Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy

[aaqubed]

I think people are talking about different things. Some people want to rip out the foundations and start all over. That means trading not just Deng and Boozer, but Noah and Taj (and maybe even Butler) -- all the guys who are good long term pieces, so that we can get bad enough to get a top pick. I don't like that plan and I think most people don't.

Others just want to trade Deng, and, if we can, Boozer and Kirk. Maybe Dunleavy as well. Open up space for the younger players to play more, get some long term assets for guys that won't be on the team next year, and yes, get a better draft pick while we're at it. We don't have to suck that badly to get a decent pick -- if we just miss the playoffs (as the 9 or 10 seed), because of how good the West is, that's probably good enough for the 11 or 10th pick. That, plus the Bobcats' pick, Mirotic, and whatever we get for Deng, gives us a lot of young talent next year, to go along with the veteran core of Rose, Butler, Taj and Noah.

[SteveDobbs]

I think people are talking about different things. Some people want to rip out the foundations and start all over. That means trading not just Deng and Boozer, but Noah and Taj (and maybe even Butler) -- all the guys who are good long term pieces, so that we can get bad enough to get a top pick. I don't like that plan and I think most people don't.

Others just want to trade Deng, and, if we can, Boozer and Kirk. Maybe Dunleavy as well. Open up space for the younger players to play more, get some long term assets for guys that won't be on the team next year, and yes, get a better draft pick while we're at it. We don't have to suck that badly to get a decent pick -- if we just miss the playoffs (as the 9 or 10 seed), because of how good the West is, that's probably good enough for the 11 or 10th pick. That, plus the Bobcats' pick, Mirotic, and whatever we get for Deng, gives us a lot of young talent next year, to go along with the veteran core of Rose, Butler, Taj and Noah.

This. 1000% this. I agree that completely gutting the team to be as bad as you possibly can is a bad strategy.

But we're a mediocre team as is now. Trading guys who probably won't be on the roster next year anyways is just prudent. Not doing so is a mistake.

[dougthonus]

I posted a similar study, and odds a couple times in past threads discussing it. Tanking is most likely to just make you suck for a long time. But w/e, if people chanting "Jabari" after every loss helps them get through this tough year, more power to them.

Luckily I don't think there is any fear of the Bulls actually totally blowing it up, and if they did, most likely people would just have to chant a new name each successive year that we continued to be bad as a result of it.

I don't think the Bulls will blow it up either. However, "blowing it up" and "tanking this season" don't necessarily equate to the same thing.

Trade Deng/Hinrich for crap players and as much future consideration as possible.

The core going into the off-season is now the same as it would be regardless of whether Rose got hurt, stayed healthy or anything else. We'd have the same base players entering 2014/15 as we would in any other circumstance.

The only difference is now the Bulls are guaranteed to miss the playoffs and will likely select in the top nine of the draft and possibly get another 1st rounder to help build in the future as well.

I don't understand the case where the Bulls come out ahead by doing something else. This is the Spurs sucking when David Robinson got hurt and then drafting Tim Duncan or the Bulls having a poor record without Jordan and then drafting Scottie Pippen. The core going forward is going to be the same either way. The only difference is whether you're adding 3 1sts with one of them being top nine or two firsts both in the teens.

The team should project back to win more than 50 games the following season either way, but one scenario clearly has vastly more upside to it than the other.

[bentheredengthat]

I posted a similar study, and odds a couple times in past threads discussing it. Tanking is most likely to just make you suck for a long time. But w/e, if people chanting "Jabari" after every loss helps them get through this tough year, more power to them.

Luckily I don't think there is any fear of the Bulls actually totally blowing it up, and if they did, most likely people would just have to chant a new name each successive year that we continued to be bad as a result of it.

Yeah Re this realization is helping me cope with the board right now. The front office is not going to panic.

As long as we either re-sign Deng to a reasonable deal (the only way we will re-sign him) or get some kind of value back if the FO knows we can't possibly re-sign him, I actually like where we are as a franchise.

As a long-time board member the only thing I regret is that we're driving good people away with all the tank spamming - but I suppose once the season is over, or if the team starts winning, we'll get some good people back around here.

[bentheredengthat]

You guys can want to tank all you want,but you know it wont happen.I truly believe they will get the third seed.Its just very annoying and embarrassing to see bulls fans wanting to lose.

Take if from me, you are fighting a losing battle. I even tried on anti-spamming yesterday, but it just left me feeling dirty & egged on the tank spammers.

If you care about the board, just post as much positive as you can & let the rest roll off your back like water on a Duck.

[McBulls]

Top 10 picks made by the Bulls over the last 47 years:

Year Round Pick Name Nationality College/HS/Club
2008 1 1 Derrick Rose United States University of Memphis
1999 1 1 Elton Brand United States Duke University
2006 1 2 LaMarcus Aldridge United States University of Texas at Austin
2002 1 2 Jay Williams United States Duke University
1979 1 2 Dave Greenwood United States University of California, Los Angeles
1976 1 2 Scott May United States Indiana University
2004 1 3 Ben Gordon United States[2] University of Connecticut
1984 1 3 Michael Jordan United States University of North Carolina
1967 1 3 Clem Haskins United States Western Kentucky University
2001 1 4 Eddy Curry United States Thornwood High School (South Holland, Illinois)
2000 1 4 Marcus Fizer United States Iowa State University
1980 1 4 Kelvin Ransey United States Ohio State University
1968 1 4 Tom Boerwinkle United States University of Tennessee
1983 1 5 Sidney Green United States University of Nevada, Las Vegas
1969 1 5 Larry Cannon United States La Salle University
1989 1 6 Stacey King United States University of Oklahoma
1981 1 6 Orlando Woolridge United States University of Notre Dame
2003 1 7 Kirk Hinrich United States University of Kansas
2000 1 7 Chris Mihm United States University of Texas at Austin
1982 1 7 Quintin Dailey United States University of San Francisco
1987 1 8 Olden Polynice Haiti University of Virginia
2007 1 9 Joakim Noah United States[1] University of Florida
1986 1 9 Brad Sellers United States Ohio State University
1978 1 9 Reggie Theus United States University of Nevada, Las Vegas
1987 1 10 Horace Grant United States Clemson University
1966 1 10 Dave Schellhase United States Purdue University.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Bulls_draft_history

The players who actually helped the Bulls are highlighted in red. The players who played on championship teams are bolded.

All-in-all, a top 10 pick has a 50% chance of being a solid contributor, and a 12% chance of contributing to a championship team.

So you don't sell the farm to get a top 10 pick -- certainly not a productive all-star in his prime, like Deng.

[coldfish]

OK, let's look at the situation:
- If the Bulls don't do anything, they will lose either Boozer or Deng or both this offseason and then come back with a worse team again next year. Beyond that, Rose is probably going to be ultra rusty next year and if he makes it to the playoffs, they will be his first since 2011. Basically the "stand pat" route is a bad idea.

- If the Bulls do little, like trade Deng for a pick or prospect, it really doesn't change much from the first option. You are going to have a much worse team being lead by a rusty star. Furthermore, Deng is the culture and just dumping him pushes you a little closer towards the losing culture mentality that tank treadmill teams acquire. People drastically underestimate what Luol means to the team. You aren't going to get a top pick by doing this either. Too many bad teams. Basically, the "trade Deng and don't do much else" route is a bad idea.

- If the Bulls burn it to the ground, you might end up getting a top 5 pick. You completely destroy the culture though and probably lose Thibodeau. Young players don't win in this league and if you fill your roster with them, you get a guaranteed loser with not much hope. Basically, the "tear it down" tank route is a bad idea.

This is fundamentally my issue. There are no good solutions right now. Maybe one of these ideas is a "least bad" scenario but I don't understand the happiness that people show when pursuing it. The Bulls are probably screwed no matter what direction they go.

[Air Poohdini]

Tanking is still a better strategy than losing in the playoffs and having to get a pick like Marques Teague again. One lost year for a tank won't hurt us, and Derrick will be thankful for it in the end.

[ryannik09]

I dont think people are callling for a complete dismantling. They want Deng and Boozer moved and maybe Dunleavy if it brings back a 1st rd pick.

We move Deng and Boozer thus guaranteeing that the Bulsl dont make the playoffs which gets the Bulls a top 12 pick. Then the bulls end up with the Bobcats pick which will be in the 12-16 range. The Bulls move Boozer for an expiring, and move Deng for a young talent and expirings (like the Waiters Cavs deal) and the Bulls are now set up to complete better in the future.

A team with Rose, Snell, Butler, Waiters????, Mirotic, Taj, Noah, and 2 top 15 2014 1st rd picks, maybe another 1st rd pick, plus a decent FA addition is built to contend next year and in the future.

[synthdogg]

http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/29/losi ... n-the-nba/

One section particularly stood out to me:

Now some might argue that this next draft is different. This next draft is supposed to have such players as Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, and Julius Randle.

But let’s imagine these players are like LeBron. It is important to remember that LeBron never won a title with the teams that acquired his services on draft night. In fact, in the lottery era (since 1985) only the San Antonio Spurs (with David Robinson and Tim Duncan) have drafted a player number one and won a title with that player. Every other number one pick failed to bring a title to the team that “won” the lottery.

I realize this thread has become a tank/non-tank topic, but I want to go back to the original article for a moment because it is pretty interesting. While I do think there are some good points in there, and a lot of food for thought....it's also a bit misleading.

The article lists a handful of #1 picks, and mentions how none of the players went on to lead the teams that drafted them to a championship. Good point, but most of the players they mentioned (other than the ones that turned out to be busts) led those franchises to the NBA Finals (Shaq, LeBron, Iverson) or deep into the playoffs before injuries took over (Yao, Glenn Robinson, Chris Webber, Larry Johnson).

The author then goes on to talk about dreams of "title contention"....I think all of the players listed above fulfilled dreams of "title contention".
Interesting, thinking about Shaq and LeBron losing in the Finals....both of them lost to teams that were led by stars that were #1 draft picks for their teams (Hakeem, Duncan).

Overall, I really do think the author makes some good points. I just looked through the top 4 draft picks over the past few decades, and there's not a lot to choose from. Even in 2003, the last draft with multiple superstars, there was still Darko Milicic sitting in there at #2.

Tanking is a little like playing the lottery. There's a LOT of luck involved. If the numbers don't go your way, you can end up with nothing, and hurting for a long, long, time.

[blumeany]

That stat about the Spurs being the only team to have won a title with their #1 pick since in the lottery area is a bit skewed. Why? Because the 80's and 90's were absolutely ruled by teams led by their own picks. In the 00's, they were dominated by the Spurs and Lakers. The Lakers led by Bryant who - although he wasn't drafted by L.A. - has played exclusively for them as he was a draft day trade. The Spurs led by Duncan.

Not to mention they kind of forgot the Dwayne Wade led Miami Heat in '05/06

EDIT: Sorry, looks like they are exclusively talking about #1 picks. But that doesn't matter, as tanking will lead to a high pick, not necessarily #1.

[transplant]

OK, let's look at the situation:
- If the Bulls don't do anything, they will lose either Boozer or Deng or both this offseason and then come back with a worse team again next year. Beyond that, Rose is probably going to be ultra rusty next year and if he makes it to the playoffs, they will be his first since 2011. Basically the "stand pat" route is a bad idea.

- If the Bulls do little, like trade Deng for a pick or prospect, it really doesn't change much from the first option. You are going to have a much worse team being lead by a rusty star. Furthermore, Deng is the culture and just dumping him pushes you a little closer towards the losing culture mentality that tank treadmill teams acquire. People drastically underestimate what Luol means to the team. You aren't going to get a top pick by doing this either. Too many bad teams. Basically, the "trade Deng and don't do much else" route is a bad idea.

- If the Bulls burn it to the ground, you might end up getting a top 5 pick. You completely destroy the culture though and probably lose Thibodeau. Young players don't win in this league and if you fill your roster with them, you get a guaranteed loser with not much hope. Basically, the "tear it down" tank route is a bad idea.

This is fundamentally my issue. There are no good solutions right now. Maybe one of these ideas is a "least bad" scenario but I don't understand the happiness that people show when pursuing it. The Bulls are probably screwed no matter what direction they go.

Fish, you're stuck because you are looking at everything from the 50th percentile. In other words, if all the unknowns come in dead-square on their statistical probabilities, you're right...the Bulls are more or less screwed. An alternative is to inject some level of optimism.

With optimism the full-tankers can see the Bulls not only getting a high lottery pick, but the player they select turns out to be the best of the lot. With optimism, tankers and non-tankers can find a common ground in believing that Rose will not be rusty...he'll be great and in fairly short order. With optimism, Mirotic will be all that and a slice of cheese. With optimism, key players stay healthy.

I also tend to be a realist. However, from time to time, I find a little sip of Kool Aid is needed to get me through the day.

[synthdogg]

We move Deng and Boozer thus guaranteeing that the Bulsl dont make the playoffs which gets the Bulls a top 12 pick.

This is the thinking that I don't understand. I'm not sure if people haven't been paying attention to the league this year or what....but as of today the Bulls are 7-9 and they're still a 7th seed. There are some BAD teams in the East this year, I mean....like 'the Bulls could lose the majority of their games for the rest of the season and still end up in the playoffs' bad. There are NO guarantees about the lottery this year. 2 teams in the East have winning records. 2.

The Bulls got out of the first round of the playoffs last year without Rose, Deng, Hinrich, and Noah playing on 1 foot.
I just don't agree that losing Rose, Deng, Boozer (add Robinson and Bellinelli if you want) guarantees that they'll become a sub .400 team.

[Rerisen]

I think we seriously would be a top 5 lottery team with just trading Deng. No need to dump any other assets really. We would be so bad on offense at that point. We already aren't that good as is.

It won't sink us that bad because when Butler comes back he will fill the role pretty well.

Plus, if you get someone like Waiters back, he actually scored about as well as Lu last year. More points per minutes even, just a tad worse efficiency.

[Rerisen]

I posted a similar study, and odds a couple times in past threads discussing it. Tanking is most likely to just make you suck for a long time. But w/e, if people chanting "Jabari" after every loss helps them get through this tough year, more power to them.

Luckily I don't think there is any fear of the Bulls actually totally blowing it up, and if they did, most likely people would just have to chant a new name each successive year that we continued to be bad as a result of it.

I don't think the Bulls will blow it up either. However, "blowing it up" and "tanking this season" don't necessarily equate to the same thing.

Trade Deng/Hinrich for crap players and as much future consideration as possible.

The core going into the off-season is now the same as it would be regardless of whether Rose got hurt, stayed healthy or anything else. We'd have the same base players entering 2014/15 as we would in any other circumstance.

The only difference is now the Bulls are guaranteed to miss the playoffs and will likely select in the top nine of the draft and possibly get another 1st rounder to help build in the future as well.

I don't understand the case where the Bulls come out ahead by doing something else. This is the Spurs sucking when David Robinson got hurt and then drafting Tim Duncan or the Bulls having a poor record without Jordan and then drafting Scottie Pippen. The core going forward is going to be the same either way. The only difference is whether you're adding 3 1sts with one of them being top nine or two firsts both in the teens.

The team should project back to win more than 50 games the following season either way, but one scenario clearly has vastly more upside to it than the other.

Sounds good to me. Letting Deng walk for nothing, while just helping us win more games this year would be doubly stupid. But until the Bulls actually take action and make a move, little reason to actively cheer for losses, because we won't be bad enough to get where people hope.

I wouldn't plan on Tim Duncan or Scottie Pippen as your high and low results though. Setting up for big disappointment.

[League Circles]

I don't think the Bulls will blow it up either. However, "blowing it up" and "tanking this season" don't necessarily equate to the same thing.

Trade Deng/Hinrich for crap players and as much future consideration as possible.

The core going into the off-season is now the same as it would be regardless of whether Rose got hurt, stayed healthy or anything else. We'd have the same base players entering 2014/15 as we would in any other circumstance.

The only difference is now the Bulls are guaranteed to miss the playoffs and will likely select in the top nine of the draft and possibly get another 1st rounder to help build in the future as well.

I don't understand the case where the Bulls come out ahead by doing something else. This is the Spurs sucking when David Robinson got hurt and then drafting Tim Duncan or the Bulls having a poor record without Jordan and then drafting Scottie Pippen. The core going forward is going to be the same either way. The only difference is whether you're adding 3 1sts with one of them being top nine or two firsts both in the teens.

The team should project back to win more than 50 games the following season either way, but one scenario clearly has vastly more upside to it than the other.

Very good post as it's important to draw the distinction between blowing it up and tanking without blowing it up.

However, while you are right that the "core" players will be the same in either scenario (more on this in a second), adding 2 or 3 first round picks plus Mirotic to the roster which already has Snell and Teague means you are committed to several extremely young, in experienced players in the rotation no matter what. The cap space that would be taken by these picks could be spent on other players. It's possible it could be insignificant, but if we draft, say, 8th with our own pick, get the Bobcats pick at 11, and another pick for Deng right in that late lottery range or whatever, suddenly you're talking about a decent amount of salary. While the players drafted might be better long term that who you could sign with that money, they most likely would not be in their first year or two, at least insofar as they contribute to actually winning games. Just as an example of FAs that should be pretty cheap that would probably be notably better than late lottery rookies in year one or two, I'm talking about guys like Thabo or Ben Gordon - that level of player.

Then there is the issue regarding our best player Luol Deng. I pretty much refuse to believe that the Bulls have ruled out resigning him. They may be expecting not to sign him, but a lot can change in 9 months based on his play and other opportunities. Say Jimmy needs to be included in a trade we really like. Luol then becomes much more valuable to keep. Hell, he's already our clear 2nd best player right now to a healthy Rose.

Basically what I'm saying is that while "tanking" without "blowing it up" could maybe be best long term and on paper, it also is rather likely to remove this team from strong contention for a year or two due to issues of inexperience and chemistry. And IMO, if we are removed from strong contention for 2 of Rose's last three years under contract, he'll likely walk when he's a FA. Maybe even demand a trade sooner.

It all sounds good and simple on paper to replace Deng, Nazr, Kirk and Boozer with Mirotic and 3 late lottery picks, but it's likely a temporary step backwards if not a permanent one over what we could be keep more of the core intact and just adding Mirotic and one or 2 first rounders.

[G I N T]

Tanking is still a better strategy than losing in the playoffs and having to get a pick like Marques Teague again. One lost year for a tank won't hurt us, and Derrick will be thankful for it in the end.

Yes it is. I mean, I understand fans not wanting to see their team lose out of natural habit, and I don’t hold that against anyone who is rooting for wins this year. But at the same time, it goes without saying that winning games and making the playoffs this year achieves nothing and will not improve the team’s future one bit (unless you seriously believe the whole “losing culture is infectious” theory). The arguments against losing games this year make very little sense. Even if you don’t get a top 3 pick, I’m sure if you look at all the drafts in NBA history that the likelihood of getting a quality/high-impact player in the 9-12 range is much greater than getting one in let’s say the 18-21 range. Fighting tooth and nail to get a meaningless 6th seed is simply foolish if the goal is to improve the team’s future outlook. And people often bring up the East being horrendous as a reason not to lose. Um, so what? The East is bad... which means what exactly? That getting the 5th seed/1st round exit/terrible draft pick is a more desirable outcome than getting a 9-12 pick, with a slim chance at a top 3 pick? Didn't think so.

[Rerisen]

It all sounds good and simple on paper to replace Deng, Nazr, Kirk and Boozer with Mirotic and 3 late lottery picks, but it's likely a temporary step backwards if not a permanent one over what we could be keep more of the core intact and just adding Mirotic and one or 2 first rounders.

I agree its likely a step backward at least a few years, but that will happen regardless if Deng is not in the realistic plans going forward. And it seems by all we have read, its leaning like he's not.

But yeah, people that are pretending Rose + a 5-10 pick + Mirotic is an instant contender again is fantasy land (if you have lost Noah, Gibson, etc).

A player in that range is not likely to even be as good as Deng for a couple years, if ever. Mirotic is likely to need a few years to learn the league. By the time those 2 assets mature, is Rose wanting out?

Then you've blown up your team prematurely just to have a new core of Nikola Mirotic, and the next Luol Deng or Ben Gordon (3rd and 7th picks respectively), while having lost your superstar. Sounds like a 10 year rebuilder to me.

[DuckIII]

I think our situation is more unique then most teams that tank every year.

I agree. This has to be put into context. And in our situation, I am absolutely convinced that the tank is the way to go given that Rose isn't playing, but will return, and in my view Deng will not be resigned this summer.

Under those circumstances, maximizing our win total - and retaining the guy that is clearly our best player right now only to lose him for nothing in a few months - is utterly nonsensical. The historical data means nothing to me, because we are in a very unusual situation.

[Makaveli92]

It will be funny if we do tank, get a lottery pick, and suck next season,