Image ImageImage Image

The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember

Moderators: HomoSapien, fleet, RedBulls23, Ice Man, AshyLarrysDiaper, Tommy Udo 6 , GimmeDat, dougthonus, Payt10, DASMACKDOWN, kulaz3000

dice
RealGM
Posts: 37,525
And1: 10,191
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#241 » by dice » Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:29 am

Ice Man wrote:
coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.


Yep. LaVine has improved to where he can now be a Top Three option on a championship team. When you have one out of three, you don't dump the one so that you go back to zero. Instead, you try to find the other two.

if lavine is one and the team is still mediocre, the other two ain't coming

imperfect measure, but here are lavine's game scores for this season:

35.5
29.4
21.2
19.9
17.3
14.9
11.9
8.4
8.0
7.5

2 great games and 3 awful games out of 10. he's still nowhere near a max player. too inconsistent, still hasn't proven himself over long stretches w/ his all-around game
please be upstanding for the mayor of simpleton
Senor Chang
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 24,795
And1: 820
Joined: Jan 26, 2002
Location: Why do you teach Spanish?
Contact:

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#242 » by Senor Chang » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:22 am

You kinda sorta need superstars to win championships. What part of the last 20 years makes anyone think we can sign a superstar free agent? was it when we signed Ben Wallace? Boozer? Eddie Robinson? What about trades? you need high value assets to trade for high quality stars. Tanking may not guarantee a superstar but it guarantees a higher chance at picking up a higher quality asset than you would had you not tanked. The problem is not tanking per se. The problem is that IT'S REALLY HARD to get the right pick to draft the right player who ends up being the next Tim Duncan.
wayoftheroad wrote:We’re getting bodied by Moochie Norris lmao
KL78192020
Head Coach
Posts: 7,279
And1: 5,895
Joined: Apr 19, 2009

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#243 » by KL78192020 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:33 am

coldfish wrote:
Southpaw wrote:The OKC tank was a financial failure and not a tank failure. They easily could've kept Harden. Everyone knew they had something special brewing in OKC and they blew it when they decided not to pay Harden. IIRC, there was only about $4-5m difference between OKC's offer and Harden's max at the time and they could've amnestied Perkins.

I agree that tanking doesn't always work but so does signing or trading for big name FAs, if championships is the only measuring stick. There are plenty of failed blockbuster trades and FA signings to point to.

I think we're looking at it the wrong way if we view tanking as a way to building a contender. To me it's the best way to getting your star player and getting a star player is your way to build a contender.

We should tank, but tank smart. The next couple of drafts apparently has a high number of superstar-type talents.


OK, ignore championships. Let's look at the top 8 teams from last year and how they got their best player:
Bucks - Giannis (mid round pick developed)
Raptors - Lowry (FA?)
Lakers - Lebron (FA)
Clippers - Kawhi (FA)
Celtics - Tatum (draft trade)
Nuggets - Jokic (2nd round pick developed)
Pacers - Brogdon? (FA), They are basically a hodgepodge of players from other teams.
Rockets - Harden (trade)

So again, a grand total of zero contenders last year got their best player by tanking for a high draft pick. Its a theory but it fails in practice so often that its not a legitimate strategy.

I'll again say that the Bulls fanbase has PTSD due to 17 years of GarPax. It IS possible to trade for a top player or sign one. Its also possible to draft a top player later in the draft. Hell, the Bulls did it with Butler but didn't have the patience or intelligence to do something with it.


The entire core of the Raptors championship team was built from the lottery.

1. Traded the 12th pick in the lottery for Kyle Lowry.

2. Traded two 9th picks in Demar/Poetl for Kawhi.

3. Traded Jonas V. the 5th pick for Marc Gasol.

4. Traded Terrance Ross the 8th pick Ibaka.

They dont win the championship without all those assets from the draft lottery. It takes a combination of things for a team to succeed.

Lakers don’t get AD without two lottery picks in Ball/Ingram.

Lebron doesn’t go back to the Cavs if they didn’t have two lottery picks in Kyrie and Wiggens which was used to get Kevin Love.
User avatar
thedarkstark
Analyst
Posts: 3,014
And1: 992
Joined: Feb 17, 2010

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#244 » by thedarkstark » Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:24 am

dice wrote:
Ice Man wrote:
coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.


Yep. LaVine has improved to where he can now be a Top Three option on a championship team. When you have one out of three, you don't dump the one so that you go back to zero. Instead, you try to find the other two.

if lavine is one and the team is still mediocre, the other two ain't coming

imperfect measure, but here are lavine's game scores for this season:

35.5
29.4
21.2
19.9
17.3
14.9
11.9
8.4
8.0
7.5

2 great games and 3 awful games out of 10. he's still nowhere near a max player. too inconsistent, still hasn't proven himself over long stretches w/ his all-around game


People said the same thing about Devin Booker .

Give him one other competent NBA starter and the Bulls will start winning games and his efficiency will improve drastically.
Ice Man
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 21,876
And1: 10,289
Joined: Apr 19, 2011

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#245 » by Ice Man » Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:17 pm

KL78192020 wrote:The entire core of the Raptors championship team was built from the lottery.

1. Traded the 12th pick in the lottery for Kyle Lowry.

2. Traded two 9th picks in Demar/Poetl for Kawhi.

3. Traded Jonas V. the 5th pick for Marc Gasol.

4. Traded Terrance Ross the 8th pick Ibaka.

They dont win the championship without all those assets from the draft lottery. It takes a combination of things for a team to succeed.

Lakers don’t get AD without two lottery picks in Ball/Ingram.

Lebron doesn’t go back to the Cavs if they didn’t have two lottery picks in Kyrie and Wiggens which was used to get Kevin Love.


The Raps were bad for only two years, in 2011 and 2012. For those picks, they got JV and Ross, who became Gasol and Ibaka. Nice complementary assets but the Big Three on the title team were Kawhi, Lowry, and Siakam, who came from other means (as did van Fleet). That seems to me a great stretch to call that a victory for tanking.

The Lakers ... eh. AD was in charge of that process, he wanted to play with LeBron, the Pelicans were dragged in that direction. If not Ball/Ingram, the Lakers might have had other assets to trade.

And I've covered the Cavs already, they could have acquired assets to trade in other ways besides tanking. The Nets or Indy or Utah, to cite three examples, have plenty of players to complement LeBron, without having been terrible to get them.

Teams that have stronger claims than those three teams to being where they are because of tanking -

Washington
Orlando
Philly
Phoenix
Chicago
Sacramento
Minnesota
Memphis
Knicks

Overall, I'm not impressed, although Philly obviously is a contender, Phoenix might be turning the corner, and Memphis could be tough in a year or two.
User avatar
Southpaw
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,796
And1: 682
Joined: Jul 23, 2011
 

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#246 » by Southpaw » Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:01 pm

Ice Man wrote:
KL78192020 wrote:The entire core of the Raptors championship team was built from the lottery.

1. Traded the 12th pick in the lottery for Kyle Lowry.

2. Traded two 9th picks in Demar/Poetl for Kawhi.

3. Traded Jonas V. the 5th pick for Marc Gasol.

4. Traded Terrance Ross the 8th pick Ibaka.

They dont win the championship without all those assets from the draft lottery. It takes a combination of things for a team to succeed.

Lakers don’t get AD without two lottery picks in Ball/Ingram.

Lebron doesn’t go back to the Cavs if they didn’t have two lottery picks in Kyrie and Wiggens which was used to get Kevin Love.


The Raps were bad for only two years, in 2011 and 2012. For those picks, they got JV and Ross, who became Gasol and Ibaka. Nice complementary assets but the Big Three on the title team were Kawhi, Lowry, and Siakam, who came from other means (as did van Fleet). That seems to me a great stretch to call that a victory for tanking.

The Lakers ... eh. AD was in charge of that process, he wanted to play with LeBron, the Pelicans were dragged in that direction. If not Ball/Ingram, the Lakers might have had other assets to trade.

And I've covered the Cavs already, they could have acquired assets to trade in other ways besides tanking. The Nets or Indy or Utah, to cite three examples, have plenty of players to complement LeBron, without having been terrible to get them.

Teams that have stronger claims than those three teams to being where they are because of tanking -

Washington
Orlando
Philly
Phoenix
Chicago
Sacramento
Minnesota
Memphis
Knicks

Overall, I'm not impressed, although Philly obviously is a contender, Phoenix might be turning the corner, and Memphis could be tough in a year or two.

One thing in common with those failed tank teams is bad management, either from the owner, the FO or both.

Look at the Grizzlies for example. They started the tank after realizing that their core was going nowhere. In back to back years they got a potential all star in JJJ (4th pick) and a potential superstar in Morant (2nd pick) who they surrounded with solid vets like Valanciunas, Crowder, Anderson etc. They also nailed their late picks in Clarke and Brooks and now they are one of the up and coming teams.
KL78192020
Head Coach
Posts: 7,279
And1: 5,895
Joined: Apr 19, 2009

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#247 » by KL78192020 » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:04 pm

Ice Man wrote:
KL78192020 wrote:The entire core of the Raptors championship team was built from the lottery.

1. Traded the 12th pick in the lottery for Kyle Lowry.

2. Traded two 9th picks in Demar/Poetl for Kawhi.

3. Traded Jonas V. the 5th pick for Marc Gasol.

4. Traded Terrance Ross the 8th pick Ibaka.

They dont win the championship without all those assets from the draft lottery. It takes a combination of things for a team to succeed.

Lakers don’t get AD without two lottery picks in Ball/Ingram.

Lebron doesn’t go back to the Cavs if they didn’t have two lottery picks in Kyrie and Wiggens which was used to get Kevin Love.


The Raps were bad for only two years, in 2011 and 2012. For those picks, they got JV and Ross, who became Gasol and Ibaka. Nice complementary assets but the Big Three on the title team were Kawhi, Lowry, and Siakam, who came from other means (as did van Fleet). That seems to me a great stretch to call that a victory for tanking.

The Lakers ... eh. AD was in charge of that process, he wanted to play with LeBron, the Pelicans were dragged in that direction. If not Ball/Ingram, the Lakers might have had other assets to trade.

And I've covered the Cavs already, they could have acquired assets to trade in other ways besides tanking. The Nets or Indy or Utah, to cite three examples, have plenty of players to complement LeBron, without having been terrible to get them.

Teams that have stronger claims than those three teams to being where they are because of tanking -

Washington
Orlando
Philly
Phoenix
Chicago
Sacramento
Minnesota
Memphis
Knicks

Overall, I'm not impressed, although Philly obviously is a contender, Phoenix might be turning the corner, and Memphis could be tough in a year or two.


The Raptors don't get Kawhi without Demar, a lottery pick that is just a fact. You can say AD wanted to go there, but Pelicans could've just traded him somehwere else like the Spurs did with Kawhi. Fact is Lakers don't get AD without Ingram and Lonzo.
How could the Cavs have acquired the a player like Kyrie and Love without two lottery picks? They had no other assets.

All those acquisitions are facts and not hypotheticals. There's no perfect strategy, but the fact is at the end of the day lottery picks/players are highly valued and can be used in a multiple ways. Those three teams don't win their championships without those lottery picks.
dice
RealGM
Posts: 37,525
And1: 10,191
Joined: Jun 30, 2003
Location: chicago

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#248 » by dice » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:33 pm

thedarkstark wrote:
dice wrote:
Ice Man wrote:
Yep. LaVine has improved to where he can now be a Top Three option on a championship team. When you have one out of three, you don't dump the one so that you go back to zero. Instead, you try to find the other two.

if lavine is one and the team is still mediocre, the other two ain't coming

imperfect measure, but here are lavine's game scores for this season:

35.5
29.4
21.2
19.9
17.3
14.9
11.9
8.4
8.0
7.5

2 great games and 3 awful games out of 10. he's still nowhere near a max player. too inconsistent, still hasn't proven himself over long stretches w/ his all-around game


People said the same thing about Devin Booker

booker's having an off season so far w/ the addition of cp3, so i'm not sure what you're talking about there

Give him one other competent NBA starter and the Bulls will start winning games and his efficiency will improve drastically.

his scoring is not an issue. and nobody's efficiency can be expected to improve drastically regardless of teammates. see devin booker
please be upstanding for the mayor of simpleton
cjbulls
Analyst
Posts: 3,471
And1: 1,242
Joined: Jun 26, 2018

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#249 » by cjbulls » Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:56 pm

How can you even tank with this team? Half the roster is gone and they’re still competitive.
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 9,299
And1: 4,928
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#250 » by Leslie Forman » Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:52 am

Everyone keeps bringing up other franchises, overanalyzing what is a "tank," how much so-and-so mattered. Why?

Who cares what the Heat or Warriors or Raptors have done when you can see what the CHICAGO BULLS have done?

THIS franchise has really only ever built two teams of any sort of relevance post-merger - built on the backs of a #3 and #5 pick, and another time on the back of a #1 pick.
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 9,299
And1: 4,928
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#251 » by Leslie Forman » Mon Jan 11, 2021 2:14 am

coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.

Uh…has something been getting in your water, coldfish?

Zach is doing absolutely nothing that Kevin Martin or DeMar DeRozan hasn't done.
DroseReturnChi
Analyst
Posts: 3,499
And1: 825
Joined: Feb 12, 2012
       

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#252 » by DroseReturnChi » Mon Jan 11, 2021 2:38 am

coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.



years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.
God told Derrick to rise, so Derrick Rose.
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 51,593
And1: 22,055
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
   

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#253 » by coldfish » Mon Jan 11, 2021 2:56 am

DroseReturnChi wrote:
coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.



years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.


garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 13,921
And1: 8,886
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#254 » by TheSuzerain » Mon Jan 11, 2021 3:23 am

coldfish wrote:
DroseReturnChi wrote:
coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.



years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.


garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.

GarPax never effectively tanked though.

Their plan was flawed from the beginning by trading Butler for 3 roster players.

I think there's a greater than 50% chance we'd be in a better place today if we had cut Butler outright instead of trading him for the package GarPax did.

Effective tanking/rebuilding involves collection and gathering of future value (most often in the form of future draft picks). Basically see what the Thunder and Pels have done.

GarPax seems to have convinced you that their awful rebuilding tactics is the only way to rebuild.
Am2626
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,944
And1: 585
Joined: Jul 13, 2013

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#255 » by Am2626 » Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:00 am

coldfish wrote:
DroseReturnChi wrote:
coldfish wrote:Lastly, I would not trade Lavine for anything less than a superstar haul right now. He is really getting it and I would have no issue with a max for him. Replacing him through the draft would take YEARS.



years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.


garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.


How are the odds against Cade becoming a star? He was an elite high school prospect playing at a high level as a college freshman. He’s a 6’8” point guard in the mold of Magic Johnson that is a great shooter. He’s hit game winning shots this year in college. There is nothing to suggest that he won’t be a star in the NBA. He will easily be the best player on the Bulls if they draft him next year.
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 51,593
And1: 22,055
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
   

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#256 » by coldfish » Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:43 am

Am2626 wrote:
coldfish wrote:
DroseReturnChi wrote:

years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.


garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.


How are the odds against Cade becoming a star? He was an elite high school prospect playing at a high level as a college freshman. He’s a 6’8” point guard in the mold of Magic Johnson that is a great shooter. He’s hit game winning shots this year in college. There is nothing to suggest that he won’t be a star in the NBA. He will easily be the best player on the Bulls if they draft him next year.


Go through the draft history and look at how the top draft picks actually pan out. I believe someone posted the lottery odds above but most of these players do not turn into championship level franchise cornerstones. This wasn't a commentary on Cade as much as it was about the draft in general.

Even then, you only have a 14% chance of getting him.
d boy gentleman
Starter
Posts: 2,377
And1: 651
Joined: Jun 02, 2009
     

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#257 » by d boy gentleman » Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:41 pm

coldfish wrote:
Am2626 wrote:
coldfish wrote:
garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.


How are the odds against Cade becoming a star? He was an elite high school prospect playing at a high level as a college freshman. He’s a 6’8” point guard in the mold of Magic Johnson that is a great shooter. He’s hit game winning shots this year in college. There is nothing to suggest that he won’t be a star in the NBA. He will easily be the best player on the Bulls if they draft him next year.


Go through the draft history and look at how the top draft picks actually pan out. I believe someone posted the lottery odds above but most of these players do not turn into championship level franchise cornerstones. This wasn't a commentary on Cade as much as it was about the draft in general.

Even then, you only have a 14% chance of getting him.


And then when you end up drafting 5th-7th and don't get your franchise savior, you tank again... :nonono:
MAQ wrote:Boozer, you're ballin, but quit **** celebrating, negro there is 3 minutes left.

slowmotion5587 wrote:Nazr Mohammed might be the most underrated dunk misser I've ever seen.
User avatar
coldfish
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 51,593
And1: 22,055
Joined: Jun 11, 2004
Location: Right in the middle
   

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#258 » by coldfish » Mon Jan 11, 2021 2:20 pm

TheSuzerain wrote:
coldfish wrote:
DroseReturnChi wrote:

years?? it will take one week. your garpax chose lavine over doncic and look what happened. he was surpassed in a day.
Same story in 2021. Why is this so hard to understand? I cannot believe most want to embrace mediocrity and not go for a potential top 10 player. And your also getting fair value in return on top of Cade.


garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.

GarPax never effectively tanked though.

Their plan was flawed from the beginning by trading Butler for 3 roster players.

I think there's a greater than 50% chance we'd be in a better place today if we had cut Butler outright instead of trading him for the package GarPax did.

Effective tanking/rebuilding involves collection and gathering of future value (most often in the form of future draft picks). Basically see what the Thunder and Pels have done.

GarPax seems to have convinced you that their awful rebuilding tactics is the only way to rebuild.


The Bulls tanked plenty hard in the early 00's. They were regularly the worst team in the NBA. It played out like a typical tank job. They got Brand and pissed him off bad enough that he wanted to leave because they didn't think he was worth building around. They got screwed in the lottery several times. Then they took some prospects that didn't work out in TC and EC. Jay Williams.

So, yeah, we went through the super hard tank and saw what it does . . . nothing. As usually happens, many of the players drafted went on to play better for other teams. Elton Brand, Chandler, Artest.

As far as the recent history, there has only been one elite player come into the NBA since the Butler trade . . . Doncic. The Bulls didn't even want him!! Even if they had super tanked, we would be stuck with Bagley.

Maybe Zion will get there but he ended up getting snagged by the team with the 7th worst record. Again, the new lottery odds really screw over the tankers. I really don't think the tankers quite understand that. In order for tanking to win, you have to hit the lottery (14% chance) in a year when there is a superstar (10%?).

That's why getting someone else's superstar is so much more effective. The people that most people expected not to be a superstar (Kawhi, Butler, Giannis) that someone else developed are in play.
cjbulls
Analyst
Posts: 3,471
And1: 1,242
Joined: Jun 26, 2018

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#259 » by cjbulls » Mon Jan 11, 2021 2:31 pm

coldfish wrote:
TheSuzerain wrote:
coldfish wrote:
garpax was the tanker. Garpax is "yours".

I don't know if Cade is going to be a superduperstar. Odds are against it. Even so, the lottery odds are different. If you absolutely destroy the team bad enough to have the worst record, your odds are 50/50 that you get the 5th pick. I'm not sure that tankers really understand that.

Statistically, a total tank job is going to get you Jalen Green or something. Then when he can't immediately win, the tankers will demand that he be dumped for the next tank job. That's why its called the "tank treadmill". The only way you can get off it is if you land one of the top players of all time. Statistics say that is extraordinarily unlikely.

Regardless, getting back to garpax, I think that the "embracing mediocrity" is why tankers are such garpax people. Garpax convinced them that its impossible to sign or trade for an elite player. As has been discussed, that's actually how most teams do it. Unfortunately the tankers have been brainwashed by garpax into thinking theirs is the only way.

GarPax never effectively tanked though.

Their plan was flawed from the beginning by trading Butler for 3 roster players.

I think there's a greater than 50% chance we'd be in a better place today if we had cut Butler outright instead of trading him for the package GarPax did.

Effective tanking/rebuilding involves collection and gathering of future value (most often in the form of future draft picks). Basically see what the Thunder and Pels have done.

GarPax seems to have convinced you that their awful rebuilding tactics is the only way to rebuild.


The Bulls tanked plenty hard in the early 00's. They were regularly the worst team in the NBA. It played out like a typical tank job. They got Brand and pissed him off bad enough that he wanted to leave because they didn't think he was worth building around. They got screwed in the lottery several times. Then they took some prospects that didn't work out in TC and EC. Jay Williams.

So, yeah, we went through the super hard tank and saw what it does . . . nothing. As usually happens, many of the players drafted went on to play better for other teams. Elton Brand, Chandler, Artest.

As far as the recent history, there has only been one elite player come into the NBA since the Butler trade . . . Doncic. The Bulls didn't even want him!! Even if they had super tanked, we would be stuck with Bagley.

Maybe Zion will get there but he ended up getting snagged by the team with the 7th worst record. Again, the new lottery odds really screw over the tankers. I really don't think the tankers quite understand that. In order for tanking to win, you have to hit the lottery (14% chance) in a year when there is a superstar (10%?).

That's why getting someone else's superstar is so much more effective. The people that most people expected not to be a superstar (Kawhi, Butler, Giannis) that someone else developed are in play.


Even Zion, who most consider a prototype #1 sure fire prospect hasn’t exactly lived up to the status. It’s not clear if he’ll ever be more than a Blake Griffin type, that is if he can keep his weight and injuries in check.

In a re-draft, does Ja Morant go 1 now?
User avatar
Leslie Forman
General Manager
Posts: 9,299
And1: 4,928
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: The argument for Tanking: Why it works, and you just don't remember 

Post#260 » by Leslie Forman » Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:56 pm

coldfish wrote:That's why getting someone else's superstar is so much more effective. The people that most people expected not to be a superstar (Kawhi, Butler, Giannis) that someone else developed are in play.

So what's the plan to do this, seeing how the Bulls have also tried to do this many, many times, and are batting a perfect .000 on this idea?

Return to Chicago Bulls