Raps Next GM wrote:I think the word “tanking” gets thrown around too loosely and is too open to interpretation.
What is “tanking,” exactly? I believe it is too broadly accepted as intentionally losing, which no pro athlete or coach would do.
So if that’s what you expect the Raptors to do, then forget that idea. That is not happening, nor will it.
The Raptors want Scottie to continue to make strides and want IQ and Barrett to emerge. If they do so to such an extreme that they make a playoff push, that is a bonus. But if they develop as hoped but you continue to lose more often than not, then so be it.
The focus is on development of the core even if it comes at the expense of a few wins this season.
In my opinion, tanking is nothing more than willing to sacrifice today for gains tomorrow. A loss this season theoretically means a win next season (or the next) when those wins will be more critical to your team’s trajectory.
If trading GTJ, or Brown or anyone other than the core three accelerates that progress in any way (i.e. allowing you to draft or sign a player that better fits the team) then you do it. Winning 32 games instead of 36 doesn't matter so long as the former is accomplished.
I don’t see how anyone could oppose "tanking" in that sense.
The athletes and coach may not have a choice if Sam Hinkie is your GM.
I completely agree with the rest of what you wrote. For healthy player and team development you want a team that goes out and is competitive. They may not be good enough to win but that's not the main objective right now.
Interestingly, you didn't refer to the draft pick at all, which seems to be the main incentive for tanking. I honestly don't think it matters what happens to the pick. The future of this team is going to be dictated by Scottie Barnes' development regardless of whether we keep the pick this year.
