8th seed in 3rd year, try to attract that superstar in year 4.

No, there isn't.  There is only one way to tank, and that's what Atlanta is doing.  When you tank, you don't even try to be competitive.  You stack the roster with youth and developmental players and avoid bringing on legitimate veteran talent.  You use cap space to take on bad contracts who are attached to "future assets" instead of using cap space to sign or trade for players that can help you get better now.

[hazer]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

No, there isn't.  There is only one way to tank, and that's what Atlanta is doing.  When you tank, you don't even try to be competitive.  You stack the roster with youth and developmental players and avoid bringing on legitimate veteran talent.  You use cap space to take on bad contracts who are attached to "future assets" instead of using cap space to sign or trade for players that can help you get better now.

Yes, there is. There are several ways to tank (as I listed), and what Atlanta is doing lands somewhere in the middle of those extremes. When Hawks tanked last year, they didn't even try to be competitive. Now they've stacked the roster with youth and developmental players this year and are avoiding bringing on legitimate veteran talent, this year. They'll use cap space to take on bad contracts who are attached to "future assets" instead of using cap space to sign or trade for players that can help you get better now, this year. Thanks, we're all well aware of what tanking is. Some of us are also aware there are several different degrees of it.