Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Enough with the Tanking Rationale... This is Not a Video Game

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Enough with the Tanking Rationale... This is Not a Video Game

    I am sick of so called basketball gurus in this market philosophizing about whether or not it's in the best interest of the team to lose even more games than we have been losing (I'm looking at you right now Chisolm, and for disclosure, my name real name is Ronnie Smith and I welcome any reply). Do you think our guys are gonna hit the floor and lose an extra game or two because some writer thinks that unknown draft picks will lead us to NBA panacea? It's ridiculous to suggest that finishing in 10th instead of 8th somehow gets us closer to being a contender for a title. We've had tons of high draft picks lately, do we really need more? SIDENOTE: Trading up is always possible if necessary for the right piece. Losing begets losing, I say win as many games as possible to breed winners. Look at John Wall, #1 pick, documented loser so far (not personally but as a pro basketball player in terms of the win-loss column), Bargnani same thing. You don't need me to go on with examples. It's called a draft lottery for a reason, it's a crap shoot and it doesn't guarantee anything. How many high picks turn out to be busts? How come the Spurs manage to find quality talent deep in the draft time and time again? We currently have a #1, a 5, two 8's and a 9 on our roster, do we need more lottery picks? No. Are we set to contend for a title if we draft the next Ed Davis? No. Do we need smarter transactions? Absolutely. This so called tanking rationale really irks me. These guys on our squad are trying hard to be better and it's taking time, we can all see the progress. It's not like a video game where you are the defacto GM for the whole league. I like where our squad is going and nothing beats getting a taste of winning.

    Attention Amir Johnson: You're the fucking man! I've had your back since you got here. The guys who do quick reaction tend to evaluate you based on your stat line and often overlook the spirit and intangible hustle plays you bring every game, even when the shot is not falling. I knew that was a good value contract, shame on those who even suggested using the amnesty.

  • #2
    Totally agree. We've also seen "high" draft pick refuse to come to the city. We need to do what the Spurs are doing. Great scouting to find players that work well in the current system. AA is a great example. From nowhere to sixth man. Jose played a long time for us. Might not be worth the money NOW, but still helped our team. This is cheaper method & has more of an impact. We can't count on this franchise to make a good pick. We can't even depend on them to keep the pick & develop player.

    Comment


    • #3
      The anti-tanking logic is even more absurd than the tanking logic. Look at the standings. Keep on ignoring reality if you want, but dont complain about it to the rest of us.

      Comment


      • #4
        Sprechen wrote: View Post
        I am sick of so called basketball gurus in this market philosophizing about whether or not it's in the best interest of the team to lose even more games than we have been losing (I'm looking at you right now Chisolm, and for disclosure, my name real name is Ronnie Smith and I welcome any reply). Do you think our guys are gonna hit the floor and lose an extra game or two because some writer thinks that unknown draft picks will lead us to NBA panacea? It's ridiculous to suggest that finishing in 10th instead of 8th somehow gets us closer to being a contender for a title. We've had tons of high draft picks lately, do we really need more? SIDENOTE: Trading up is always possible if necessary for the right piece. Losing begets losing, I say win as many games as possible to breed winners. Look at John Wall, #1 pick, documented loser so far (not personally but as a pro basketball player in terms of the win-loss column), Bargnani same thing. You don't need me to go on with examples. It's called a draft lottery for a reason, it's a crap shoot and it doesn't guarantee anything. How many high picks turn out to be busts? How come the Spurs manage to find quality talent deep in the draft time and time again? We currently have a #1, a 5, two 8's and a 9 on our roster, do we need more lottery picks? No. Are we set to contend for a title if we draft the next Ed Davis? No. Do we need smarter transactions? Absolutely. This so called tanking rationale really irks me. These guys on our squad are trying hard to be better and it's taking time, we can all see the progress. It's not like a video game where you are the defacto GM for the whole league. I like where our squad is going and nothing beats getting a taste of winning.

        Attention Amir Johnson: You're the fucking man! I've had your back since you got here. The guys who do quick reaction tend to evaluate you based on your stat line and often overlook the spirit and intangible hustle plays you bring every game, even when the shot is not falling. I knew that was a good value contract, shame on those who even suggested using the amnesty.
        How exactly is someone saying that finishing 10th over 8th is better for the development of the franchise constitute tanking? Tanking usually means finishing in the bottom 3 of the league.

        Do you really think that winning say 2 more games in the regular season (likely difference between 8-9) then getting swept by Miami is more beneficial than the team pushing hard, coming up short, getting the flexibility to trade a draft pick again (once the OKC debt is paid)? Seems very short-sighted since we are still in a talent acquisition phase.

        The whole video game line really puts this rant over the top. If you want to argue that making the playoffs and fostering a culture of winning games is more important than talent acquisition, then feel free to do so, but to me that line kind of made your whole thing a joke. How is saying we should finish 10th similar to a video game? Maybe you're just not good at video games, cause most people don't try to finish 10th.
        Heir, Prince of Cambridge

        If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Sprechen wrote: View Post
          I am sick of so called basketball gurus in this market philosophizing about whether or not it's in the best interest of the team to lose even more games than we have been losing (I'm looking at you right now Chisolm, and for disclosure, my name real name is Ronnie Smith and I welcome any reply). Do you think our guys are gonna hit the floor and lose an extra game or two because some writer thinks that unknown draft picks will lead us to NBA panacea? It's ridiculous to suggest that finishing in 10th instead of 8th somehow gets us closer to being a contender for a title. We've had tons of high draft picks lately, do we really need more? SIDENOTE: Trading up is always possible if necessary for the right piece. Losing begets losing, I say win as many games as possible to breed winners. Look at John Wall, #1 pick, documented loser so far (not personally but as a pro basketball player in terms of the win-loss column), Bargnani same thing. You don't need me to go on with examples. It's called a draft lottery for a reason, it's a crap shoot and it doesn't guarantee anything. How many high picks turn out to be busts? How come the Spurs manage to find quality talent deep in the draft time and time again? We currently have a #1, a 5, two 8's and a 9 on our roster, do we need more lottery picks? No. Are we set to contend for a title if we draft the next Ed Davis? No. Do we need smarter transactions? Absolutely. This so called tanking rationale really irks me. These guys on our squad are trying hard to be better and it's taking time, we can all see the progress. It's not like a video game where you are the defacto GM for the whole league. I like where our squad is going and nothing beats getting a taste of winning.

          Attention Amir Johnson: You're the fucking man! I've had your back since you got here. The guys who do quick reaction tend to evaluate you based on your stat line and often overlook the spirit and intangible hustle plays you bring every game, even when the shot is not falling. I knew that was a good value contract, shame on those who even suggested using the amnesty.
          You clearly didn't actually read Chisholm's article if you think he's advocating tanking.

          We owe OKC a lottery pick sometime between now and 2018. He was saying it's best to give up that pick this year (in an expected weak draft), than in future years. The only way we give up that pick this year is if we miss the playoffs.

          By giving up that pick, Colangelo gains the ability to use future 1st round picks as trade bait this summer. He can't do this until OKC gets their pick from us.

          Comment


          • #6
            whos the other #8 draft pick besides ross?

            edit: gay. didn't consider trades.

            Comment


            • #7
              Here we go again...

              Comment


              • #8
                RepRaptorsintheUSA wrote: View Post
                Totally agree. We've also seen "high" draft pick refuse to come to the city. We need to do what the Spurs are doing. Great scouting to find players that work well in the current system. AA is a great example. From nowhere to sixth man. Jose played a long time for us. Might not be worth the money NOW, but still helped our team. This is cheaper method & has more of an impact. We can't count on this franchise to make a good pick. We can't even depend on them to keep the pick & develop player.
                Which high draft pick refused to come to Toronto? The only player I can remember "holding out" anywhere was Steve Francis in Vancouver, and that was close to 15 years ago now. I hope that you're not giving up all hope in the lottery process as a way to build your team because of one isolated incident that happened in the 1990's. That's looking for monsters under the bed.

                If replicating the Spurs draft success was as simple as a franchise saying "We should start doing that too!", then wouldn't every team in the league already be doing it? Besides, the Spurs are a completely different animal than the current version of the Raptors (understatement of the century?). They've been able to target complimentary or "system" players with their draft picks because they've had one of the leagues top 3 or 4 cores for the past decade and a half. That is not a luxury that the Raptors have; they should still be in the process of accumulating as much talent as they possibly can before even defining what their system is.

                Chisholm's article isn't advocating tanking or losing on purpose down the stretch to ensure that they miss out on the playoffs. He's just thinking aloud about some of the ramifications that both scenarios (playoffs or no playoffs) could have on this team going forward.

                All of your thoughts about how playoff experience and a winning culture can really help a young group like Toronto were acknowledged by him as well. However there are potential drawbacks to making the playoffs and I feel like Chisholm did a good job of hitting on those too. One of the most important variables in the equation is how Colangelo (if MLSE is foolishly enough to option him for another year) will respond this summer under both scenarios. He's always been a guy who has read his own headlines and counted his chickens before they hatched (this past Fall for example) - doesn't it worry you that he will rest of his laurels a bit this offseason if the team were to scrape into the 8th spot? Does trading Bargnani become less of a priority? To go one step further, does the absence of a first round pick in potential trades make moving Bargnani for something of value impossible?
                Last edited by Fully; Wed Feb 27th, 2013, 01:01 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Nilanka wrote: View Post
                  You clearly didn't actually read Chisholm's article if you think he's advocating tanking.

                  We owe OKC a lottery pick sometime between now and 2018. He was saying it's best to give up that pick this year (in an expected weak draft), than in future years. The only way we give up that pick this year is if we miss the playoffs.

                  By giving up that pick, Colangelo gains the ability to use future 1st round picks as trade bait this summer. He can't do this until OKC gets their pick from us.
                  +1
                  Nowhere in the article does it mention the word "tanking" or the concept of "losing on purpose". Chisolm's argument was that we want the Raptors to become a contender, i.e. to be in the playoffs and win a series or more year after year; as opposed to a 8th seed who sneaks into the playoffs and blindly considers itself to be a piece away from being contenders:

                  "None of this is meant to suggest that making the Playoffs would be any kind of failure. There are plenty of positive takeaways to a postseason series, even a four-and-out sweep, and if the Raptors could manage it, it would speak to a real growth in the club's ability to grind out necessary wins to achieve a preseason goal. Still, there are Playoff teams and there are contenders, and what the Raptors really want to be is the latter, not the former." - Chisolm

                  The fact that we owe OKC a pick as explained by Nilanka and Axel further strenghtens his argument.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    RepRaptorsintheUSA wrote: View Post
                    Totally agree. We've also seen "high" draft pick refuse to come to the city. We need to do what the Spurs are doing.
                    Which high draft pick has refused to come to Toronto?

                    I agree about the Spurs. We should get really fortunate and have our best players get hurt, tank the season, get lucky in the lottery, and draft a once in a generation big man who is one of the greatest players in teh history of basketball. I think that's an awesome plan.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I've been shouting this to anyone who will listen, but the best-case scenario is clearly:
                      a) making the playoffs, gaining valuable experience and confidence, even if it results in a hasty first-round exit.
                      b) going into the draft with their own pick (likely 15th or 16th overall), and a list of guys who they'd like if they drop.
                      c) if none of those players fall to them, then they've got some potential trades on the table. These include:
                      • Sending the pick to OKC, for the future rights to the Raptors own draft pick. In other words, completing the Lowry trade now. Maybe OKC opts not to do this, in the hopes that Toronto collapses and misses big at some point over the next few years. But if they can find an NBA-ready role-player at 15, it might make sense for them. An nba-ready floor-spacing big-man like Olynyk might make more sense for them, for example, than it would for Toronto.
                      • Using the pick as incentive in a Bargnani trade. Would LA flip Gasol for Bargnani + Kleiza + a mid 1st-rounder? Would Toronto do this? What other options are out there for Bargnani when you add a mid first-rounder to the mix?
                      • Using the pick to try to facilitate a sign-and-trade. Obviously, there are PFs Toronto likes who will be available in sign-and-trades, but the Raptors lack useful assets to make this happen. A mid first-rounder, even in a weak draft, is a decent asset. A direct trade with Utah is unlikely because they've got a couple mid firsts (their own and the Nets), but we could find another asset to flip to them or help them move up in the draft.

                      To me, Chisholm is just trying to make it seem like the a miss is the best-case scenario to manage fan expectations. Guaranteed, if the Raptors actually did make the playoffs, he'd be writing about how great this is for the organization.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        There's nothing wrong with saying that we are better off not making the playoffs this year because of the implications of this years draft vs. next years draft and the fact that we owe a pick to OKC. That to me is not tanking. Tanking is aimed at getting a lotto pick (1-3) in the hopes of landing a franchise changing player.

                        I haven't heard anyone on this site advocate tanking since last year. Seriously. Also you don't need to advocate tanking because even if the raps continue to play well there's a 10% (my estimation) that they'll even make the playoffs.

                        So go ahead, play your hearts out, we'll support you all the way, but if you come up short, which odds are you will, then we get to flip a high-ish draft pick in a weak draft out.

                        I just don't understand your rant...

                        EDIT:
                        I read it as "draft pick refuse" as in the synonym for garbage, live we've seen a lot of high draft pick garbage come through the city... aka POB
                        "They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee Dec. 2014

                        "I guess I got a little carried away there" ~ ezzbee Apr. 2015

                        "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          slaw wrote: View Post
                          Which high draft pick has refused to come to Toronto?

                          I agree about the Spurs. We should get really fortunate and have our best players get hurt, tank the season, get lucky in the lottery, and draft a once in a generation big man who is one of the greatest players in teh history of basketball. I think that's an awesome plan.
                          Exactly! Easy as pie, right? Another thing, I often see the Spurs being cited as draft geniuses, and a "why can't we do like them" attitude. It's all based on myth. I take nothing away from the Spurs, as by all accounts they're a superbly run organization, and there's no question that Popovich is at the top of the heap, coaching wise, BUT the draft is as much of a crapshoot for them as anyone else.

                          Ginobli is often cited as them being geniuses for picking him at 57. If they're such geniuses, and had any clue how he was going to turn out, why wouldn't they have chosen him at the 29 spot when they took some guy named Leon Smith? Or why did they take Splitter at 28 when Marc Gasol went at 48? Or why the hell did they take Mahinmi when they could have had David Lee, Gortat, Ellis? They took Beno Udrih when Andy Varejao went 2 picks later? Like everybody else, they take their best guess as to what a kid is going to be in a few years, and miss more often that hit.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            octothorp wrote: View Post
                            I've been shouting this to anyone who will listen, but the best-case scenario is clearly:
                            a) making the playoffs, gaining valuable experience and confidence, even if it results in a hasty first-round exit.
                            b) going into the draft with their own pick (likely 15th or 16th overall), and a list of guys who they'd like if they drop.
                            c) if none of those players fall to them, then they've got some potential trades on the table. These include:
                            • Sending the pick to OKC, for the future rights to the Raptors own draft pick. In other words, completing the Lowry trade now. Maybe OKC opts not to do this, in the hopes that Toronto collapses and misses big at some point over the next few years. But if they can find an NBA-ready role-player at 15, it might make sense for them. An nba-ready floor-spacing big-man like Olynyk might make more sense for them, for example, than it would for Toronto.
                            • Using the pick as incentive in a Bargnani trade. Would LA flip Gasol for Bargnani + Kleiza + a mid 1st-rounder? Would Toronto do this? What other options are out there for Bargnani when you add a mid first-rounder to the mix?
                            • Using the pick to try to facilitate a sign-and-trade. Obviously, there are PFs Toronto likes who will be available in sign-and-trades, but the Raptors lack useful assets to make this happen. A mid first-rounder, even in a weak draft, is a decent asset. A direct trade with Utah is unlikely because they've got a couple mid firsts (their own and the Nets), but we could find another asset to flip to them or help them move up in the draft.

                            To me, Chisholm is just trying to make it seem like the a miss is the best-case scenario to manage fan expectations. Guaranteed, if the Raptors actually did make the playoffs, he'd be writing about how great this is for the organization.
                            The only problem with c) is that again...NBA teams cannot trade 1st round picks in consecutive years. The conditions that comes with the pick now owned by OKC makes it unknown when they can acquire the pick. In other words, the Raptors cannot trade their 2013 pick since it is possible that the 2014 pick could go to OKC...thus giving up 1st rounders in consecutive years.

                            That is why one of Chisolm's points is the flexibility i.e. if OKC gets the Raptors' 2013 pick, the team can start trading 1st round picks again starting with the 2015 pick.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Best case is making the playoffs. This year, next year, and so on. F the draft, and F the lottery pick.

                              If the team is in the playoffs, then having a 15-25 pick on the annual is quite acceptable.
                              Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X