RealGM

Thought we should update the happenings in the league via teams tanking for Simmons

Philly: 4-31 is head and shoulders above the rest leading tank nation for the umpteenth year in a row, not going to catch them. Lost last 3 and 3-7 in the last ten.

Lakers: 9-31 Up next and actually are 4-6 last 10 games including a win last night versus the Pelicans. Organization realizes the goof and "doctors" have suggested resting Kobe for 1-2 weeks because he could give a flip about tanking.

Nets: 10-28 lost 5 in a row 2-8 last ten. They are just putrid no matter what. JJ and Lopez and only ten wins

NO: 11-26 lost 4 in a row, 3-7 during last ten and they are "resting" Davis because of his "bad" back; definitely full blown tank mode.

Minny 12-27 lost 7 in a row and 1-9 last ten. How these guys are continually rewarded with top picks just to waste their talents is beyond belief.

PHX 13-27 lost 2 in a row 1-9. We are learning from the best with the stomach flu, sore hand, and knee ailments. Eff it and continue to start Archie and co. Make up a Knight injury and began to rest him.


It sucks to compete with tank masters, but hopefully NO, Minny, and LAL catch us and leaves us with the third best odds.


Feel free to update injuries win and loss streaks and draft positioning as needed.

Gotta get in the top two!

Philly and Lakers will be the top 2, no doubt about it.
I think we can catch the #3, especially if we go full young after the all-star break.
Nets needs to win to save face
NO eventually will find their rhythm (hope for no more Unibrow injuries here)
Minny is probably our biggest competitor here. Mitchell is almost as bad as Hornacek is... he's really holding KAT back. Unbelievable.

Since 1985, only 5 times has the team with the worst record gotten the 1st pick. Thats 5 out of 30 years.

During that same time frame, the 2nd worst team got the 1st pick twice.
3rd worse got 7. 4th worse got it 3 times. 5th got 5 and 6th got 3.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/lottery_winners

So im fine with not finishing with the worst record. I'd prefer it to be somewhere in the top 3 worse.

Kerrsed wrote:Since 1985, only 5 times has the team with the worst record gotten the 1st pick. Thats 5 out of 30 years.

During that same time frame, the 2nd worst team got the 1st pick twice.
3rd worse got 7. 4th worse got it 3 times. 5th got 5 and 6th got 3.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/lottery_winners

So im fine with not finishing with the worst record. I'd prefer it to be somewhere in the top 3 worse.

5 out of 30 years?

Saberestar wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:Since 1985, only 5 times has the team with the worst record gotten the 1st pick. Thats 5 out of 30 years.

During that same time frame, the 2nd worst team got the 1st pick twice.
3rd worse got 7. 4th worse got it 3 times. 5th got 5 and 6th got 3.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/lottery_winners

So im fine with not finishing with the worst record. I'd prefer it to be somewhere in the top 3 worse.

5 out of 30 years?

Yes, thats what i wrote!

I really want to finish great on this tank festival. I would sign a fourth spot right now, because I am concerned about the other teams tanking hard (Minnesota/Philly are ALWAYS there).

Hopefully Prokhorov trades Joe Johnson for decent players who can win some games for the Nets and Anthony Davis makes his thing...those two teams are more about winning now than tanking (at least in theory).

Kerrsed wrote:Since 1985, only 5 times has the team with the worst record gotten the 1st pick. Thats 5 out of 30 years.

During that same time frame, the 2nd worst team got the 1st pick twice.
3rd worse got 7. 4th worse got it 3 times. 5th got 5 and 6th got 3.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/lottery_winners

So im fine with not finishing with the worst record. I'd prefer it to be somewhere in the top 3 worse.

Also it's tough to be a fan of THE worst team in the league.

Saberestar wrote:

Kerrsed wrote:Since 1985, only 5 times has the team with the worst record gotten the 1st pick. Thats 5 out of 30 years.

During that same time frame, the 2nd worst team got the 1st pick twice.
3rd worse got 7. 4th worse got it 3 times. 5th got 5 and 6th got 3.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/draft/lottery_winners

So im fine with not finishing with the worst record. I'd prefer it to be somewhere in the top 3 worse.

5 out of 30 years?

The odds used to not favor the top teams as highly. I wonder what the numbers are after they changed it (I think after Orlando it twice in a row taking Shaq (and then instead of taking Webber, flipped him for Penny).

But even now, the top team only has a 25% chance, so out of 20 times, they should win 5, and the 2nd team has like 19%, so out of 20, about 4, and on down. I think if you are in the worst 5, you all have a fair shot, and even 6 and 7 are not that far off...but it really drops off after that. That's just for #1 though. If you are in bottom 5, you have like a 30% chance of moving into top 3 (better chance than worst team getting 1st pick) We sit at bottom six now, and have a little better than a 20% chance of moving into top 2 (better chance than 2nd worst team getting top pick).

Looks like Brooklyn is going to beat the Knicks tonight on the backs of a 39/19/8/5 performance from Lopez/Young.

If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

bwgood77 wrote:Looks like Brooklyn is going to beat the Knicks tonight on the backs of a 39/19/8/5 performance from Lopez/Young.

We play Minny on Sunday.

lilfishi22 wrote:If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

bwgood77 wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

He also allowed Derrick Williams to light him up on the other end. Just saying.

We simply don't need 27 year old offensive big men when our entire team is basically young scoring guys playing the 1-3. Markieff isn't necessarily unmovable. Same for Knight.

AtheJ415 wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

He also allowed Derrick Williams to light him up on the other end. Just saying.

We simply don't need 27 year old offensive big men when our entire team is basically young scoring guys playing the 1-3. Markieff isn't necessarily unmovable. Same for Knight.

I'm not saying they are unmovable, but those guys locked into good long term deals at positions that are more in need across the league are more movable. How old are Chandler and Kieff? Again, hoping we move Kieff for Jones or to Toronto for a pick. I'm just saying that deal wasn't unreasonable...probably more unreasonable for Brooklyn though.

bwgood77 wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

I must've missed it but what was the Nets deal being proposed?

lilfishi22 wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:If only we had a similarly talented PF who plays hard every game like Young on our team.

On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

I must've missed it but what was the Nets deal being proposed?

A poster from the Nets forum (shakes and fries) posted different variations of proposals in the trade thread....start maybe 2-3 pages back and scroll until you see them. It started after I mentioned possibly dealing with them. Start here... viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1419464&start=981#start_here

Remember when we were 7-5? lol

bwgood77 wrote:

lilfishi22 wrote:

bwgood77 wrote:
On top of 19 points on 50% shooting he had 11 boards, 3 assists and 3 steals. I'm a little surprised people are so against the Brooklyn proposal from the guy saying Lopez/Young for Chandler/Knight, and a protected pick. I could go either way but Lopez and Young are probably far more movable than those other guys. And if we move into top 3 we get those guys, but I guess we'd likely improve.

I suppose I would rather have the chance at a top 3 pick, but the deal certainly isn't unreasonable. I think Bledsoe/Booker/Warren/Young/Lopez would be a pretty good squad with Bogdan, Leuer and Len off the bench. But you can always make more moves.

I don't mind the proper rebuild and am fine at keeping these guys but not a huge fan of Knight or Chandler. Hopefully we dump Kieff on Friday for Jones though.

I doubt Brooklyn would offer up such a deal anyway. They likely want to add more vets TO those guys, which is why I originally was thinking move Knight and Kieff, for someone like RHJ and Johnson to clear way for Booker.

I must've missed it but what was the Nets deal being proposed?

A poster from the Nets forum (shakes and fries) posted different variations of proposals in the trade thread....start maybe 2-3 pages back and scroll until you see them. It started after I mentioned possibly dealing with them. Start here... viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1419464&start=981#start_here

Cheers

I don't like that deal unless we replace Bledsoe with Knight.

Maybe a tanking team can give Brooklyn a couple of good players.

Our pick should be definitely off the table until the lottery. Can't risk having the pinballs fall in our favor only to lose out and have another team reap the fruits of or tortuos toil