A new take on tanking - opponents of this need not click this thread

[Axel]

Chris Quinn, an asset?

I didn't say he was an asset, I said it was a trade that was a "blatant give away for cap space". Moves that clearly demonstrated that Miami's #1 goal was cap space, not attempting to accumulate talent for on the court. Thus, for the definition of this thread, "tanking"

[Axel]

You're right, the Heat didn't sell off every conceivable asset. They only sold off every asset that would hinder their ability to sign Bosh and James.

At the risk of being a huge douche, I'm going to quote myself and expand on this thought.

I am all in favour of the Raps keeping players that wont hinder their ability to acquire more talent. Guys like Ross, Hansbrough, Stone, JV, Buycks are all on decent deals. Of those, Hansbrough could be flipped for a younger asset, but on the whole, I see no reason to move these guys. It's the contracts/limitations of Lowry, Gay, DD, and Fields that should go. Of those 4, I'd most like to keep DD, but he is also likely our most attractive asset of the 4.

Amir is a guy I'd love to keep, but his value is likely at it's peak. I look at it as similar to Varajao in Cleveland. They could have flipped him years ago to help kick-start the rebuild, but instead they kept him and he has been the constant for the team, bridging the LeBron era and Kyrie Irving era. I see Amir in a similar situation. His contract isn't bad and he plays a great role for this team. I would have to consider long and hard before I'd trade him, but like Ted Dibiase used to say "everybody's got a price"

[Axel]

BTW - speaking of Memphis. That's another team (small-market, no less) that acquired all-stars (Gasol/Randolph) via trade or free agency, not draft.

Memphis is a good example of a successful small market model, but both Gasol and Randolph were acquired via trade. The Gasol trade was considered one of the most lobsided deals in history at the time. Z-Bo was a malcontent risk going on his 4 th team in 3 years, so he was acquired fairly cheaply (Q-Rich) as he was a risky acquisition. Memphis either got lucky or did their homework, either way it wasn't received as a great deal at the time either. But both of those deals do serve to demonstrate that even though you might not like the deal immediately, the long term benefits are what counts.


This team's success will come from the block; low post, high post and trade.

[special1]

Beasley was a 2nd year 21 yr old PF who started 78 games, avg 15.8PPG, 6.4 RPG, while logging 29.8 MPG and a Win Shares of 4.6. That WS put him in the company of James Harden (4.5), Taj Gibson (4.7), Steph Currey (4.7). It wasn't until later in his career that he became completely useless. Perhaps Miami had such foresight to know that, but I don't think it made a difference to them, they had already decided their course of action.

Cook was a rotational player in his 2nd year and Quinn was a role player. Neither were stars, but both had roles on the team (similar to guys like Alan Anderson and Ed Davis from the Raps last year in terms of minutes).

You're right, the Heat didn't sell off every conceivable asset. They only sold off every asset that would hinder their ability to sign Bosh and James. Haslem was a UFA at the same time, so he didn't impact their cap room, and ended up signing after they landed LeBron and Bosh. Jermaine O'Neal was acquired because his deal was set to expire at the right time, he was an asset to get them cap space, little else. Dorell Wright was on the last year of his rookie deal (rookie scale deals are one of the assets many of us are trying to acquire). Wright was allowed to walk the next year. Chalmers was a 2nd round rookie scale deal, so even better than Wright. Anthony was an undrafted free agent on the books for $825k. Magloire was a cheap $1.1M deal.

The Heat obviously needed to fill out their roster, and they did so with expiring deals, rookie deals, or cheap vets, all surrounding D-Wade.

As for the name "tanking" "tankers" etc., a large part of that is from people on this forum who wanted to let this team play as-is and believe that the playoffs are attainable. That group of people, now known as "anti-tankers" lumped all rebuild/overhaul/tank supporters into one single group. We all became tankers despite different views on what that actually would entail. As this thread, and several others have shown, not all people who are labelled "tankers" believe the same thing. I have long been one of the biggest supporters of a massive overhaul of this roster, but then again, I was one of the few who wasn't particularly thrilled about the Rudy Gay acquisition in the first place. It is a broad spectrum of opinions that fall into what is now known as the "tankers" movement here on RR.

I must admit i appreciated this discussion. I think i learned that not all "pro tankers" are actually for tanking in the sense that's being thrown out around here. Most are probably more for rebuilding or re-tooling or just asking for some sort of change to the roster. I totally understand that. We may not always agree (anti-tankers and pro-tankers) BUT this makes me feel that we're definitely not as far apart in our views as it may seem.

Again, I don't think roster is close to being a finished product. However, I do like our core pieces (DD and JV). I like Amir Johnson and Tyler Hansborough and wouldnt mind keeping Rudy around at the right price. Anyone else may be used in a trade to improve our team.

Some may call this rebuilding or even re-tooling. Personally, I dont care what you call it.....JUST DONT CALL IT TANKING!

[CalgaryRapsFan]

I must admit i appreciated this discussion. I think i learned that not all "pro tankers" are actually for tanking in the sense that's being thrown out around here. Most are probably more for rebuilding or re-tooling or just asking for some sort of change to the roster. I totally understand that. We may not always agree (anti-tankers and pro-tankers) BUT this makes me feel that we're definitely not as far apart in our views as it may seem.

Again, I don't think roster is close to being a finished product. However, I do like our core pieces (DD and JV). I like Amir Johnson and Tyler Hansborough and wouldnt mind keeping Rudy around at the right price. Anyone else may be used in a trade to improve our team.

Some may call this rebuilding or even re-tooling. Personally, I dont care what you call it.....JUST DONT CALL IT TANKING!

I think the bold part is definitely common ground between pro & anti tankers. The way I see it, most of the 'pro tankers' just consider the current roster's ceiling to be much lower (this season and beyond) than what the 'anti tankers' do, and have less need to "wait and see".

A few other issues always seem to motivate the 'pro tankers' to want to take decisive action more quickly:

- cap space: at this point, trades really are the only viable option for improving the roster

- asset maximization: Lowry's expiring contract & Gay's player option - good seasons could mean re-signing them to take the team well into tax territory, while bad seasons could kill trade value, plus both could wind up walking for no return

- perceived wasted money: DeRozan's new contract and Fields' lousy deal - DeRozan had a fantastic preseason and could very well prove all the naysayers wrong (myself included), but if he doesn't then his 'potential' could become a wasted asset & if Fields' shooting stroke doesn't return to form that's even more wasted money for players who are either broken (Fields) or redundant/inefficient/poor fit (DeRozan)

- treadmill territory: most experts have the Raptors slotted in anywhere from #6 to #11, potentially landing them both out of the playoffs and at the end of the lottery - moving a core piece(s) to retool the roster for a playoff run OR unloading a core piece(s) to acquire draft pick(s) and improve lottery odds, would be preferable to landing in the dreaded treadmill spot for many fans on either side of the 'tank' debate

- we've been here before: two seasons ago, while Valanciunas was in Europe, the Raptors won several 'winning culture' building games which were utterly meaningless, resulting in the #8 pick instead of a top-5 pick - some people view this current team as little better than that team (partly due to big time improvements many other EC teams have made this offseason), so why repeat the same mistake of piling up meaningless wins while ultimately winding up on the outside of the playoff bubble?

- why waste time?: for posters who believe this roster is a non-playoff team that is only destined to fight for the playoffs at best (ie: never be a true contender for anything better than 1st round fodder), they've simply already arrived at the same conclusion that they expect MU to arrive at after he has been able to "wait and see" - if a trade-deadline and/or offseason rebuild/retool is inevitable, why not start now to have the added benefit of increasing lottery odds?


My point is that I agree with you. I think too many people on both sides of the debate have been unfairly labeled as 'pro tankers' or 'anti tankers', when many on either side probably fall into a common middle ground of 'retool' (be it a reload for this year and/or for future seasons). If that is a conclusion we can come to, then this thread will have served its purpose.

Wednesday night can't come soon enough!

[special1]

I think the bold part is definitely common ground between pro & anti tankers. The way I see it, most of the 'pro tankers' just consider the current roster's ceiling to be much lower (this season and beyond) than what the 'anti tankers' do, and have less need to "wait and see".

A few other issues always seem to motivate the 'pro tankers' to want to take decisive action more quickly:

- cap space: at this point, trades really are the only viable option for improving the roster

- asset maximization: Lowry's expiring contract & Gay's player option - good seasons could mean re-signing them to take the team well into tax territory, while bad seasons could kill trade value, plus both could wind up walking for no return

- perceived wasted money: DeRozan's new contract and Fields' lousy deal - DeRozan had a fantastic preseason and could very well prove all the naysayers wrong (myself included), but if he doesn't then his 'potential' could become a wasted asset & if Fields' shooting stroke doesn't return to form that's even more wasted money for players who are either broken (Fields) or redundant/inefficient/poor fit (DeRozan)

- treadmill territory: most experts have the Raptors slotted in anywhere from #6 to #11, potentially landing them both out of the playoffs and at the end of the lottery - moving a core piece(s) to retool the roster for a playoff run OR unloading a core piece(s) to acquire draft pick(s) and improve lottery odds, would be preferable to landing in the dreaded treadmill spot for many fans on either side of the 'tank' debate

- we've been here before: two seasons ago, while Valanciunas was in Europe, the Raptors won several 'winning culture' building games which were utterly meaningless, resulting in the #8 pick instead of a top-5 pick - some people view this current team as little better than that team (partly due to big time improvements many other EC teams have made this offseason), so why repeat the same mistake of piling up meaningless wins while ultimately winding up on the outside of the playoff bubble?

- why waste time?: for posters who believe this roster is a non-playoff team that is only destined to fight for the playoffs at best (ie: never be a true contender for anything better than 1st round fodder), they've simply already arrived at the same conclusion that they expect MU to arrive at after he has been able to "wait and see" - if a trade-deadline and/or offseason rebuild/retool is inevitable, why not start now to have the added benefit of increasing lottery odds?


My point is that I agree with you. I think too many people on both sides of the debate have been unfairly labeled as 'pro tankers' or 'anti tankers', when many on either side probably fall into a common middle ground of 'retool' (be it a reload for this year and/or for future seasons). If that is a conclusion we can come to, then this thread will have served its purpose.

Wednesday night can't come soon enough!

Here here!

I think this post pretty much sums up my thoughts on this tanking issue. I'm more wait and see (at least give me 20 games!)....but we're in the same boat, watching the same team, hoping for the same thing (eventually) WINS. Some want to see playoffs this year (ME) and build on that for the future. Honestly, I wouldnt mind seeing JV and DD get some playoff games under their belts. Whatever decision MU makes..... i'm still going to support this team.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

Here here!

I think this post pretty much sums up my thoughts on this tanking issue. I'm more wait and see (at least give me 20 games!)....but we're in the same boat, watching the same team, hoping for the same thing (eventually) WINS. Some want to see playoffs this year (ME) and build on that for the future. Honestly, I wouldnt mind seeing JV and DD get some playoff games under their belts. Whatever decision MU makes..... i'm still going to support this team.

I think the bold just uncovered another key difference of opinion between the two camps.

One side prefers playoffs this year, with retooling to happen next offseason to help the team take the next step.

The other side believes if the current roster is a #7 seed at best and, given the cap situation has very limited roster flexibility to improve without trading, why not just start the inevitable retooling now (ahead of an extremely loaded 2014 draft).

Both strategies have merit and both strategies could very well be successful in the long-term.

[mcHAPPY]

I think the bold just uncovered another key difference of opinion between the two camps.

One side prefers playoffs this year, with retooling to happen next offseason to help the team take the next step.

The other side believes if the current roster is a #7 seed at best and, given the cap situation has very limited roster flexibility to improve without trading, why not just start the inevitable retooling now (ahead of an extremely loaded 2014 draft).

Both strategies have merit and both strategies could very well be successful in the long-term.

If the team goes this route, Ujiri is really going to have to make the absolute most of draft picks (which is harder to do the lower you pick) both first and second round, exceptions, and minimum contracts. Value will be the new name of the game.

[special1]

I think the bold just uncovered another key difference of opinion between the two camps.

One side prefers playoffs this year, with retooling to happen next offseason to help the team take the next step.

The other side believes if the current roster is a #7 seed at best and, given the cap situation has very limited roster flexibility to improve without trading, why not just start the inevitable retooling now (ahead of an extremely loaded 2014 draft).

Both strategies have merit and both strategies could very well be successful in the long-term.

I agree! Not much else needs to be said. I'm definitely in the first camp. You have to build on success. The end goal doesnt come overnight.... it takes a long time to build a championship team.

[special1]

If the team goes this route, Ujiri is really going to have to make the absolute most of draft picks (which is harder to do the lower you pick) both first and second round, exceptions, and minimum contracts. Value will be the new name of the game.

I also agree with this! Futhermore, i think Ujiri and his team can make it work. You have to admit Ujiri's pretty good at getting value (whether through trades or free agency). I don't think anyone can argue against that!

[CalgaryRapsFan]

If the team goes this route, Ujiri is really going to have to make the absolute most of draft picks (which is harder to do the lower you pick) both first and second round, exceptions, and minimum contracts. Value will be the new name of the game.

Very true.

This has never been my preferred approach, mainly because I think this roster is poorly assembled, when salaries and 'fit' are factored in. However, there could very well be some benefits to this approach, if a significant retooling is still MU's preference:

- a good season from Lowry, especially if his 2nd half is better than 1st half, and he could be a S&T asset

- a good season from DeRozan, making his contract seem like a bargain, and he could become an even more valuable trade chip (even possibly during the draft)

Gay is really the wildcard here. If he doesn't give a good indication that he wants to re-sign at a decreasing salary (since next year will be the same amount whether re-signed or extended), then it would be a shame to let him walk without getting anything in return. He may very well be the first domino to fall, which could be what MU's "wait and see" is all about. Not only are we talking about a player and/or valuable trade chip, but it's also a huge chunk of salary cap and part of the redundancy with DeRozan.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

I agree! Not much else needs to be said. I'm definitely in the first camp. You have to build on success. The end goal doesnt come overnight.... it takes a long time to build a championship team.

I see pros and cons with both sides, but tend to lean a little more the other way because I am not in love with this roster and think it is a playoff bubble team at best. Given the cap situation, Lowry's expiring contract and Gay's option looming, I would prefer to start the retooling by the deadline at the latest (assuming decent trades are there to be had - ie: good young players/prospects and draft picks).

Of course, if the Raps get off to a good start against a tough schedule, then it's a whole new ballgame with retooling-on-the-fly coming into play. I would never suggest going all-in for this season, but advantageous trades to not only improve the roster for this season but also set the team up for sustained success, is always a good approach.

[Lark Benson]

That brings up another issue with tanking that I have, regardless whether you are pro or anti tanking for the Raptors this season. At the trade deadline, teams are often congratulated for dumping old/high-priced players for good package of prospects and/or picks, even if they aren't technically eliminated from playoff contention. As a GM, what is the difference between making a similar assessment of your team prior to the trade deadline?

Why is it considered tanking when a forward-looking strategy is implemented in the offseason before the season starts or during the first half of the season, but considered good asset management and future planning when the same strategy is implemented at the trade deadline? I'm not trying to be a jerk, I'm honestly curious to hear thoughts on this from people on both sides of the tanking debate.

+1 billion for this post.

The people who are paid to run NBA franchises clearly have no problem with what most fans call tanking. To them it would seem the need to acquire talent trumps the need to build a 'winning culture'. Wonder why....

[mcHAPPY]

+1 billion for this post.

The people who are paid to run NBA franchises clearly have no problem with what most fans call tanking. To them it would seem the need to acquire talent trumps the need to build a 'winning culture'. Wonder why....

Because like love and marriage, you can't have one without the other.

[Fully]

Kind of off topic but "changing the culture" has to be the most overused cliche in all of sports right now.

Every single coach (and lately, even executives) who has been hired over the past decade has told us that they are instituting a culture change, only about 5% of them ever live up to it, and yet the media and fans can not wait to eat it up from the next guy who drops the same stuff.

Casey's a great example but there's dozens more. He had a "culture building" season in year one, saw it completely regress in year two, and now he's firing up the culture change machine again for a second time around this year!