p00ka wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
A new take on tanking - opponents of this need not click this thread
Collapse
X
-
Heir, Prince of Cambridge
If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.
-
special1 wrote: View PostIn 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.
As I understand this thread, 'tanking' (which has 2 votes only) is all about making roster moves with 2 things in mind this season: acquiring draft picks and maximizing draft position (ie: just lose baby!). What we're seeing though, is that many people who labeled themselves as 'tankers' want something more in line with retooling than outright tanking... if that makes any sense. of course if the Raps get off to another awful start in the standings this season, then I think the outright full-on tanking bandwagon will fill up in a hurry!
Comment
-
An element that seems to confuse matters is the idea of losing on purpose. We need to distinguish between players losing on purpose, versus management losing on purpose.
It needs to be pointed out that nobody is expecting players to start missing shots, throwing the ball out of bounds, or generally lowering their compete level.
Comment
-
Nilanka wrote: View PostAn element that seems to confuse matters is the idea of losing on purpose. We need to distinguish between players losing on purpose, versus management losing on purpose.
It needs to be pointed out that nobody is expecting players to start missing shots, throwing the ball out of bounds, or generally lowering their compete level.Heir, Prince of Cambridge
If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.
Comment
-
Nilanka wrote: View PostAn element that seems to confuse matters is the idea of losing on purpose. We need to distinguish between players losing on purpose, versus management losing on purpose.
It needs to be pointed out that nobody is expecting players to start missing shots, throwing the ball out of bounds, or generally lowering their compete level.
Players/coaches go from game to game trying to win.
Management looks many seasons out. Draft picks, free agency targets, their own player evaluation and development.
This team is not going to win a championship as currently constructed therefore why wouldn't management, especially since management has made clear championships is the ultimate goal and EXPECTATION, make moves down for 2-5 seasons down the road when the team COULD field a championship contender?
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostWHOOOOOO! (Ric Flair is here!)
Players/coaches go from game to game trying to win.
Management looks many seasons out. Draft picks, free agency targets, their own player evaluation and development.
This team is not going to win a championship as currently constructed therefore why wouldn't management, especially since management has made clear championships is the ultimate goal and EXPECTATION, make moves down for 2-5 seasons down the road when the team COULD field a championship contender?
Comment
-
Axel wrote: View PostThis is why you are wrong. Tanking is really the proper term for what 90% of the "pro-tankers" are even advocating. Roster rebuild with a complete overhaul has nothing to do with lottery. Better fitting pieces, cap flexibility, and future picks. No where does it say, trade everything for a chance to win the lotto. So no, the Joe Johnson trade doesn't change the topic, since this thread is about how far are you willing to go in a roster overhaul. That trade is likely the barometer for any Rudy Gay trade, since Gay has more in common with Johnson than Melo.
Hey, however you wish to describe the nature of the thread, I responded to your post about Atlanta's example with a simple "Yet none of it resembles tanking for lottery luck.". I mentioned that because MANY pro-tanking posts, especially from the OP of this thread, constantly speak to losing as many games as possible (that's called tanking) because the upcoming lottery is loaded with talent.
You responded with "Joe Johnson Trade was ". I provided facts that spell out that there was zero lottery implications in that example. Now you come back telling me I'm "wrong" because it "has nothing to do with lottery". Man, if you're going to keep changing the path of this convo (somewhat common among pro-tankers apparently), yup I'm wrong about something.
Comment
-
Matt52 wrote: View PostWHOOOOOO! (Ric Flair is here!)
Players/coaches go from game to game trying to win.
Management looks many seasons out. Draft picks, free agency targets, their own player evaluation and development.
This team is not going to win a championship as currently constructed therefore why wouldn't management, especially since management has made clear championships is the ultimate goal and EXPECTATION, make moves down for 2-5 seasons down the road when the team COULD field a championship contender?
If we can get on the same page about what rebuilding, retooling, tanking, pro-tanking, anti-tanking, roster evaluation and wait-and-see means before the season starts - partly as a result of this thread - then all our summer frustrations won't all be for naught! lol
Comment
-
p00ka wrote: View PostDude, you keep changing the topic of the discussion between you and I, so of course I'm "wrong".
Hey, however you wish to describe the nature of the thread, I responded to your post about Atlanta's example with a simple "Yet none of it resembles tanking for lottery luck.". I mentioned that because MANY pro-tanking posts, especially from the OP of this thread, constantly speak to losing as many games as possible (that's called tanking) because the upcoming lottery is loaded with talent.
You responded with "Joe Johnson Trade was ". I provided facts that spell out that there was zero lottery implications in that example. Now you come back telling me I'm "wrong" because it "has nothing to do with lottery". Man, if you're going to keep changing the path of this convo (somewhat common among pro-tankers apparently), yup I'm wrong about something.
Special1 asked about how Atlanta was a rebuild? I presented how Atlanta went from a treadmill team, circa 2009 to their present state. Each of the moves they made are similar to what many of the rebuild movement want; moving the albatross contract, creating cap flexibility, acquiring extra picks as assets. The whole idea that everyone who is not satisfied with this roster wants us to acquire lottery picks in trades isn't true, that's your perception of our desires, not reality.
I honestly don't care if we get a single draft pick in our rebuild. I honestly don't care if we have 0 lottery picks this year. We need to overhaul the roster with moveable and valuable assets that either fit together or can be flipped again. The Joe Johnson trade is a perfect example. Removing a Gay like contract, adding players with moveable contracts and adding an extra pick (that was used on Shane Larkin then traded again). I would be thrilled if that was the first step in our rebuild.
Lottery luck is not a term that I have said, nor do I recall seeing Matt mention it during the OP. In fact, here is something Matt did say: "A lot of people who are against tanking use the argument or protest against it saying assets such as Lowry, DD, or Gay would be traded for expiring contracts - and that is it. The classic example is Stuckey/CV for Gay that was floated over the summer. Personally, I'm all for blowing it up but not if it means trading assets for nothing. Established NBA talent, picks, and cap space in any combination is a minimum. Valuable assets need to be returned. As bad as Gay's contract may be, it is still over in 2014-15. We're not talking Joe Johnson here."
Matt even mentions Joe Johnson in the OP.Last edited by Axel; Thu Oct 24, 2013, 06:45 PM.Heir, Prince of Cambridge
If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.
Comment
-
TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View PostI have a question, and im not being sarcastic here, but what would be the reason to tank? If the reason to tank is to get a potential franchise player from the draft (which i really think is the end all be all of tanking), dont we already have that player in Jonas Valanciunas?Twitter - @thekid_it
Comment
-
-
JimiCliff wrote: View PostGotta have at least two.Twitter - @thekid_it
Comment
-
I do find it funny that I was able to change Matt's stance on this topic. At the start of the summer he was consistently emphasizing how Gay, DD, Lowry etc needed to go at all costs. But now he only wants to move them if we get good value in return.
Interesting.
Ditto for Axel and CalgaryRapsFan. I'm sure they'll all vehemently deny it nowLast edited by Xixak; Thu Oct 24, 2013, 11:02 PM.
Comment
Comment