Prove Me Wrong: Only 2 Teams are Tanking So Far

[The Rebel]

The suns never "intended" to tank. They knew they had a good team on their hands unlike every other person in the world who thought we'd be last in the league.

Didn't the Suns trade their starting centre for a draft pick and a guy everyone knew was injured? I'm sure that NOW the Suns are thinking about winning but that trade certainly wasn't about improving their odds this year.

To be fair Gortat was forcing his way out, and with the money savings and a 1st round pick, that is not a bad deal for an average disgruntled center. Especially when you have 2 young centers you are high on.

[JayMKE]

The Bucks aren't tanking at all, Kohl/Hammond did everything possible to compete for the 8th seed this year but we've just suck and have had a lot of injuries. Our young players are actually better than the veterans we brought in to compete. The Bucks actually tried to resign both Monta and Jennings, they wanted out tho. Monta declined more money from the Bucks to sign with Dallas.

The only team I think you could say is tanking is Philly since they traded their best player for an injured Noel and draft pick but they wouldn't be making the playoffs with Holiday anyways and Noel/2014 1st is great value.

Basically tanking is a myth, a video game mentality by fans. No coach is purposely trying to lose, no player is missing shots intentionally, no GM wants to miss the playoffs year in and year out. This is work for these guys and their futures aren't guaranteed, they have to worry about losing their jobs.

[The Rebel]

Bucks are tanking from what I have seen(unless they don't own there draft picks)

Tanking to me is holding out player due to "injuries" for an extended amount of time.

To be fair I think the Bucks injury problems started on their own, they may be holding guys out now, but that was not on purpose at the beginning of the season.

[DusterBuster]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

That's some WILDLY flawed logic. Every team in the NBA has the potential to fail immensely. Injuries and/or bad chemistry can hit every team in the league and turn a playoff (or even championship) contender into a bad team.

Tanking, by it's nature, has a goal.

[loserX]

The suns never "intended" to tank. They knew they had a good team on their hands unlike every other person in the world who thought we'd be last in the league.

Didn't the Suns trade their starting centre for a draft pick and a guy everyone knew was injured? I'm sure that NOW the Suns are thinking about winning but that trade certainly wasn't about improving their odds this year.

To be fair Gortat was forcing his way out, and with the money savings and a 1st round pick, that is not a bad deal for an average disgruntled center. Especially when you have 2 young centers you are high on.

Oh, I'm not suggesting it was a bad deal. But it was a tank deal. If they'd wanted win-now pieces I'm sure they could have got them, even if just by re-routing Oak and the pick to a 3rd team.

[Thugger HBC]

We don't agree because those moves weren't made to make them intentionally bad. They were trying to be good and failed. That's sucking, not tanking. Tanking is where you, as a GM, intentionally put your team in a position to fail. The Nets, Bucks and Knicks CLEARLY did not do that.

Both GM's did do that, one lost his job for it and the other should as well.

The Bucks did as well one good year from OJ doesnt sell anything.

You seem to be looking at these situations without any form of context or hindsight. Either that or you can't differentiate the difference between a team sucking and a team tanking, which imo, are two very different things. As far as I can tell, your bottom line is 'bad=tanking'. I don't see it that black and white.

The Bucks, Nets and Knicks aren't tanking, nor were they set out to be tanking teams before the season started. They're just really crappy teams for a variety of reasons. Sometimes you put a roster together that you think makes sense on paper, but then it just doesn't work out for one reason or another.

That's a very VERY different think from stripping a roster to bare bones and giving a bunch of young unproven guys huge minutes. That's intentionally tanking as a GM. The Jazz, Celtics, Suns and Sixers all set out to be tanking teams. Whether or not the expected outcome of a ton of losses transpired is something wholly different. Just as it is that it's very different when a team expects a lot of wins but they end up not getting them.

Now you may say, "Well what about a team that starts out the season wanting to win, but then decides to throw in the towel on a season?" This is certainly a common occurrence. I think you can soon add a couple teams to that list; Lakers, Bulls and Cavs are all candidates for that. One or more of them will start tanking soon I'd think. Sometimes seasons go sideways on you and the best option is just to throw it out.

On the flip side of that coin, sometimes you end up having a great season like the Suns and what you thought was going to be a tanking year turns into a playoff season.

I'll put it like this...

Speaking specifically of the Knicks, take a look on our board from July 1, we have a large contingent that KNEW the team would not be as good, although surprised they are this bad, but we knew they wouldnt be good at all, because they addressed nothing and compounded the bad areas and made them worse....even to the point of doing NOTHING about it, mainly because they cant and wont....thats tanking, just not by intention.

Doesnt matter what their intentions were, it's about what they did.

The same directly applies to the Nets...they were hyped, unproven as a group, and the same flaws they had mainly non-durable core was compounded by an aging few were clearly on the downside.

Same animal.

[JayMKE]

Bucks are tanking from what I have seen(unless they don't own there draft picks)

Tanking to me is holding out player due to "injuries" for an extended amount of time.

To be fair I think the Bucks injury problems started on their own, they may be holding guys out now, but that was not on purpose at the beginning of the season.

Who are the Bucks holding out that would be winning us games? Sanders got into a bar fight and broke his hand, had to have surgery and is just coming back now.(We're 0-2 since he came back) The young players we have out there right now are better than the veterans who are injured/not playing.

[nomansland]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

[tiderulz]

Boston are not tanking. We got out and be competitive every game, we havnt been blown out often (Indiana did beat us by 30 odd but they are very very good).

Boston are 13-17 and Toronto (4th seed & top of division) are 13-15, I think we can make that up when Rondo returns.

boston by all means was trying to tank. trade Pierce & Garnett with Rondo on the mend. Maybe it shows that Brad Stevens can really coach. That roster is pretty bad.

[The Rebel]

Personally I think the teams that set out to tank are the 76ers, Celtics, and Jazz. I think the Bucks, bulls, and Lakers are starting to embrace that attitude now due to the injury problems.

[Thugger HBC]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

[theFireBlanket]

Bucks are tanking from what I have seen(unless they don't own there draft picks)

Tanking to me is holding out player due to "injuries" for an extended amount of time.

To be fair I think the Bucks injury problems started on their own, they may be holding guys out now, but that was not on purpose at the beginning of the season.

They've been playing Ersan through his nagging injury all year, rushing him back at the season's beginning just to try to be competitive. But that backfired, he got hurt again (twice) and hasn't been as effective while playing at less than 100%.

[JayMKE]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

Realistically how do the Bucks compete this season? What need did they not address that they could of? The same with Orlando, Utah, or Philly?

Tanking is a myth, it really is. I regret ever using the term now since people take it literally.

[The Rebel]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

Not when the owner and coach are delusional enough to believe it is just a few injuries and time to gel that the team needs. Especially since Dolan will be pissed when the Knicks pass a good lotto pick to the Nuggets.

They built that team to win, they thought the team was going to be a contender by adding in Bargnani, they did not realize all the issues they did nothing to fix and instead created worse problems.

[nomansland]

Building teams with a potential to fail immensely is tanking, whether that was the goal or not.

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

No because (assuming you're talking about the Knicks and Nets) they're not deliberately trying to lose- trying being the key word- and there's no incentive for them to play like crap at this point.

The star may say they're playing to lose but I guarantee you that's not the desired outcome. Saying that is self-criticism.

[Thugger HBC]

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

Realistically how do the Bucks compete this season? What need did they not address that they could of? The same with Orlando, Utah, or Philly?

Tanking is a myth, it really is. I regret ever using the term now since people take it literally.

Certainly isnt a myth, so we gotta establish that first....there are clear examples in the history of the sport.

[Thugger HBC]

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

Not when the owner and coach are delusional enough to believe it is just a few injuries and time to gel that the team needs. Especially since Dolan will be pissed when the Knicks pass a good lotto pick to the Nuggets.

They built that team to win, they thought the team was going to be a contender by adding in Bargnani, they did not realize all the issues they did nothing to fix and instead created worse problems.

Having Dolan as owner is a tanking job.

[nomansland]

Put it another way:

Ineptitude is when your plan fails.
Planning to fail is tanking.

[Thugger HBC]

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

No because (assuming you're talking about the Knicks and Nets) they're not deliberately trying to lose- trying being the key word- and there's no incentive for them to play like crap at this point.

The star may say they're playing to lose but I guarantee you that's not the desired outcome. Saying that is self-criticism.

we'll agree to disagree.

[DusterBuster]

Implicit with tanking is either deliberately trying to lose or sacrificing wins for a long term gain. Tanking is not the same thing as just plain sucking. Not at all.

So a team that addressed none of their needs, the star player admitting the team is playing to lose, the owner basically willing to stand pat by saying everyone is safe and every media having the teams thinking of said team not improving in any facet that impedes a season plans two years from now doesnt fit tanking?

Not when the owner and coach are delusional enough to believe it is just a few injuries and time to gel that the team needs. Especially since Dolan will be pissed when the Knicks pass a good lotto pick to the Nuggets.

They built that team to win, they thought the team was going to be a contender by adding in Bargnani, they did not realize all the issues they did nothing to fix and instead created worse problems.

Exactly. Thugger seems to be confusing incompetence with tanking. Again, two very very very different things. Obviously the moves they made weren't good moves, but in the eyes of incompetent ownership and management, they clearly thought they had a winner on their hands. At the very least least something that could make the playoffs.

Speaking of the Knicks specifically, they brought back a lot of the pieces that got them to the playoffs last year, but realized they needed something at PF since Amare is toast. So they went out and got Bargnani, assuming he would help stretch the floor for everyone else and create spacing. Obviously it's a bad idea to bring in a "shooter" who only shoots 35% from 3 and has never played a lick of D in his life, but that's what bad management does. They look at things simplistically and think it will make a winner. While they made bad moves, they didn't make them with the explicit intent to tank. Again, what did the Knicks possibly have to gain by tanking the year away? They have no pick and Melo is on his last year. Absolutely no good could have came from explicitly making the Knicks worse this year.

Same goes for the Nets. They have no pick and have a roster they're spending over 160 million to field. That wasn't a roster built to tank. They've been derailed by a number of issues, just as the Knicks and Bucks, but that does not make them a tanking team. It makes them a poorly run team. A team can be competently run and be a tanking team. These things are not the "same animal" as Thugger so wrongly keeps wanting to propose.