Moochthemonkey wrote:Sunsdeuce wrote:I read and respond to everyone's opinion whether I agree or not.
I like seeing the arguments. Unlike some here I like seeing both sides. Granted there is a large majority of people that are suns fans that want to tank the season that doesn't mean you have to ignore them just cause you don't agree with them.
Well is that so? So comforting to hear that coming from you...Not so sure how true that first line is though, evidenced by your one-liner response (if any) to this post. But atleast you read some of it. The next step is to read it all the way through and put it into the consideration tank.
To respond to your question "so if the mercury win the title you wouldn't want to be part of it?"- Yes! I thought I've made it quite clear in this thread that I'm opposed to tanking (which the Mercury didn't do IMO) and I would never support them if that was the path they would take.
Haha yeah right!
Allow me to step down from my high horse for a second. Lets not forget a major if not the primary reason (atleast for me) that we watch sports is for the entertainment. To draw a parallel example to the Mercury situation, look at the Donaghy incident in 2007. Do you really think there are any Spurs fan who wouldn't want to be apart of their championship that year because a few games in the playoffs might have been officiated in their favor? Now I hope that most of their fans wouldn't condone rigging the results, and if hypothetically they had a chance to replay the games without Donaghy as the official, they would. But there's a myriad of other factors and reasons why the Spurs (deservingly) took home the trophy that year...Even if the Mercury didn't land the #1 pick and loose their shot at Griner, they still have the talent to contend. But I still stick with what I said. Given the Mercury's roster, it's not fair for the other mediocre-bad teams to play hard, and not be granted their deserved compensation for their futile efforts. Perhaps Stern should consider the team's record over multiple seasons in their draft placement. For example, if a certain team has made the playoffs for five years in a row, and then they have one bad season, they are barred from obtaining a top 5 pick...but the downside to that is, we have teams (or fans moreso) rallying for tank ERAS...instead of just for 2 or 3 seasons.
---
Refer to Bigfoot's post 4-5 pages back. I don't think players at a professional level, or college level for that matter (as if they have anything to lose), have it in them to intentionally lose games. It's also very insulting to feel/be to told that you and the group of guys you work with don't have enough talent and potential to eventually be able to compete. Not to mention it looks bad on your resume for future teams...What the front office and staff can do is take a direction that involves the "development of unknown players for the future betterment of the team at the risk of yielding a below satisfactory current win-percentage"...If the players win games after this, then good for them. If they lose, so be it. IMO, tanking (i.e. losing on purpose no matter the method), as of now, is therefore a construct largely propagated by fans. We can continue to split hairs at this point- playing borderline NBA talent or resting injured players for extended periods of time (to prevent possible further injury; in a losing season future health becomes a priority) is NOT tanking. My arguments are not an appeal to the FO not to follow such a direction; rather a response to the posters on here who get frustrated when a team wins despite who they have on the floor at the end of games is Hadaddi and W. Johnson..
With all that said, I'm sure some front offices have intentions to tank. That's not just reserved for lottery bound teams; but playoff teams too (given the Lakers recent record- say they squeak in as an 8th seed, would OKC/Spurs rather face them or the rockets?). BUT, there is no circumstantial evidence for Stern to act on his comments. How does he prove the Warriors went 5-22 or whatever was the result of forfeiting games on purpose? I mean, fan SPECULATION may work in the favor for making a case with probable cause that the team was tanking, but speculation alone is not the proof needed to find the team guilty of the act. So that's why Stern largely cannot do anything about the situation.
However, to a smaller degree, Stern HAS acted on teams that lose on purpose. Weren't the Spurs fined earlier in the year for sitting out several players against the Heat? Also, recall that the draft lottery was always weighted the way it is now/was; (read:
http://web.archive.org/web/201003101336 ... t_al.html- I think this was brought up earlier in the thread) the team with the worst record only has a 25% of getting the first pick, to dissuade teams from tanking. I think the draft system in place now is a great way for the legitimately poor teams to improve, but as is with economic and political systems, the bulk of the problems are not the systems themselves, but the people in the systems who dishonestly take advantage of the system. Some poster(s) mentioned still being bitter over the Spurs supposed tank season of 1997...and if the Jazz were indeed tanking right now, that's not fair to us. Screw the notion that makes the golden rationalization "well everybody else or other people do it" acceptable. If you aren't happy with the lack of integrity that may plague the league...you don't give in to what others are doing but hopefully lead by example..
Or not. I'm sticking with what I said, and instead of ending this post with a platitude,
This is getting great, please tell me more of your wisdom.
You should really do better research, learn how to read, and then comprehend what you read, and for cripes sakes learn the difference between fact and opinion.
An apology is owed... you sanctimonious fool.
