Tank World Order (10.0) The Empire Strikes Back

[WuTang_CMB]

No one would have blinked, but he's the one that has to build with the results whether they get lucky or not. He chose the easiest path for him to (keep) building up the team. Taking big Ls on trades just for a 6-7% chance at Wembanyama isn't good process.

Disagree. It certainly was fine to do it this year. What isn't good process is going for the play in.

The play-in is just results. They could have reached that without any trade. Acquiring Poeltl is presumably for the future as well, or else it really was a stupid decision. Trading out good players just to increase odds from 6% to 9% would be silly.

The play in doesn't mean anything. The hardcore fans don't care. It's the casual ones that do. Masai got stuck going for it because we had a subpar season and wants to save face. No one is saying to trade Fred or OG to tank (even though if reports are true, Masai was willing to do it if they met his ask). The Poeltl trade is good because he will be re-upped. But with bigger picture in mind, its clear as day they should have tanked the rest of the year with 22 games left.

[Duffman100]

You forgot Kevin Durant

He was talking about when both the #1 and #2 picks...

Not sure what this stat has to do with this. The argument is you put yourself in a better draft position to draft better talent.

We just went through this in 2021

Which is a strategy. A strategy that doesn't have a lot of examples of success.

Yes we got Scottie, who is great. But will it lead to us winning? Who knows.

[Spida888]

The only teams that have somewhat succeeded drafted top 10-15 players of ALL TIME and during an era when stars stuck with their teams their entire careers.

The Thunder made the finals once. They're the closest example of success.
The Cavs lucked into Lebron signing back with them after he left them.

We lucked into Kawhi getting injured by Zaza and then the Spurs choosing to trade him after they have a public falling out over an injury diagnosis which led him to to us rather than countless other suitors. The odds of all those events happening is much lower than say 19 percent chance at getting one of scoot or Wembanyama (the odds to move up into the top 2 for us a couple days before the deadline).

If we’re talking luck, wishing for a once in a life time trade to happen again to the same franchise is more unlikely than getting superstar talent through the draft.

VS the 'luck' of hitting a top 10-15 player of all time to our team and having that player stick with us and winning a title. Which... hasn't happened in what, 20 years?

Again, tanking has shown to not work and have very little success.

At the end of the day it's very difficult to win a championship. There's no guarantee regardless of which direction you go - staying relevant and waiting for a star to trade (it doesn't happen, he may not fit, or the trade depletes your depth), getting a lottery pick (he may be a bust), etc.

The way I look at it is what moves can you make to acquire more talent. It doesn't always have to be tanking, but it made sense for this season. Many people on tWo like myself wasn't advocating for a complete rebuild, but a retool where we can bounce back even as soon as next year.

I saw this draft as a great opportunity to acquire more talent where we were projected to get a high draft pick. Selling one of our starters and not buying on Poeltl was probably going to solidify the tank especially with the parity in standings this season.

[WuTang_CMB]

He was talking about when both the #1 and #2 picks...

Not sure what this stat has to do with this. The argument is you put yourself in a better draft position to draft better talent.

We just went through this in 2021

Which is a strategy. A strategy that doesn't have a lot of examples of success.

Yes we got Scottie, who is great. But will it lead to us winning? Who knows.

There's a lot more to building a contender than just the draft. Totally agree. But you and I both know it's the elite players that make a difference in the playoffs.

[720]

The only teams that have somewhat succeeded drafted top 10-15 players of ALL TIME and during an era when stars stuck with their teams their entire careers.

The Thunder made the finals once. They're the closest example of success.
The Cavs lucked into Lebron signing back with them after he left them.

We lucked into Kawhi getting injured by Zaza and then the Spurs choosing to trade him after they have a public falling out over an injury diagnosis which led him to to us rather than countless other suitors. The odds of all those events happening is much lower than say 19 percent chance at getting one of scoot or Wembanyama (the odds to move up into the top 2 for us a couple days before the deadline).

If we’re talking luck, wishing for a once in a life time trade to happen again to the same franchise is more unlikely than getting superstar talent through the draft.

VS the 'luck' of hitting a top 10-15 player of all time to our team and having that player stick with us and winning a title. Which... hasn't happened in what, 20 years?

Again, tanking has shown to not work and have very little success.

I’m sorry but drafting your own superstar is absolutely key if you look at history. Every single champion in the last century has had lottery talent on their team as a star player, with only one exception (2004 Pistons). Within the other group only two teams had said star players that weren’t homegrown, the Bubble lakers where neither AD or Lebron were homegrown and the 2019 Raptors with Kawhi.

Every other team had a superstar player through the lottery that they drafted. Kobe x5, Duncan x5, Wade x3, Dirk x1, Lebron x1, Giannis x1.

The goal is talent accumulation in order to build the best team that can contend for a title.

This team is not a free agent destination, so our only options are trading for the star player (Kawhi) or drafting a star player through the draft. The odds of another Kawhi trade happening is much lower than getting a superstar/star level player through the draft.

[Duffman100]

We lucked into Kawhi getting injured by Zaza and then the Spurs choosing to trade him after they have a public falling out over an injury diagnosis which led him to to us rather than countless other suitors. The odds of all those events happening is much lower than say 19 percent chance at getting one of scoot or Wembanyama (the odds to move up into the top 2 for us a couple days before the deadline).

If we’re talking luck, wishing for a once in a life time trade to happen again to the same franchise is more unlikely than getting superstar talent through the draft.

VS the 'luck' of hitting a top 10-15 player of all time to our team and having that player stick with us and winning a title. Which... hasn't happened in what, 20 years?

Again, tanking has shown to not work and have very little success.

I’m sorry but drafting your own superstar is absolutely key if you look at history. Every single champion in the last century has had lottery talent on their team as a star player, with only one exception (2004 Pistons).

These two statements are always connected.

There is no doubt having a top 10 player in the league (almost always from the lottery is key to winning the title).

Tanking to get that player is NOT connected to winning and hasn't been proven to work.

[Reeko]

Comes down to Masai gets a thrill drafting out of the lottery to find a gem. Seems stupid with 22 games left to keep that mindset

Could have easily tanked and no one would say boo

Only if you believe that his bosses would've been ok with tanking.

It's not traditional tanking for 3 years like what HOU is doing. It's a stealth tank for 22 games.

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

[anotherhomer]

Only if you believe that his bosses would've been ok with tanking.

It's not traditional tanking for 3 years like what HOU is doing. It's a stealth tank for 22 games.

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

i did previously say that Ed Rogers was a factor, in not tanking.
Given the contract structure (bonus payment based on franchise valuation increase), and Ed's opposition,
didn't make sense for Ujiri to tank.

I guess if Ed was more supportive of Ujiri (like he's supportive of Shapiro, and Anthony Staffieri, Rogers CEO), i'm pretty sure Ujiri would had tanked.

[DelAbbot]

Only if you believe that his bosses would've been ok with tanking.

It's not traditional tanking for 3 years like what HOU is doing. It's a stealth tank for 22 games.

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

what's wrong with badly losing in 2 out of last 3 seasons? We spent a lot of "capital" to win the championship and then lost Kawhi, Green, Ibaka, and Gasol for nothing to FA and old age. It's only natural that we lose a few years (yes plural) to restock our team's capital.

The Jays had 3 season of averaging 90 losses from 2017-2019 after that run in 2015-2016, to restock/rebuild, which didn't even reach the height of the Raptors.

The business people in MLSE understand better than anyone that business cycles exist and sports competitive cycles (which translates to its own business cycle) also exist

So I don't think MLSE is mandating this push for play-in. Masai either believes in Fred+Pascal or messed up the trade deadline (with intention to do a one year tactical tank) - neither is a good look for people who understands this franchise.

[720]

VS the 'luck' of hitting a top 10-15 player of all time to our team and having that player stick with us and winning a title. Which... hasn't happened in what, 20 years?

Again, tanking has shown to not work and have very little success.

I’m sorry but drafting your own superstar is absolutely key if you look at history. Every single champion in the last century has had lottery talent on their team as a star player, with only one exception (2004 Pistons).

These two statements are always connected.

There is no doubt having a top 10 player in the league (almost always from the lottery is key to winning the title).

Tanking to get that player is NOT connected to winning and hasn't been proven to work.

You can call the actual process of focusing on the draft instead of the playoffs whatever you want. Even in this thread, there are only a few guys that wanna blow it up like a Hinkie type tank (I’m not totally against it but understand that requires major commitment).

I think most people here would prefer a stealth tank like the Scottie year.

[WuTang_CMB]

Only if you believe that his bosses would've been ok with tanking.

It's not traditional tanking for 3 years like what HOU is doing. It's a stealth tank for 22 games.

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

But the Raptors are in year 2 of this rebuilding process. In all likelihood, I don't think they were telling the board they were going to be contenders in year 2. Last year they made the playoffs when they probably shouldnt have. So it's pretty much a wash and they would still be on their natural progression to being a top team.

[Johnny Bball]

I’m sorry but drafting your own superstar is absolutely key if you look at history. Every single champion in the last century has had lottery talent on their team as a star player, with only one exception (2004 Pistons).

These two statements are always connected.

There is no doubt having a top 10 player in the league (almost always from the lottery is key to winning the title).

Tanking to get that player is NOT connected to winning and hasn't been proven to work.

You can call the actual process of focusing on the draft instead of the playoffs whatever you want. Even in this thread, there are only a few guys that wanna blow it up like a Hinkie type tank (I’m not totally against it but understand that requires major commitment).

I think most people here would prefer a stealth tank like the Scottie year.

I read "blow it up" a thousand times. A few guys? Come on. That's just revising history even if it wasn't you.

[Reeko]

It's not traditional tanking for 3 years like what HOU is doing. It's a stealth tank for 22 games.

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

what's wrong with badly losing in 2 out of last 3 seasons? We spent a lot of "capital" to win the championship and then lost Kawhi, Green, Ibaka, and Gasol for nothing to FA and old age. It's only natural that we lose a few years (yes plural) to restock our team's capital.

The Jays had 3 season of averaging 90 losses from 2017-2019 after that run in 2015-2016, to restock/rebuild, which didn't even reach the height of the Raptors.

Yeah, well those are two different situations run by two different organizations. Let's be real, Ed Rogers doesn't seem to have the best rep when it comes to other races so the opportunities he might feel comfortable giving to a white guy he hand picked versus a black guy he didn't think was worth his extension, are likely not the same.

[DelAbbot]

I mean it doesn't really matter how you get there, only that you get there. I just want to be clear that I would rather tank the rest of the season than have traded away next year's first rounder for Poeltl.

Even if MLSE was fine with losing, how does it look for Masai to have tanked 2 of his last 3 seasons? Ed Rogers potentially starts looking much more legitimate in his views regarding Masai's extension. At the end of the day the executive game is cut throat and results driven. More success breeds higher expectations and if you can't meet those expectations then you're out on your ass.

what's wrong with badly losing in 2 out of last 3 seasons? We spent a lot of "capital" to win the championship and then lost Kawhi, Green, Ibaka, and Gasol for nothing to FA and old age. It's only natural that we lose a few years (yes plural) to restock our team's capital.

The Jays had 3 season of averaging 90 losses from 2017-2019 after that run in 2015-2016, to restock/rebuild, which didn't even reach the height of the Raptors.

Yeah, well those are two different situations run by two different organizations. Let's be real, Ed Rogers doesn't seem to have the best rep when it comes to other races so the opportunities he might feel comfortable giving to a white guy he hand picked versus a black guy he didn't think was worth his extension, are likely not the same.

Can't really have a serious discussion if you keep mentioning Ed Rogers like he has control of MLSE or the Raptors - he has ownership stake in MLSE but the only person Masai needs to answer to is MLSE represented by Larry T.

[Reeko]

Another thing that I think we may be underestimating is that at trade deadlines and in the offseason bad teams inherently deal from positions of weakness. By being respectable/decent/good it also improves how other teams view the Raptors when it comes to trades.

[720]

These two statements are always connected.

There is no doubt having a top 10 player in the league (almost always from the lottery is key to winning the title).

Tanking to get that player is NOT connected to winning and hasn't been proven to work.

You can call the actual process of focusing on the draft instead of the playoffs whatever you want. Even in this thread, there are only a few guys that wanna blow it up like a Hinkie type tank (I’m not totally against it but understand that requires major commitment).

I think most people here would prefer a stealth tank like the Scottie year.

I read "blow it up" a thousand times. A few guys? Come on. That's just revising history.

I think people say that out of frustration or are being hyperbolic. There are very few people that wanna start from scratch like Hinkie did with the Sixers. To be clear though, if someone proposes a Siakam or a Fred trade for example, I don’t consider that starting from scratch. A Hinkie type tank requires a complete vision shift. Trading Siakam or Fred for assets for example to better the team short or long term doesn’t necessarily fall under that.

[Reeko]

what's wrong with badly losing in 2 out of last 3 seasons? We spent a lot of "capital" to win the championship and then lost Kawhi, Green, Ibaka, and Gasol for nothing to FA and old age. It's only natural that we lose a few years (yes plural) to restock our team's capital.

The Jays had 3 season of averaging 90 losses from 2017-2019 after that run in 2015-2016, to restock/rebuild, which didn't even reach the height of the Raptors.

Yeah, well those are two different situations run by two different organizations. Let's be real, Ed Rogers doesn't seem to have the best rep when it comes to other races so the opportunities he might feel comfortable giving to a white guy he hand picked versus a black guy he didn't think was worth his extension, are likely not the same.

Can't really have a serious discussion if you keep mentioning Ed Rogers like he has control of MLSE or the Raptors - he has ownership stake in MLSE but the only person Masai needs to answer to is MLSE represented by Larry T.

Exactly he has an ownership stake, which means he likely exerts some level of power and influence in MLSE. He already made it uncomfortable enough for Masai to consider taking a hiatus when Masai had the full support of everyone else. So you can choose to believe that people look at Ed like an idiot and that he has no sway, me personally though I wouldn't bet on it.

[WuTang_CMB]

Yeah, well those are two different situations run by two different organizations. Let's be real, Ed Rogers doesn't seem to have the best rep when it comes to other races so the opportunities he might feel comfortable giving to a white guy he hand picked versus a black guy he didn't think was worth his extension, are likely not the same.

Can't really have a serious discussion if you keep mentioning Ed Rogers like he has control of MLSE or the Raptors - he has ownership stake in MLSE but the only person Masai needs to answer to is MLSE represented by Larry T.

Exactly he has an ownership stake, which means he likely exerts some level of power and influence in MLSE. He already made it uncomfortable enough for Masai to consider taking a hiatus when Masai had the full support of everyone else. So you can choose to believe that people look at Ed like an idiot and that he has no sway, me personally though I wouldn't bet on it.

It's a board. Bell and Larry/Lastman are a block, plus his sister melinda hates his guts. Everything points to full support of Masai. Ed and his CFO don't have much leverage in this situation.

[Reeko]

Can't really have a serious discussion if you keep mentioning Ed Rogers like he has control of MLSE or the Raptors - he has ownership stake in MLSE but the only person Masai needs to answer to is MLSE represented by Larry T.

Exactly he has an ownership stake, which means he likely exerts some level of power and influence in MLSE. He already made it uncomfortable enough for Masai to consider taking a hiatus when Masai had the full support of everyone else. So you can choose to believe that people look at Ed like an idiot and that he has no sway, me personally though I wouldn't bet on it.

It's a board. Bell and Larry/Lastman are a block, plus his sister melinda hates his guts. Everything points to full support of Masai. Ed and his CFO don't have much leverage in this situation.

Right now they don't. But keep on losing for a few years while drafting more assets and see if people's opinions don't change. It's a risk is all I'm saying.

[WuTang_CMB]

Exactly he has an ownership stake, which means he likely exerts some level of power and influence in MLSE. He already made it uncomfortable enough for Masai to consider taking a hiatus when Masai had the full support of everyone else. So you can choose to believe that people look at Ed like an idiot and that he has no sway, me personally though I wouldn't bet on it.

It's a board. Bell and Larry/Lastman are a block, plus his sister melinda hates his guts. Everything points to full support of Masai. Ed and his CFO don't have much leverage in this situation.

Right now they don't. But keep on losing for a few years while drafting more assets and see if people's opinions don't change. It's a risk is all I'm saying.

Well yea, they need to build another winner. But there's time to build to that. No one is going to question Masai in year 2 is the point.