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

[CalgaryRapsFan]

Are you serious??? Your the most negative person i've come across on this forum (when it comes to the Raptors). You want to sell off every player we have for scraps....you don't believe we will ever be good as constructed and would be willing to take less value then we currently have!! Get over yourself dude!

Your a disgrace to true Raptor Fans. I question if you even live in Toronto or Canada!

There was no need for such a blatant personal attack. His message wasn't even aimed at you. You can disagree with his opinion all you want, but please show some respect for your fellow posters.

[p00ka]

I think most of us do.

Do you understand that we would rather see the team built to compete for championships instead of a perrenial stepping stone in the first or second round of the playoffs? ,,,,, Do you understand?

Yet no team has ever won a championship through unloading it's top talent and tanking. Do you understand?

[special1]

Exactly - The benefits of the draft is not only to find a franchise player, but to find complimentary pieces as well. We all know that you don't have to suck to find a good player.

Tony Parker was drafted 28th, Gilbert Arenas drafted 30th, Zach Randolph drafted 19th, Gerald Wallace drafted 25th. This was all in the 2001 draft. I'm sure there are other drafts that would show that you can get very good talent later on. BTW Kwame Brown was the first overall pick in that draft! Eddy Curry was the 4th overall pick. So just having a high pick doesn't mean much at all.

I say win every game you can. You build through the draft when the ping pong balls tell you where to pick. Then you pick the best player available. I would never say that there is no benefit of the draft.....I just dont think you should tear down your team (who most think have a chance for the playoffs) for a lottery pick.

[mcHAPPY]

Yet no team has ever won a championship through unloading it's top talent and tanking. Do you understand?

And yet no team has ever won a championship without all-star talent... and with the exception of the 2004 Pistons all-League talent.

And of course how do most teams get their all-League talent? The overwhelming majority through the draft or assets acquired through the draft and then traded.


Just because it is the Raptors top talent doesn't mean it is talent worth keeping.... especially when all avenues with the greatest chance of acquiring more talent are unavailable.


You don't understand.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

This team as currently constructed is NOT a finished product. Actually, you can say that for about 26 other teams in the NBA. Should everyone else start tanking too?? I think that tanking is flawed, especially when others are doing the same thing!

I think you missed the entire premise of this thread, which is upsetting, since it was specifically directed at people like you.

You're arguing against a concept of tanking that none of the pro-tankers (well 2 actually, per the voting) are advocating. The reason so many threads got derailed is because posters like yourself never bothered trying to actually understand the position of the posters you were arguing with. You have a definition in your head of what "tanking" is, but this thread is illustrating that almost none of the pro-tankers consider tanking to be what you are defining it as.

Per your first bold, you agree that the team is not a finished product, which means roster change is necessary. Given the cap situation, roster change can only happen via trade. Given CBA rules, the only way you're going to trade for a high-impact, high-priced player is by trading one away (ie: Gay, DeRozan, Lowry or Johnson - all core pieces). Essentially, you are arguing that in order for the team to be successful, it needs to rebuild/retool/rework/reconstruct the roster... which is exactly the same thing most of the pro-tankers are pushing for!

This thread should really have been an eye-opener for you, to help you understand exactly what the pro-tankers mean when they say they support "tanking"... it's not what you think!

[mcHAPPY]

Exactly - The benefits of the draft is not only to find a franchise player, but to find complimentary pieces as well. We all know that you don't have to suck to find a good player.

Tony Parker was drafted 28th, Gilbert Arenas drafted 30th, Zach Randolph drafted 19th, Gerald Wallace drafted 25th. This was all in the 2001 draft. I'm sure there are other drafts that would show that you can get very good talent later on. BTW Kwame Brown was the first overall pick in that draft! Eddy Curry was the 4th overall pick. So just having a high pick doesn't mean much at all.

I say win every game you can. You build through the draft when the ping pong balls tell you where to pick. Then you pick the best player available. I would never say that there is no benefit of the draft.....I just dont think you should tear down your team (who most think have a chance for the playoffs) for a lottery pick.

A chance and an expectation are two totally different things.

There is a chance they make the playoffs. There is no expectation they make the playoffs.

Also you're tearing a team down for more assets than a lottery pick.... still not getting the point.

[special1]

There was no need for such a blatant personal attack. His message wasn't even aimed at you. You can disagree with his opinion all he wants, but please show some respect for your fellow posters.

I apologize.....I'm just a passionate fan who takes things a bit too far at times. I think it came out a lot harsher than i wanted it to.

[Axel]

Are you actually saying that the Atlanta Hawks did what your suggesting we do?? What exactly are you saying? I'm saying i would rather make the playoffs and be like the Atlanta Hawks instead of a perrenial lottery team.....Do you understand?

I'm saying that the Hawks did tear it down. They traded away their number 1 guy in Joe Johnson for assets. They built around their talented big (Al Horford) while moving good players (Lou Williams for example) in the process to build a competitive team with a balanced roster. They let their inefficient chucking expiring deal go ( who is a far superior defender to anyone we have) and used the cap space they built to acquire Millsap on a very attractive contract.

Build around a promising young big? Trade away the albatross contract? Move away from inefficient chuckers? Bring in assets on friendly deals? Sounds exactly like what many of us are advocating, and exactly what brought Atlanta, again your words, one or two really good players away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[p00ka]

And yet no team has ever won a championship without all-star talent... and with the exception of the 2004 Pistons all-League talent.

And of course how do most teams get their all-League talent? The overwhelming majority through the draft or assets acquired through the draft and then traded.


Just because it is the Raptors top talent doesn't mean it is talent worth keeping.... especially when all avenues with the greatest chance of acquiring more talent are unavailable.


You don't understand.

As misguided as the sentiment is, that turned aggressive in a hurry.

Oh, I understand that managing a plan to build toward a championship involves obtaining talent in the draft. I just don't translate that into a simplistic "tank and get superstars" in the lottery. It's a lot more complicated than that. You say this is not a championship team as constructed. I agree!!! Thing is, no matter what route you take, it isn't going to happen this year or next, so touting the tank route (a disgrace to the GAME), for the reason of how "this team is currently constructed" is near meaningless argument.

Hey, I'm all for the option offered in this thread of trading certain players AND getting VALUABLE assets in return. BC is gone and we now have hope stemming from our new GM. From his track record, there's reason to believe he'll make those kind of decisions when they become AVAILABLE. In the meantime, I personally find it senseless to constantly be pushing for a tank to get into the crapshoot of a lottery, no matter how enticing a few high school players are at this point.

[p00ka]

I'm saying that the Hawks did tear it down. They traded away their number 1 guy in Joe Johnson for assets. They built around their talented big (Al Horford) while moving good players (Lou Williams for example) in the process to build a competitive team with a balanced roster. They let their inefficient chucking expiring deal go ( who is a far superior defender to anyone we have) and used the cap space they built to acquire Millsap on a very attractive contract.

Build around a promising young big? Trade away the albatross contract? Move away from inefficient chuckers? Bring in assets on friendly deals? Sounds exactly like what many of us are advocating, and exactly what brought Atlanta, again your words, one or two really good players away.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Yet none of it resembles tanking for lottery luck.

[special1]

I think you missed the entire premise of this thread, which is upsetting, since it was specifically directed at people like you.

You're arguing against a concept of tanking that none of the pro-tankers (well 2 actually, per the voting) are advocating. The reason so many threads got derailed is because posters like yourself never bothered trying to actually understand the position of the posters you were arguing with. You have a definition in your head of what "tanking" is, but this thread is illustrating that almost none of the pro-tankers consider tanking to be what you are defining it as.

Per your first bold, you agree that the team is not a finished product, which means roster change is necessary. Given the cap situation, roster change can only happen via trade. Given CBA rules, the only way you're going to trade for a high-impact, high-priced player is by trading one away (ie: Gay, DeRozan, Lowry or Johnson - all core pieces). [U]Essentially, you are arguing that in order for the team to be successful, it needs to rebuild/retool/rework/reconstruct the roster... which is exactly the same thing most of the pro-tankers are pushing for![/U]

This thread should really have been an eye-opener for you, to help you understand exactly what the pro-tankers mean when they say they support "tanking"... it's not what you think!

In my opinion (please correct me if i'm wrong) Pro-Tankers believe that we should lose games in order to get a higher draft pick. Please excuse me if i somehow have this confused. Isn't that the true meaning of tanking??

I "hear" what your saying. It seems your definition of pro-tanking includes my views? To be honest, I've never felt so distant from the "pro-tanking" movement. Yet, you make it seem that i may be a "pro-tanker" as well. Interesting.....

I believe that this team should improve itself at any opportunity. Gay has the option of opting out of his contract. Lowry could walk at the end of the year. Would we not have flexibility then? Technically, we don't have to tank for this flexibiliity in the coming year or two.

FYI - I think re-tool, re-work, reconstruct is not the same as tanking. I think that this roster will be different next year. However, I'm not sure the core will be much different.

This thread is indeed an eye opener for me. I think there are divisions within the "pro-tanking" movement. I think you guys should put up a poll to see exactly what it is that you do stand for. For example, you may believe that i am in the tanking movement, yet i am not. I do think this roster still needs to show improvement, but i'm NOT advocating tanking.

[special1]

I'm saying that the Hawks did tear it down. They traded away their number 1 guy in Joe Johnson for assets. They built around their talented big (Al Horford) while moving good players (Lou Williams for example) in the process to build a competitive team with a balanced roster. They let their inefficient chucking expiring deal go ( who is a far superior defender to anyone we have) and used the cap space they built to acquire Millsap on a very attractive contract.

Build around a promising young big? Trade away the albatross contract? Move away from inefficient chuckers? Bring in assets on friendly deals? Sounds exactly like what many of us are advocating, and exactly what brought Atlanta, again your words, one or two really good players away.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Is this what you guys are referring to as "tanking"....Matt52's right. I don't understand pro-tankers at all!

[Axel]

Yet none of it resembles tanking for lottery luck.

Joe Johnson Trade was
The Nets have announced they have acquired six-time all-star shooting guard Joe Johnson from the Atlanta Hawks, in exchange for Jordan Farmar, Anthony Morrow, Johan Petro, DeShawn Stevenson, Jordan Williams, and two draft picks -- Houston's (lottery protected) first rounder in 2013, and the Nets' second rounder in 2017. Farmar is expected to be bought out by the Hawks and is expected to sign a three-year contract with a team in Turkey.
~~

So if the Raps make that trade but with Rudy Gay instead of Johnson, you won't complain that we are tanking?

[Axel]

Is this what you guys are referring to as "tanking"....Matt52's right. I don't understand pro-tankers at all!

It's all about reading. This entire thread was created so that the various forms of tanking could be discussed and hashed out. Most of the "protankers" are really just people who want to see roster changes, it's not all about the ping pong balls. The Atlanta trade with Joe Johnson is a perfect example of what we could see with a move for Rudy Gay; Flexibility, and assets.

Instead, this thread has once again devolved into "anti-tankers" trying to explain why we are wrong, without actually hearing what we are saying.

For the record, my preferences for trades would be Gay and Lowry. Gay's contract is unworkable (I never liked the deal) and should net us a draft pick that we could use on a PG prospect. Lowry just might not be the long term answer, but is looking for a long term deal. Move him for mid-level contributors and maybe get a late pick.

[p00ka]

Joe Johnson Trade was
The Nets have announced they have acquired six-time all-star shooting guard Joe Johnson from the Atlanta Hawks, in exchange for Jordan Farmar, Anthony Morrow, Johan Petro, DeShawn Stevenson, Jordan Williams, and two draft picks -- Houston's (lottery protected) first rounder in 2013, and the Nets' second rounder in 2017. Farmar is expected to be bought out by the Hawks and is expected to sign a three-year contract with a team in Turkey.
~~

So if the Raps make that trade but with Rudy Gay instead of Johnson, you won't complain that we are tanking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

With that question, you totally change the topic. so I won't even respond to it specifically.
Reminder: My point that you responded to was "yet none of it resembles tanking for lottery luck."

The "lottery related" results of that JJ trade:
1. A lottery protected (no shooting for lottery luck there) 1st round pick that ended being the 18th pick in a very weak draft, subsequently used to trade all the way up to #16 in the same weak draft. Nothing lottery related at all.
2. The hawks went on to finish 6th in the East last year, taking them way out of the lottery. Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't seem to come close to resembling "tanking for lottery luck".
3. Most don't project them in the lottery this year either. If they are, they certainly won't be high in the lottery. As you pointed out, they went out and got Milsap, hardly a tanking for the lottery move.

Once again, your Atlanta example of "Sounds exactly like what many of us are advocating" doesn't at all resemble tanking for lottery luck, as it resulted in no lottery implications at all.