Kohl's Pink Tank: What Will It Take For You To Climb Aboard

LUKE23 · Post #1 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:33 pm

Reality is reality. We have a very good shot to lose our next eight games. The next seven are against clearly superior teams and the eigth (at Indiana) is a road game. I say at best in this stretch we go 2-6.

I'm fully on the tank bandwagon. Changes, especially in this organization, do not come easy. The only way I see is an embarassing end to the season, where there can be no rationalizing on what has taken place. Personally, a top 5 pick (which is very possible again for this team) is just a bonus.

So how much worse does it have to get for you to jump ship?

Dags · Post #2 » by **Dags** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:39 pm

I won't support tanking. I mean, where's your pride? This team is perfectly capable of losing every match without having to tank, so why take the shameful route?

soboMP3 · Post #3 » by **soboMP3** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:39 pm

I see little good what tanking will do. We're already too far ahead with 19 wins for any decent pick, and we've been sucking for years. Adding another young inexperienced player to a team of young inexperienced players isn't going to do much. Cleaning house and trading away a few key pieces for good talent in return will go a lot further, IMO.

jerrod · Post #4 » by **jerrod** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:42 pm

i don't know

but it hasn't happened yet

Post #5 » by **paulpressey25** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:43 pm

I'm not jumping ship. But I am ready for the tank.

But then again, hasn't the tanking two of the past three years contributed to this mess?

I don't follow NCAA ball as close as many of you. Are there really some Chris Paul or Deron Williams caliber prospects here? I'm worried we just pick a freshman chucker with the sixth pick or so, who won't do much for a number of years. Talk to me on this one.

LUKE23 · Post #6 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:44 pm

soboMP3 wrote:I see little good what tanking will do. We're already too far ahead with 19 wins for any decent pick, and we've been sucking for years. Adding another young inexperienced player to a team of young inexperienced players isn't going to do much. Cleaning house and trading away a few key pieces for good talent in return will go a lot further, IMO.

You can do all of that and still tank. I'm not saying sit in front of your TV and cheer for the Bucks to lose. Just realizing that losing is better for the future.

In the NBA, a 30+ win team is the worst place to be, especially one with several bad contracts. We need clean house, but also add a very talented player this offseason.

EastSideBucksFan · Post #7 » by **EastSideBucksFan** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:47 pm

We really don't have to try to start losing games. We are losing games. We need to reel this thing back and do everything possible to have some professional pride and win some ball games.

We are the scrote of the NBA right now. Teams are coming into our building and slapping us around. This has a snowball effect.

I'd rather go out with pride. But thats just me...and Desmond Mason

http://www.last.fm/user/DPF55 · Post #8 » by **Buck You** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:50 pm

We don't have to try to lose, we just lose. We are in the same boat as Miami, Minnesota, Memphis and Charlotte. We don't have to tank, we just can't win. I think we win 6 games the rest of the season and finish 25-57. Yes, I really think we are only going to win 6 games the rest of the season, that's how I feel about this team right now.

paulpressey25 wrote:I'm not jumping ship. But I am ready for the tank.

But then again, hasn't the tanking two of the past three years contributed to this mess?

I don't follow NCAA ball as close as many of you. Are there really some Chris Paul or Deron Williams caliber prospects here? I'm worried we just pick a freshman chucker with the sixth pick or so, who won't do much for a number of years. Talk to me on this one.

Derrick Rose, Jamont Gordan, Darren Collison.

LUKE23 · Post #9 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:52 pm

paulpressey25 wrote:I'm not jumping ship. But I am ready for the tank.

But then again, hasn't the tanking two of the past three years contributed to this mess?

I don't follow NCAA ball as close as many of you. Are there really some Chris Paul or Deron Williams caliber prospects here? I'm worried we just pick a freshman chucker with the sixth pick or so, who won't do much for a number of years. Talk to me on this one.

I see this as a three player star draft (Beasley, Rose, Gordon) and a dropoff after that. I still think there are more players that can help us immediately in that 4-9 range than there are after that though.

But mostly I just want changes made, and the more losses, the better chance of that, in my opinion.

BobbyLight · Post #10 » by **BobbyLight** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:56 pm

After last years obvious tanking did us no good in terms of draft status, I am not going to activley support tanking. But I will not be dissapointed if we continue to lose games. The only thing I want for the reast of the season is to, at some point, know who we can build a basketball team around and who needs to go. I think we have good ideas on that already, but i'll let the season pan out.

I have no doubt we will be in the lottery and I think we are lucky if we win 30. That right there just makes me think I don't even need to hope for tanking. I just need the Bucks to keep playing as they are.

Chuck Diesel · Post #11 » by **Chuck Diesel** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 6:58 pm

What changes will there really be other than Larry and Larry getting fired as long as Kohl is the owner? I'm all for some trades, but apparently the Bucks are still in "wait it out" mode.

LUKE23 · Post #12 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:00 pm

Chuck Diesel wrote:What changes will there really be other than Larry and Larry getting fired as long as Kohl is the owner? I'm all for some trades, but apparently the Bucks are still in "wait it out" mode.

Well, one would think Kohl would realize that this core of guys isn't going to get it done if this team yet again wins 30 or less games. You would think that would lead to moves, but yes I agree this is Kohl we're talking about.

Chuck Diesel · Post #13 » by **Chuck Diesel** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:07 pm

True. Again though I go back to this "grey area" of who is responsible for the roster. Do we have to dissect every player on the team and figure out who is responsible (Kohl or Harris) for that player being on the team? No one has a bug in the GM's office. Didn't Larry Harris think this backcourt would work and that Bobby Simmons would be a 16 and 6 guy and that Gadzuric would be worth 36 million?

LUKE23 · Post #14 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:12 pm

Chuck Diesel wrote:True. Again though I go back to this "grey area" of who is responsible for the roster. Do we have to dissect every player on the team and figure out who is responsible (Kohl or Harris) for that player being on the team? No one has a bug in the GM's office. Didn't Larry Harris think this backcourt would work and that Bobby Simmons would be a 16 and 6 guy and that Gadzuric would be worth 36 million?

Good points. You could argue that if Bogut was better than he is now (or as good as people thought right away), and Simmons had stayed healthy and repeated his Clipper performance we'd be signing a different tune right now. It leads me to believe that the problem is coaching and leadership across the board, given the fact that several of the players that have come here have seemed to regress, especially on defense.

But what if we kept TJ and he stayed healthy, Simmons repeated his Clipper year with us, and Bogut came out of the blocks a stud? Maybe we're not having this conversation right now.

Sideways · Post #15 » by **Sideways** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:12 pm

A higher lotto pick will not help us with this front office.
If by tanking you mean drive that big pink tank to the office building where the Bucks are set up and blasting away, I'm in.
If it's throwing games on the court, I'm out.

InsideOut · Post #16 » by **InsideOut** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:36 pm

I was all for tanking last season and am for it again this season. Who in the world cares if we win 28 or 34 games? We suck either way. I also don't believe in the losing culture argument. Talent wins and lack of talent loses. We need a big time talent and the only way we can get it is through the draft. The worse the record the better your shot at a higher pick. Does it guarantee the high pick...no. But all you can do is have the odds on your side and hope you get lucky.

Now just because you get a high pick doesn't mean you have to use it on a young player. Look at what Boston did. They traded their high pick for Ray Allen. Putting him with Pierce was enough to get KG to sign. So by tanking last season Boston went from 2nd worst to best in one season. Looks to me like their losing culture vanished in a hurry when they added talent. If Boston didn't tank and ended up with say the 10th pick they don't have enough to get Allen and then KG stays away. The Bucks need building blocks and high draft picks count as building blocks. The worst thing that can happen is for this team to win 35 games and get that 8th seed. We don't get a shot at a lottery pick and Kohl can say we made the playoffs and no changes need to be made. Then we can look forward to another season of adding no talent and trying to finish .500. It's a never ending cycle.

LUKE23 · Post #17 » by **LUKE23** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:37 pm

InsideOut wrote:I was all for tanking last season and am for it again this season. Who in the world cares if we win 28 or 34 games? We suck either way. I also don't believe in the losing culture argument. Talent wins and lack of talent loses. We need a big time talent and the only way we can get it is through the draft. The worse the record the better your shot at a higher pick. Does it guarantee the high pick...no. But all you can do is have the odds on your side and hope you get lucky.

Now just because you get a high pick doesn't mean you have to use it on a young player. Look at what Boston did. They traded their high pick for Ray Allen. Putting him with Pierce was enough to get KG to sign. So by tanking last season Boston went from 2nd worst to best in one season. Looks to me like their losing culture vanished in a hurry when they added talent. If Boston didn't tank and ended up with say the 10th pick they don't have enough to get Allen and then KG stays away. The Bucks need building blocks and high draft picks count as building blocks. The worst thing that can happen is for this team to win 35 games and get that 8th seed. We don't get a shot at a lottery pick and Kohl can say we made the playoffs and no changes need to be made. Then we can look forward to another season of adding no talent and trying to finish .500. It's a never ending cycle.

I agree, and I think pairing Redd with the pick is a legit option this offseason, the only thing is I can't really think of that many guys we could land that would be worth it.

steger_3434 · Post #18 » by **steger_3434** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:47 pm

I'm all for tanking. Why you may ask? Because I can then make my mind believe we're better than we are. If we lose to say the Clippers with all our guys playing we just plain suck. If we lose while sitting our key guys, thus tanking, and lose I can make myself believe that we would have won the game with our key players.

Todd_Day · Post #19 » by **Todd_Day** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:52 pm

Tank or no tank it all comes back to:

HERB KOHL

Problem is at the top of the food chain.

Post #20 » by **blkout** » Tue Feb 12, 2008 7:54 pm

I don't see the point in trying for the #1 pick in this draft. There's no clear cut number one player and I disagree that there are 3 Chris Paul/Deron Williams types. People were saying the same sort of thing about the strength in the draft we've just had and that obviously hasn't been the case. If you end up with a pick from #3-#7 you're going to get a good player regardless.