To tank or not to tank?

[thrill]

My question is how to you get from a team of scrubs to a team of allstars when 1-3 good picks will make you at least league average? Will the 5th #1 pick in row suddenly take you from last place to 1st place? Sounds made up.

This post, in terms of the original conversation involving the Chicago Bulls, says it all:

Also, comparing anything to the NBA is pointless. The NBA blows. Only part of the reason is that they encourage tanking.

You don't understand basketball if you don't understand the difference one young, elite player can make to an NBA franchise.

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

My question is how to you get from a team of scrubs to a team of allstars when 1-3 good picks will make you at least league average? Will the 5th #1 pick in row suddenly take you from last place to 1st place? Sounds made up.

This post, in terms of the original conversation involving the Chicago Bulls, says it all:

Also, comparing anything to the NBA is pointless. The NBA blows. Only part of the reason is that they encourage tanking.

You don't understand basketball if you don't understand the difference one young, elite player can make to an NBA franchise.

So, your answer is yes, teams should tank because the NBA says it's okay? I rest my case, on both counts.

[thrill]

It depends on your goals. If your goal is to win a championship and acquiring a lottery pick in a season when a league MVP is recovering from a catastrophic injury, your supporting cast has proven inadequate to the pursuit of a championship and your bench is made up of a expiring contracts that don't fit the coach's system to whom you just gave a long, expensive extension to, then you should try to acquire that pick, yes. If that, to you, is tanking, fine. Call it whatever you want. It's sound strategy.

So by your logic, the Bulls should continue to overpay for mediocrity and not try to acquire assets towards contending for a championship because that's the right way to do things? To me, THAT, sounds like tanking.

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

I have no clue what the Vulls should do. Like I said, I don't follow basketball.

Just a quick peak back doesn't make it look like you need a #1 pick multiple years in a row to win a championship, though. Lakers, Heat, Celtics, MAvericks, Spurs account for what 13 of the past 14 championships? The only team to have their own #1 pick contributing was Spurs (Duncan).

[jim]

The answer is Never. It's the only answer to the question. The question really is, what's the question?

There are different roles. The role the player takes is immediate - win the game. The role the coach takes is midrange - win the season. The GM is long range, win the war so to speak. So tanking ... what exactly are you tanking?

Tank the game? Player never. Coach possibly if it means winning more games later (i.e not burning through your pitching staff, or playing a player to develop when it might cost you a game now but may pay off later in the year etc..) GM's aren't considered at the game level.

Tank the season? Player never. Coach never. GM possibly if it means longer range benefits - i.e. more success down the road.

So where to fans fit in? I guess that is all personal, I'm much more short sighted and tend to think more like a player or coach, so am more interested in the competition as it is before me at that moment. I'm watching, they are keeping score, I want my guys to win. It's about that simple. I can't imagine how a persons brain is wired to think differently than that.

Even though I said that GM's can tank seasons, and coaches tank games, I think that's not exactly right. I don't think "tank" is the right word, for example if I'm developing a player and it's a spot where the game calls for a change in strategy and I don't make that change - I'm not tanking it. I'm expecting that player to come through. Concrete example - key situation where a PH is called for and I decide to stick with the other player to give him experience in high pressure situations. I expect him to deliver - and when he doesn't I'll accept that I "tanked" the game. If there was zero chance of his coming through than I am obligated to make a change.

I also think that most fans have absurd ideas on tanking to improve draft positions etc... It's like fans weird desire for surgeries for players. Rest too. If fans had it their way most players would be getting some surgery they really didn't need, being pulled from most games too early, and teams in general would be most losing games on purpose.

[jim]

I say no way. Just play the damn game. The Patriots didn't get to be a near dynasty by getting top draft pick after top draft pick.

This is a complicated question if you let it be, but if you wanted to get to where the rubber meets the road then this is the correct answer.

I know this started with an NBA discussion, so let's use that to see what the coveted lottery pick gets you. Just looking at the top lottery picks over the past few years

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Draft_ ... ery_system

how many of those top picks won championships with the team that drafted them? I don't think it's that many, imo not enough to warrant tanking a season to get a draft pick.

[thrill]

how many of those top picks won championships with the team that drafted them?

Well not that many teams have won titles, period. That's part of my point. You need elite players to win titles. Otherwise, due to the nature of the game and how often you can get the ball into your best player's hands, teams will steamroll you and the rest of the league for years. Dynasties are the major theme of the NBA and it's history. Where are dynasties built? On the back of of supremely great individuals like Russell, Jordan, Bird, Magic, Kareem, Kobe, Shaq, Pippen, Hakeem, Duncan etc. It's an oversimplification, sure, but you can count on one hand the championship teams that didn't have at least one elite player on it's roster in the entire history of the game. Where are those supremely great individuals acquired? Primarily in the draft, with few exceptions. ALL of them with the exception of Dirk Nowitski, Chauncey Billups and a handful of other individual exceptions were high draft picks. Name me the best player on a dynasty team that wasn't acquired extremely high in the draft and you'll have found one more exception to that rule than I could off the top of my head.

I have no clue what the Vulls should do. Like I said, I don't follow basketball.

Just a quick peak back doesn't make it look like you need a #1 pick multiple years in a row to win a championship, though. Lakers, Heat, Celtics, MAvericks, Spurs account for what 13 of the past 14 championships? The only team to have their own #1 pick contributing was Spurs (Duncan).

First you're wrong. LeBron & Shaq we're both number 1 picks. Not with the teams they eventually won titles with, but it enforces my point about acquiring elite talent high in the draft. Second, I didn't say anything about the #1 pick specifically, just the necessity of drafting early to have a chance to get a special player.

Since you keep admitting that you know nothing about the NBA and then keep arguing with me about the NBA, this is the last thing I'll be addressing to you about the NBA. No hard feelings, it's just pointless.

[Maclowery]

In this view, I have gone for the championship every moment of my life, instead of tanking like almost all of you. I am pretty much wholly incapable of planning for the future. Like, right now, I should be doing about 15 important things. But I am looking at what games are on tonight instead, and deciding whether to read this new book I got today at the bar along with the games, or just go find some weed and stay home and cook. I did laundry today, which was painfully difficult as I could have instead played some computer games. I did this solely because I no longer had any clean socks.

I should get better at tanking, or at some point I am going to lose 82 games every single season until my whole franchise folds. Crap!

[lukethedrifter]

so would you tank it with your gal?

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

The only team to have their own#1 pick contributing was Spurs (Duncan).

First you're wrong. LeBron & Shaq we're both number 1 picks. Not with the teams they eventually won titles with

Or, to put it another way, I'm not wrong.