The Tank Thread

[AHF]

16 hours ago, Diesel said:

Golden State is one of the luckiest stories in history.  So now, because GS was able to accomplish cold fusion, you want to go out and get your tritium and pd electodes. 

 

Almost every champion gets lucky.  Is this in any way surprising?  The Bulls were lucky to get Jordan and Pippen in the lottery.  The Lakers were lucky to get Magic, Worthy and Kobe in the lottery.  The Celtics were lucky to get Bird, McHale and Parish in the lottery.   Houston was lucky to get Hakeem in the lottery.  Dallas was lucky to get Dirk in the lottery.  The Heat were lucky to get Wade in the lottery.  The Spurs were lucky to get Duncan in the lottery.

Look at the history of champs and see how common it is that they got lucky in the lottery.  Trade to get there, lose with pride to get there, lose without pride, etc. just get there and get lucky if you aspire to one day wear a ring.

[Wretch]

19 hours ago, MaceCase said:

The push back seems to be that teams should never have the right to see the writing on the wall and intentionally push the reset button thus "tank".  If a team does it "organically" like the Mavs where they try to hand out 9 figure deals like candy yet still bottom out or the Nets who mortgaged their whole future trading for win now vets then that's a "true" rebuild.  It's apparently better to go out like Apollo Creed because theoretically he was one lucky punch away than do something disgraceful like throwing in the damn towel.

 

That is a perfect analogy.

It's ok if we put the best team possible out there, give no consequence to any of the moves, and we just happen to miss the playoffs. Mission accomplished praise the Hawks for their efforts. Tear it down and reboot?  Shame on the Hawks...what a terrible organization.  They were lucky that they backed into the playoffs.

Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other...

16 hours ago, Diesel said:

I believe what you say is true.. we do have to define the goal.  I agree with your definition of tanking... going for a top three pick.   To do has been shown to not work.  Over the past 16 years only Kyrie Irving has been a top 3 pick that has won a championship.   Actually in the past 16 years, he has been the only top 4 pick to have won a championship... So if tanking is the goal... it doesn't work.

Secondly, if this is a rebuild, we can argue the merits of how we rebuilt.  Without rhyme or reason.  Just a firesale of assets.  Moreover, how do you rebuild and not get rid of Baze and Dennis?

To answer your original question, it was your GM Schlenk that suggested that GS tanked for Harrison Barnes and he has spoke about what they did as if it were the way to the promised land. 

Finally, when you talk of winning a finals with a top 14 pick... it's a syllogistic fallacy.   It's damn near impossible to have a team without a top 14 pick.   I mean if we were to comeback and win the championship this year, Prince and Dedmon would be our top 14 picks.  At the end of the day, you asking for the team that won the championship with only players from the bottom half of the draft is about as impossible as finding a team with players from only the bottom half of the draft. 

 

For arguments sake, let's assume that I'm not a toddler trying to pigeonhole the argument like that.  Let's revisit the questions I asked and let me explicitly establish the logic behind asking these questions.  No semantics.  No slanted selective logic.

Quote

Wwhere are all these teams (not named San Antonio Spurs) that have not gone through this complete cycle?  

Which teams have built and maintained a competitive core without drafting in the top 14 spots, without trading their top 14 pick, and purely through free agency and trades...?

Let's key on the statements in bold.  It is NOT my point that teams contend without lottery picks - we all know that's false.  It is my contention that teams progress through cycles and during the down cycle they acquire the talent through the draft lottery and that becomes their competitive core.  You are debating the merits of intentionally maintaining a down cycle and whether or not certain GMs have historically embraced that strategy.

That's too much homework for me.  Plot twist though: as it is commonly ascribed, I am not a fan of tanking as much as I am a proponent of securing high lottery picks.  I can name countless Hall of Famers who did not go 1-3 (to include the core of the team that has dominated most of this thread).  That's another discussion though.

Looping back, I believe the down cycle happens.  Which contending teams did not acquire their core through some manner of down cycle?  Which contenders didn't trade their own lottery pick(s) to either move up higher in the lottery or acquire All-NBA caliber talent?  Which teams maintained a "winning culture" without sniffing the lottery and built contenders through free agency, mid to late 1st round picks, and second round picks, and trades (not involving their own lottery picks or lottery picked players)?

For arguments sake, I put no weight (or thought really) on an intentional tank or unintentional trip to the lottery.  I don't believe we have the reputation to lure free agents or the assets to pull off a blockbuster that will significantly move the needle.  Thus, the smartest thing for the Hawks to do is "intentionally lose", get better assets, and TRY to find a franchise changing talent in the lottery.

Answering my own question:

San Antonio, post Duncan, has defied those odds.  Detroit, circa 2001.  FWIW... I think the Detroit model is the more favorable of the two.  There's no way to play the draft odds in the late 1st/2nd round like the Spurs have.  Danny Ferry and our 60 win Hawks team does. not. count.  We got lucky and we won a pick in the draft lottery.  We beat the odds and won it.  We drafted Al Horford with the #3 pick in the 2007 NBA draft after Billy Knight literally did exactly what you don't want us to do now.  We are not the same 60 win team without him and I won't entertain an argument over semantics.  You have to put Al Horford on that team and you can't without the lottery.

[Wretch]

Also @Diesel...  I'm widening the goal posts for you.  I'm not asking for just champions.  Name all the perennial contenders who have avoided the down cycle...which is all any of us really want out of our Hawks.

[Guard]

16 hours ago, Diesel said:

Not to mention that they traded Monta because of his sexual harrassment case. 

But hey... let's act like this was all a calculated plan...

They  traded Monta because a Ellis Curry backcourt wasn't going to work in the long run. Especially on defense.

[benhillboy]

I’m digging the hell out of this tank.  We’ve had a lead or been tied going into the fourth quarter 14 out of 19 games.  It feels like they’re hovering around .500 if you didn’t know the final scores.  Bud (not going anywhere) has the offensive system securely in place to make a transition seamless for a lotto pick.

[KB21]

Ah, the delusion over this tank is thick.  We "seem" like a .500 team.  LOL!  You are what your record says you are, and through a quarter of the season, this team has FOUR wins.  Count them.  One, two, three, four.  FOUR.   Some underdeveloped 19 year old isn't going to change that next year either.

[Diesel]

7 hours ago, AHF said:

Almost every champion gets lucky.  Is this in any way surprising?  The Bulls were lucky to get Jordan and Pippen in the lottery.  The Lakers were lucky to get Magic, Worthy and Kobe in the lottery.  The Celtics were lucky to get Bird, McHale and Parish in the lottery.   Houston was lucky to get Hakeem in the lottery.  Dallas was lucky to get Dirk in the lottery.  The Heat were lucky to get Wade in the lottery.  The Spurs were lucky to get Duncan in the lottery.

Look at the history of champs and see how common it is that they got lucky in the lottery.  Trade to get there, lose with pride to get there, lose without pride, etc. just get there and get lucky if you aspire to one day wear a ring.

Corrections...

The Bulls traded for Pippen.. it was a plan.

The Lakers traded for Kobe..  It was a plan. 

The Celtics traded for Parrish..  it was a plan.

Dallas traded for Dirk... it was a plan.

The Spurs were given Duncan... The NBA didn't want Pitino to succeed as a coach. 

So it's not always LUCK... Sometimes, team have a plan... some teams trade for players that fit and make them better.  But show me a team that had a firesale to get better lottery picks that ended up winning the finals with the player they drafted as the lead dog or even a strong contributor??

 

[Diesel]

7 hours ago, Wretch said:

That is a perfect analogy.

It's ok if we put the best team possible out there, give no consequence to any of the moves, and we just happen to miss the playoffs. Mission accomplished praise the Hawks for their efforts. Tear it down and reboot?  Shame on the Hawks...what a terrible organization.  They were lucky that they backed into the playoffs.

Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other...

For arguments sake, let's assume that I'm not a toddler trying to pigeonhole the argument like that.  Let's revisit the questions I asked and let me explicitly establish the logic behind asking these questions.  No semantics.  No slanted selective logic.

Let's key on the statements in bold.  It is NOT my point that teams contend without lottery picks - we all know that's false.  It is my contention that teams progress through cycles and during the down cycle they acquire the talent through the draft lottery and that becomes their competitive core.  You are debating the merits of intentionally maintaining a down cycle and whether or not certain GMs have historically embraced that strategy.

That's too much homework for me.  Plot twist though: as it is commonly ascribed, I am not a fan of tanking as much as I am a proponent of securing high lottery picks.  I can name countless Hall of Famers who did not go 1-3 (to include the core of the team that has dominated most of this thread).  That's another discussion though.

Looping back, I believe the down cycle happens.  Which contending teams did not acquire their core through some manner of down cycle?  Which contenders didn't trade their own lottery pick(s) to either move up higher in the lottery or acquire All-NBA caliber talent?  Which teams maintained a "winning culture" without sniffing the lottery and built contenders through free agency, mid to late 1st round picks, and second round picks, and trades (not involving their own lottery picks or lottery picked players)?

For arguments sake, I put no weight (or thought really) on an intentional tank or unintentional trip to the lottery.  I don't believe we have the reputation to lure free agents or the assets to pull off a blockbuster that will significantly move the needle.  Thus, the smartest thing for the Hawks to do is "intentionally lose", get better assets, and TRY to find a franchise changing talent in the lottery.

Answering my own question:

San Antonio, post Duncan, has defied those odds.  Detroit, circa 2001.  FWIW... I think the Detroit model is the more favorable of the two.  There's no way to play the draft odds in the late 1st/2nd round like the Spurs have.  Danny Ferry and our 60 win Hawks team does. not. count.  We got lucky and we won a pick in the draft lottery.  We beat the odds and won it.  We drafted Al Horford with the #3 pick in the 2007 NBA draft after Billy Knight literally did exactly what you don't want us to do now.  We are not the same 60 win team without him and I won't entertain an argument over semantics.  You have to put Al Horford on that team and you can't without the lottery.

Just an aside... I don't think we beat the odds with Horford.. Horford was what.. our 6th top ten pick...

Now back to your question....

• Post Wade.. I don't think Miami ever had an upkick to be in the lottery... could be wrong.  I don't think they cycled down to get Wade either.  I think they were just naturally terrible.
• There's also the Celtics of now.  Ainge showed how to wheel and deal and turn your valued players into Picks without having a true down cycle. 
• There was the Paul George pacer team.  Paul George was a #10 pick in 2010.  Prior to him the other person picked in the top 10 by the Pacers was Erick Dampiere (#10) in 1996.  So they built a championship quality team without having to be in the high lottery.
• The Rockets haven't drafted in the top 10 and got a player to play for them since Yao Ming in 2002.

So.. there is an other way... 

I'm not against getting High Picks.  I would have loved to trade Josh Smith or DHoward or Al Horford for a High Pick.  I think your valuable players should give you value when you let them go.. that's all.   When you have a firesale though... it send a bad message to the team, the fans, and the league.   Right now, we're tanking and nobody can say what our goal is other than we want a high lottery pick...  That's Andre Bargnani  thinking. 

 

 

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, KB21 said:

Ah, the delusion over this tank is thick.  We "seem" like a .500 team.  LOL!  You are what your record says you are, and through a quarter of the season, this team has FOUR wins.  Count them.  One, two, three, four.  FOUR.   Some underdeveloped 19 year old isn't going to change that next year either.

Well, people think that the 19 year old is going to come in and grow with everybody else.  However, they fail to see how other players are going to want off the bus.  Ask the Clipps how this works. 

 

[Lurker]

2015 UGA in college football knocked on the door and said hi to this ridiculous notion that you are always who your record says you are.

Heck, 2017 Kentucky knocked on the door and said hi to this. Especially Kentucky. Kentucky was a bunch of luck, smoke and mirrors away from 3-9 this year.

[KB21]

2 hours ago, Diesel said:

Well, people think that the 19 year old is going to come in and grow with everybody else.  However, they fail to see how other players are going to want off the bus.  Ask the Clipps how this works. 

 

Well, one of those 19 year olds has emerged to be head and shoulders above the rest.  Collin Sexton is the real deal.  That dude almost willed his team to a win with his team playing 3 on 5 for the final 10 minutes of the game.  He was exhausted, and he just kept on and almost willed that team to a win.  Think about that.  He was one of 3 facing 5 players on the floor.  He was getting double teamed every time he touched the ball, and he helped cut the lead from 15 points to 5 points.   He scored 40 points on 12 of 20 shooting while shooting 16 free throws, dished out 5 assists, and grabbed 5 rebounds.  

[TheNorthCydeRises]

6 hours ago, Wretch said:

That is a perfect analogy.

It's ok if we put the best team possible out there, give no consequence to any of the moves, and we just happen to miss the playoffs. Mission accomplished praise the Hawks for their efforts. Tear it down and reboot?  Shame on the Hawks...what a terrible organization.  They were lucky that they backed into the playoffs.

Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other...

The issue is that when you completely tear it down, you not only get rid of your assets for pennies on the dollar, the people you do pick up just to fill out a roster are probably not a part of your future as well.  This makes the rebuild that much more difficult and longer to take place.  And when you do that, you go into desperation mode in a few short years.

The other thing not being mentioned about the Hawks, is our frugal nature of doing business.  This team has made it a point in recent years, to be "flexible".  This means being very cautious to the contracts they dish out, while also trying their best to stay under the Salary Cap at all costs.

I THOUGHT this had changed last year, when we acquired Dwight for 3 yrs / 70 million, with Millsap on the eve of a huge payday the following year.  That, to me, was a signal that we were going to "go for it" at least for a few years, with a high quality front line, and hope the kids developed in the interim.  But they gave up after just one year, and blew it all up together.  All of that time developing Millsap and Hardaway Jr . . gone . . down the drain.  Partially because they gave a ridiculous deal to Bazemore.  And while I HATE his contract, his deal can't be the difference between going for it, and blowing it all up.

One of the characteristics of "champions" and "contenders", is that they "pay to play".  And that means going over the Salary Cap, and sometimes into the Luxury Tax to achieve the level of success that they want.

 

Teams into the Luxury tax . . which is at 119 million.   Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Cleveland

Golden St

Oklahoma City

Miami . . . ( only because of Chris Bosh's contract )

Washington

Portland

New Orleans

LA Clippers

 

Teams over the Salary Cap . . . which is at 99 million.  Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Milwaukee

Toronto

Houston

Charlotte

Minnesota

Detroit

San Antonio

Memphis

Boston

Utah

Denver

LA Lakers

New York

Orlando

 

Teams under the Salary Cap . . . less than 99 million.  Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Atlanta

Brooklyn

Indiana . . . ( got value from the Paul George trade . . Olidipo is looking great, along with Sabonis being a quality player )

Sacramento

Phoenix

Dallas

Philadelphia . . . ( the young tank squad full of top picks . . . Embiid and Simmons are legit )

Chicago

 

 

 

[Peoriabird]

This is so funny to me...Atlanta takes 1 year off from the playoff just to get younger and the sky is falling even though the players that were suppose to resign are under performing their contracts with the exception of Al Horford...The player the MB cared the least about.

[Thomas]

3 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

This is so funny to me...Atlanta takes 1 year off from the playoff just to get younger and the sky is falling even though the players that were suppose to resign are under performing their contracts with the exception of Al Horford...The players the MB cared the least about.

I'm coming around to our existing direction. As you said about the cats that are gone: DMC-we knew he was dealing with a knee problem but he ended up in much worse shape after he left for 15 million, Sap-out for up to three months now and he left for 30 million though really his age was the bigger factor I think, Tim- the jury is still out I guess but 17 million for a guy that consistently sucks in the playoffs is too much, Al-he was gone anyway if you believe IT and if he loves Ainge that much then so be it. So as much as I liked these players when they were here we apparently avoided a couple of train wrecks and we're moving on. 

[KB21]

4 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

This is so funny to me...Atlanta takes 1 year off from the playoff just to get younger and the sky is falling even though the players that were suppose to resign are under performing their contracts with the exception of Al Horford...The players the MB cared the least about.

Oh, it isn't 1 year off from the playoffs.  This team won't be in the playoffs again for another 5 years.  We would rather be "young and fun" rather than actually win games.

[Peoriabird]

5 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Oh, it isn't 1 year off from the playoffs.  This team won't be in the playoffs again for another 5 years.  We would rather be "young and fun" rather than actually win games.

I'm surprise to hear this from you!

Dude you're like a broken record and no one take you seriously around here anymore so make some adjustments.

[KB21]

22 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

I'm surprise to hear this from you!

Dude you're like a broken record and no one take you seriously around here anymore so make some adjustments.

Yeah, I don't think I'll change my opinion on a proven poor team building strategy.

[Wretch]

On 11/25/2017 at 8:27 PM, TheNorthCydeRises said:

The issue is that when you completely tear it down, you not only get rid of your assets for pennies on the dollar, the people you do pick up just to fill out a roster are probably not a part of your future as well.  This makes the rebuild that much more difficult and longer to take place.  And when you do that, you go into desperation mode in a few short years.

The other thing not being mentioned about the Hawks, is our frugal nature of doing business.  This team has made it a point in recent years, to be "flexible".  This means being very cautious to the contracts they dish out, while also trying their best to stay under the Salary Cap at all costs.

I THOUGHT this had changed last year, when we acquired Dwight for 3 yrs / 70 million, with Millsap on the eve of a huge payday the following year.  That, to me, was a signal that we were going to "go for it" at least for a few years, with a high quality front line, and hope the kids developed in the interim.  But they gave up after just one year, and blew it all up together.  All of that time developing Millsap and Hardaway Jr . . gone . . down the drain.  Partially because they gave a ridiculous deal to Bazemore.  And while I HATE his contract, his deal can't be the difference between going for it, and blowing it all up.

One of the characteristics of "champions" and "contenders", is that they "pay to play".  And that means going over the Salary Cap, and sometimes into the Luxury Tax to achieve the level of success that they want.

 

Teams into the Luxury tax . . which is at 119 million.   Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Cleveland

Golden St

Oklahoma City

Miami . . . ( only because of Chris Bosh's contract )

Washington

Portland

New Orleans

LA Clippers

 

Teams over the Salary Cap . . . which is at 99 million.  Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Milwaukee

Toronto

Houston

Charlotte

Minnesota

Detroit

San Antonio

Memphis

Boston

Utah

Denver

LA Lakers

New York

Orlando

 

Teams under the Salary Cap . . . less than 99 million.  Current Standings Playoff teams in BOLD

 

Atlanta

Brooklyn

Indiana . . . ( got value from the Paul George trade . . Olidipo is looking great, along with Sabonis being a quality player )

Sacramento

Phoenix

Dallas

Philadelphia . . . ( the young tank squad full of top picks . . . Embiid and Simmons are legit )

Chicago

 

 

 

First, let me say that I agree with you 1000%.  Considering that your all-star core is going to eat up the lion's share of your cap, there is a definite correlation between the money a team spends to contend and their contender status.  Without some sort of scouting and salary cap sorcery, there's no way to avoid it.

Thing is, I compartmentalize things differently.  Though they are related...I have to put salary cap issues in one bucket, talent acquisition in another.  I also prioritize here and put more concern on talent acquisition and worrying about whether or not we're spending enough money when we don't have the core talent to contend is a bit like putting the cart before the horse.  

What does it net us if we max out an aging Millsap, throw stupid money at THjr (17+ mil), and ride out Howard for another year?  We're still middle-fodder in the playoffs with two long term potentially poisonous contracts and a third in Millsap, albiet short term.  Nothing about that is attractive to me.  Even with the smartest cap management, it's more of the middling "carrot on a stick" that we have seen for decades here.

So for me, the two concepts are almost mutually exclusive and I won't worry about spending money until when we have something to spend it on.

[Diesel]

 

We have signed on to a 5 to 8 year plan.  For those of you thinking that we're just going to jump right back into it, you're kidding yourselves.   We're not jumping right back into the playoffs.. This is the long game.   

BUT.

 

Since this is the road that Hawks Management decided to take, then we just have to get on board. 

But while on Board, let's not buy into things that don't make sense. 

1.  Only John Collins on this roster is somebody with staying power. 

A GM talking about finding a franchise player, doesn't speak well for the players that we have.   I suspect that our players are good but all are expendable.   We need to realize that as a fan base.   There are no sacred cows on this team.  Even Collins is tradable.   Hawks fans have to get out of that mentality that because we drafted them, they must be a star.  Not true.  In fact, I think recently, we have had more misses than hits. 

2.  Our Blueprint will not be Spurs, GS, or Milwaukee's or anybody elses. 

This team is unique in our inability to attract free agents and our inability to have a consistent fan base.  Because we are unique in those aspects, we will have a unique solution that Schlenk is going to stumble upon.  He is going to have to be an expert of talent recognition.   Much like Ferry, he's going to have to work lock step with his coach and pick players that fit the coaches strength.   Honestly, No coach can coach any player.  Coaches have needs just as much as players do and those needs fit the scheme. 

3.  This road has at least 2 trips to the lottery in it. 

It's a hard time for this plan because from year to year, we don't know if the NBA will institute their plans to change how the draft lottery works.   It's an Atlanta screwjob coming.   Fortunately it's not this year.  We are slated to be in the top part of the lottery for the next 2 years (at least).  This still doesn't suggest that we will be out of the lottery after that.   Probably like last time, expect 4 to 5 years in the lottery before we see a change in our winning.

4.  Hold on, Bud may not make it up the mountain. 

Bud is no Marvin Lewis.  He's a great coach, but if you go back to #2, Bud and Schlenk have to work lockstep with each other and I'm not sure that Schlenk will give Bud everything that Bud wants.  

5.  Player Evaluation is key.

Schlenk major job is to evaluate players and see how do they fit.  If he sees a player that don't fit, his job is to move them.  Fanbase has to give Schlenk some room here. 

 

So the real question is when does Schlenk really get evaluated? i would say 2021.

 

[KB21]

I agree.  I am right.

Atlanta will have no fewer than three trips into the lottery though.  It's going to be at least 2 years before the player the Hawks take in the 2018 lottery is ready to help the team win any games, so that pushes the time frame to compete out till no earlier than 2020.  The problem is, there is only so much impact one guy can make even if he is a legitimate star.  So, you are looking at a lottery pick in 2018, one in 2019, and then one in 2020 as well.   Two of those will be top 5 picks as well, because this team will likely be worse in 2018-2019 than they are this year.  

If they are actually able to hit big on the lottery, develop the talent properly, sign 2-3 veterans, and avoid major injuries that delay the process, then maybe the 2020-2021 season, you will see them get back to the 40+ win plateau where they can compete for a playoff spot.