Tha Cynic wrote: 
I don’t even know what you’re arguing anymore. No one said having the top pick in the draft every season doesn’t give you better players. People are arguing that you can’t just tank every season and hope you get lucky every year and get the top picks that lead to championships.
All you need to do is look back over the last 20 years and see how many championships were a result of tanking.
In the last 20 years the only four teams who have won due to tanking are the Cavs, Heat, Celtics and Spurs and the Spurs did a strategic tank that was due to an injury (again something the raptors have done multiple times). Two of the other championships by the Heat were due to free agency signings.
Not only are you fighting against those percentages, you also have to be one of the many tanking teams to get that top pick that works out too.
There is nothing that shows that tanking is a great strategy for winning championships. In fact the opposite is true. Since the NBA flattened the lottery odds a different team has won the championship every year and only Boston you can say was due to tanking.
Like I’ve been saying, you’re using small percentage occurrences to “strategize” and relying on luck.
Is it really that hard for you and Los to understand what im trying to say? If it is then sorry i will simplify it as much as possible so you understand...
Team mid vs Tanking....Tanking over the history of the NBA has produced better results, Championships, Winning percentage, Better outcomes in terms of team success than Team mid has and there are statistics to back that up not just a passionate belief....Its actually proven by percentages again if you like to argue against statistics and historical facts & data be my guest....But you will be wrong about it 100% of the time because data does not back up what you are saying.
High draft picks vs low draft picks (Many people here are saying it does not matter where you draft) But it certainly does if you want actual talent and NBA staying power....1-14 have historically had NBA staying power, stars, franchise players where as 20s/2nd round have deep bench guys or out of the league guys...There for it is easier to build a winning/championship team playing the draft because you can draft an overall better team the higher you draft....rather than staying in the middle losing in the playoffs and having bad draft picks where the talent is limited to bench guys or out of the league fodder. Do outliers like Jokic exist of course they do but that is like 1/10000000 odds....So its dumb to bring up the very limited players and say "Here is my data to disprove it one player out of thousands"
Can you still build a team playing the middle ....Yes but does it produce championship level teams? Not very often if at all....Why? Because you do not get draft picks to land good enough talent, or trade assets, you end up not being good enough to actually win in the playoffs, all while drafting mideocre talents that have no value in trades, or to grow your team into a contender because they lack the talent....Tanking has produced more title contenders and is the much more successfull way to build a team over the history past and present in the NBA...
Statistics show it is much more harder to even trade for said superstar to put you into the championship level because these players are rarely on the market and if they do end up on the market you lack the assets to land that player because you have a bunch of mid talents that teams are not fond of.....Thats why if Giannis were to be on the market today the Tanking teams...Spurs/Rockets/OKC have the assets to get the deal done over us....Because they have been collecting actual good young players with value over the years while we have been collecting mid....
I hope i made it simple to understand for you my friend....
