The Tank Thread

[hazer]

It really just boils down to this: 

Instant yet lesser gratification, or swallowing the bitter medicine that will make you better in the long run...

[KB21]

5 minutes ago, hazer said:

It really just boils down to this: 

Instant yet lesser gratification, or swallowing the bitter medicine that will make you better in the long run...

So, give me the evidence that tanking (intentionally structuring the roster to lose games) makes teams better in the future.

Edited December 17, 2017 by KB21

[MaceCase]

5 minutes ago, hazer said:

It really just boils down to this: 

Instant yet lesser gratification, or swallowing the bitter medicine that will make you better in the long run...

It’s like a gameshow where you could walk away with the discount coupon to Arby’s or risk it all for what’s in the mystery box.

 

Some people just really like Arby’s.

[KB21]

8 minutes ago, MaceCase said:

It’s like a gameshow where you could walk away with the discount coupon to Arby’s or risk it all for what’s in the mystery box.

 

Some people just really like Arby’s.

Eating at Arby's is better than rummaging through dumpsters for something to eat, the latter is the equivalent of tanking.

[MaceCase]

16 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Eating at Arby's is better than rummaging through dumpsters for something to eat, the latter is the equivalent of tanking.

Those dumpsters must be in the alleyway of some of the finest restaurants given that the majority of the best meals in the league are found there.

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, MaceCase said:

Those dumpsters must be in the alleyway of some of the finest restaurants given that the majority of the best meals in the league are found there.

So your goal is simply to have the perception of having a big name player, not actually winning games and championships?

[MaceCase]

1 minute ago, KB21 said:

So your goal is simply to have the perception of having a big name player, not actually winning games and championships?

I was under the perception that big name players win games and championships but I could be wrong, I’m not sure people really knew much of the last 30 champions until they actually won.

[Lurker]

Here's a better analogy to chew on: 

Real championship contenders: The fine, expensive restaurant with expensive food that is worth the money.

Mediocre playoff teams that have a grand total of 0 shot at a title: The fast food restaurant that has tasty food but is fattening.

Tanking teams: The mystery box that you open in a few years. Sometimes you get the well cooked food that is healthy for everyone and sometimes you get the expired food that gets you sick.

[KB21]

30 minutes ago, MaceCase said:

I was under the perception that big name players win games and championships but I could be wrong, I’m not sure people really knew much of the last 30 champions until they actually won.

Well, if that's the case, why aren't the teams who draft at the top of the lottery year in and year out actually getting better?

Great TEAMS win championships.

[KB21]

19 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Here's a better analogy to chew on: 

Real championship contenders: The fine, expensive restaurant with expensive food that is worth the money.

Mediocre playoff teams that have a grand total of 0 shot at a title: The fast food restaurant that has tasty food but is fattening.

Tanking teams: The mystery box that you open in a few years. Sometimes you get the well cooked food that is healthy for everyone and sometimes you get the expired food that gets you sick.

I'd revise that to say:

Playoff contenders: the fine, expensive restaurant with expensive food that is worth the money.

Rebuilding teams: The mystery box.

Tanking teams: The Dog shit that you step in.

[MaceCase]

12 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Well, if that's the case, why aren't the teams who draft at the top of the lottery year in and year out actually getting better?

Great TEAMS win championships.

Great teams have great PLAYERS.

[DBac]

Tanking is more like telling your kid that being a professional athlete isn't a good plan A so focus on school.

[Jody23]

56 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Well, if that's the case, why aren't the teams who draft at the top of the lottery year in and year out actually getting better?

Great TEAMS win championships.

That clearly says more about the  lack of competency to build a winning team with those teams and their organizations than it does about the talent pool of the draft.  Whether a team tanks or not, there are many things that have to consistently be in place to build a winning or championship team.  Top level talent, good coaching, good player and team development, management that knows how to maximize assets and committed ownership.  How many of those teams that are in the lottery every year have all those components?  Aside from top level talent, I'd say there's been pretty good evidence that the Hawks have those components.

Edited December 17, 2017 by Jody23

[Lurker]

Like I have said before, great team play, growth and development together by unselfish players, and integrity is not what matters in the NBA. And no coach is going to make it matter. It's an exception, not a rule for the team play/unselfish players that grew up together/integrity teams to win out over the teams with the stars.

Yes the Spurs had all that, but they also had STARS. What you're trying to chase will lead you on a wild goose chase for 97 times out of 100.

is it worth it to chase the 3%?

[KB21]

4 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Like I have said before, great team play, growth and development together by unselfish players, and integrity is not what matters in the NBA. And no coach is going to make it matter. It's an exception, not a rule for the team play/unselfish players that grew up together/integrity teams to win out over the teams with the stars.

Yes the Spurs had all that, but they also had STARS. What you're trying to chase will lead you on a wild goose chase for 97 times out of 100.

is it worth it to chase the 3%?

That's better odds than the 0% chance of success that comes from tanking.

[KB21]

22 minutes ago, Jody23 said:

That clearly says more about the  lack of competency to build a winning team with those teams and their organizations than it does about the talent pool of the draft.  Whether a team tanks or not, there are many things that have to consistently be in place to build a winning or championship team.  Top level talent, good coaching, good player and team development, management that knows how to maximize assets and committed ownership.  How many of those teams that are in the lottery every year have all those components?  Aside from top level talent, I'd say there's been pretty good evidence that the Hawks have those components.

Do we?  The fact that management is openly tanking tells me otherwise.

[Jody23]

21 minutes ago, KB21 said:

Do we?  The fact that management is openly tanking tells me otherwise.

And you feel this way because in your mind, good management="we have to make the playoffs every year at all costs.  You can never ever tank".  The reality is, most league executives, especially the ones who have won championships, will tell you that's not the case and that there are more factors involved in building a championship team and that you have to consider more than just the here and now.  Do you think it was bad management when the Celtics traded away KG, Pierce and Terry in 2013 for basically draft picks and proceeded to go 25-57 the following season?

[KB21]

33 minutes ago, Jody23 said:

And you feel this way because in your mind, good management="we have to make the playoffs every year at all costs.  You can never ever tank".  The reality is, most league executives, especially the ones who have won championships, will tell you that's not the case and that there are more factors involved in building a championship team and that you have to consider more than just the here and now.  Do you think it was bad management when the Celtics traded away KG, Pierce and Terry in 2013 for basically draft picks and proceeded to go 25-57 the following season?

That wasn't a tank.  Good executives do not intentionally structure the roster to lose games because the evidence shows that it doesn't work.  That doesn't take into account that tanking is the most abhorrent strategy an organization can employ.

Edited December 17, 2017 by KB21

[Jody23]

11 minutes ago, KB21 said:

That wasn't a tank.  Good executives do not intentionally structure the roster to lose games because the evidence shows that it doesn't work.  That doesn't take into account that tanking is the most abhorrent strategy an organization can employ.

Lol!  They intentionally made their team worse in a trade to get draft picks from the Nets while knowing that making their team worse would improve their own pick.  The Celtics knew the team they constructed would miss the playoffs.  That is "tanking".  Now, was that bad management?  Was that a mistake?

Edited December 17, 2017 by Jody23

[KB21]

6 minutes ago, Jody23 said:

Lol!  They intentionally made their team worse in a trade to get draft picks from the Nets while knowing that making their team worse would improve their own pick.  The Celtics knew the team they constructed would miss the playoffs.  That is "tanking".  Now, was that bad management?  Was that a mistake?

What they did is not tanking.  They didn't fall to the bottom of the league.  They didn't make moves that were designed to make them lose games.  They weren't the worst team in basketball.