Jazz's Markkanen: Tanking is a failed concept

[Ducklett]

I don't think it would be common if it happened at all which is why I find flat odds preferable to the current race for the bottom scenario.

Really? Imagine you are Atlanta Hawks and your choice is either 1st round exit or 36% for top5 pick. Every year some mid-level team would tank, probably, with flat lottery odds. That's terrible idea, it would fix lack of tanking of the worst teams but create tanking of mid-level teams. It wouldn't be that apparent, but the consequences (parity) would be even bigger. Especially in the seasons with strong draft classes where 50% of chances for top7 pick would be really encouraging.

There are minor changes that should be discussed: preference for teams waiting longer for a 1st draft picks, no back-to-back top3 picks, etc. Pelicans, Sixers, Nets or Wizards wouldn't have had chances for Flagg in the first scenario (Jazz or Hornets and Raptors are waiting longer for a 1st pick), so they wouldn't be so incentivized in tanking for Flagg. I think you can decrease frequency of tanking while keeping the main purpose of draft and lottery quite easily.

What does that look like though? Sitting players on the last day with a chance to make the playoffs? I don't think it happens a lot. But it could happen.

The play-in would big the biggest tank fests in history.

[Capn'O]

Really? Imagine you are Atlanta Hawks and your choice is either 1st round exit or 36% for top5 pick. Every year some mid-level team would tank, probably, with flat lottery odds. That's terrible idea, it would fix lack of tanking of the worst teams but create tanking of mid-level teams. It wouldn't be that apparent, but the consequences (parity) would be even bigger. Especially in the seasons with strong draft classes where 50% of chances for top7 pick would be really encouraging.

There are minor changes that should be discussed: preference for teams waiting longer for a 1st draft picks, no back-to-back top3 picks, etc. Pelicans, Sixers, Nets or Wizards wouldn't have had chances for Flagg in the first scenario (Jazz or Hornets and Raptors are waiting longer for a 1st pick), so they wouldn't be so incentivized in tanking for Flagg. I think you can decrease frequency of tanking while keeping the main purpose of draft and lottery quite easily.

What does that look like though? Sitting players on the last day with a chance to make the playoffs? I don't think it happens a lot. But it could happen.

The play-in would big the biggest tank fests in history.

Then you lose your pick.

[DeBlazerRiddem]

No team is giving up a shot at the playoffs for a chance at a pick. More often than not you will end up with the 14th pick and look like a chump. If they were good enough to get themselves in the situation than they were playing competitively at the end of the season and the players and coaching staff wants to make the playoffs.

Even if a rare team once in a blue moon did that, mid level teams tanking one game is a much better scenario than the current "half the season is a total waste" crap we get now.

[monopoman]

Nobody valorizes tanking. We just accept that it’s the best and fastest way for a bad team to turn things around.

Not if it encourages teams to be worse than they need to be. Teams should not make moves to be bad, no fan should have to root for their team to lose.

Yeah, except “get gud” is not a real strategy in the NBA. You need high end talent to win in this league, and the draft is the only way for most teams to get that talent.

Tanking teams are sacrificing the short term for the long term. It’s a legitimate strategy, and probably the only strategy for small market teams.

As a fan I’d rather win 20 games for a few years and get rewarded with a star talent, than win 30 games for the rest of eternity.

/QFT

What's funny is if any of the most extreme anti-tanking measures were ever implemented it would make it so the big market teams had even more of an advantage.

Imagine how good the Lakers and other teams where big name players want to go with something like a wheel draft, at that point a bad team might suck for over a decade even with making good picks if they are getting lower picks. Meanwhile a team like the Lakers might get some big name free agent, and some random all-star wanting a trade there.

People whine that "Tanking doesn't work!" and that's bull, it all comes down to picking the right players. The Warriors won their championships all on the back of making great picks over a short period of time.

[DeBlazerRiddem]

Tanking doesn't work because it incentivizes poor team building. Teams wasting seasons and fans getting burned out watching stupid and pointless basketball is bad for the product. Fans rooting for their team to lose and being mad when they don't is so counter productive.

Flat lottery odds for non-playoff teams doesn't tilt things towards big markets at all, that isn't a counter argument that works.

[Richard4444]

I'm sure it sucks to go from a losing team to another losing team to another losing team, but at the end of the day, Markkanen will probably make close to a half a billion dollars playing a kid's game. If something he should be quite happy about his life, no matter if he never plays in a playoff game in his career.

Lauri could have chosen not to extend with the Jazz, by forcing a trade or accepting a lower salary to go to a win-now team. By remaining in Utaz, he opted for the money instead of competitive basketball.

[The Master]

No team is giving up a shot at the playoffs for a chance at a pick. More often than not you will end up with the 14th pick and look like a chump. If they were good enough to get themselves in the situation than they were playing competitively at the end of the season and the players and coaching staff wants to make the playoffs.

Even if a rare team once in a blue moon did that, mid level teams tanking one game is a much better scenario than the current "half the season is a total waste" crap we get now.

Not really though, right now due to play-ins we have a situation that majority of the league (20/30 at least) fights for something. And you can include Suns, Blazers, or Spurs pre-injury of Wemby. That's why the whole "tanking is ruining the league" is so overblown, we have +1200 games per regular season with 23/24 teams actually caring about winning?

Anyway, if you give 1st round teams without any prospects (Bulls, Hawks, Kings, Heat, Mavs this year) of making a deep run a choice between 1st round exit vs 43% chances for a top6 pick, it's a bit delusional to expect that they'll all pass on this opportunity and select 1st round exit. With flat lottery odds, it would be in some instances stupid for teams like Mavs to actually make the playoffs from long term perspective - so the whole concept of 'losing shouldn't be incentivized' won't be fixed, it will just exist on different level. The 2nd problem with flat lottery odds is that the distribution of talent pool from long term perspective would get more uneven, what's quite obvious considering 10th-14th teams in lottery would've had 35% chances for a 1st pick, not 7% like right now.

So, the league would be more uneven - and it would be still beneficial in very specific instances to lose on purpose.

[Richard4444]

Markkanen comes from Europe where tanking,as in we're gonna intentionally suck for a whole season,simply doesn't exist.This is a player in his prime who wasted a whole year away,of course he's not gonna be happy.Tbh as a european myself, seeing fans of NBA teams actually wanting their teams to lose and getting angry when they win is one of my least favorite ascpects of the league.

It is the worst part of American sports culture. We're obsessed with sending the best young players to terrible teams in the pursuit of parity that we create tons of unwatachable teams every year.

As if in the free market European soccer, there are no unwatchable teams.

Everybody loves to watch Alaves, Leganes, Crystal Palace, and Southampton games.

[zero rings]

Tanking doesn't work because it incentivizes poor team building. Teams wasting seasons and fans getting burned out watching stupid and pointless basketball is bad for the product. Fans rooting for their team to lose and being mad when they don't is so counter productive.

Flat lottery odds for non-playoff teams doesn't tilt things towards big markets at all, that isn't a counter argument that works.

The two best teams in the league built their current rosters by trading their veterans, bottoming out, and selecting talented players at the top of the draft. Tanking isn’t a fool proof strategy, but saying it doesn’t work is a stretch.

And yes, flat lottery odds would benefit the big markets by taking away the one avenue small markets have to compete. OKC and Cleveland wouldn’t be juggernauts today if they had been picking 10th-14th in the draft during those down years.

[andyhop]

What’s one of relegation-promotion problems , name me one ?

Massively unpredictable revenues.

Not our problem.

It is if you want promotion and relegation because its the reason it will never happen

[DeBlazerRiddem]

Not really though, right now due to play-ins we have a situation that majority of the league (20/30 at least) fights for something. And you can include Suns, Blazers, or Spurs pre-injury of Wemby. That's why the whole "tanking is ruining the league" is so overblown, we have +1200 games per regular season with 23/24 teams actually caring about winning?

Arguably those teams are doing the wrong thing, because of the way the league incentivizes tanking. But even having 7 teams that aren't trying to win should be embarrassing to the league. Zero teams should be trying to lose, it's an insult to the fans that the league makes losing a desirable outcome and the fans who spend hard earned money in those markets are being cheated out of seeing their team trying to do its best every night. It's a travesty that half the season is a joke and completely pointless. I freaking love the Blazers but seeing them intentionally throw games and players sitting out and being uncompetitive makes me not want to watch them. The league loses fans and potential fans by having this stupid system in place.

Anyway, if you give 1st round teams without any prospects (Bulls, Hawks, Kings, Heat, Mavs this year) of making a deep run a choice between 1st round exit vs 43% chances for a top6 pick, it's a bit delusional to expect that they'll all pass on this opportunity and select 1st round exit. With flat lottery odds, it would be in some instances stupid for teams like Mavs to actually make the playoffs from long term perspective - so the whole concept of 'losing shouldn't be incentivized' won't be fixed, it will just exist on different level. The 2nd problem with flat lottery odds is that the distribution of talent pool from long term perspective would get more uneven, what's quite obvious considering 10th-14th teams in lottery would've had 35% chances for a 1st pick, not 7% like right now.

So, the league would be more uneven - and it would be still beneficial in very specific instances to lose on purpose.

I disagree that it would be a common occurrence, but even if it does happen having these teams throw ONE game is a huge improvement from those teams currently throwing half a season.

[DeBlazerRiddem]

Tanking doesn't work because it incentivizes poor team building. Teams wasting seasons and fans getting burned out watching stupid and pointless basketball is bad for the product. Fans rooting for their team to lose and being mad when they don't is so counter productive.

Flat lottery odds for non-playoff teams doesn't tilt things towards big markets at all, that isn't a counter argument that works.

The two best teams in the league built their current rosters by trading their veterans, bottoming out, and selecting talented players at the top of the draft. Tanking isn’t a fool proof strategy, but saying it doesn’t work is a stretch.

Yes the league currently incentivizes tanking and so that is the smart thing for teams to do within the current system.

My point was the system is stupid, not the teams who play the system. If that wasn't clear then that's on me. "A system that incentivizes tanking doesn't work" is more what I was saying.

[og15]

Play for your odds within your draft tier.

1) Still allows worst teams to get best odds vs other proposals that can cause the rich to get richer and the poor to stay poor
2) Eliminates roster decimation incentive
3) Adds excitement for winning to fans of lottery teams at the end of the season
4) Makes the end of the season competitive for everyone, not just the teams competing for the playoffs

Even if we say, "players won't play for their replacement", players will play for contracts, to stay in the league, to show their skill, and simply winning pride, many guys hate being on losing teams.

You're locked into a tier at around 55-65 games, at that point, your record during the remaining games determines your ranking for draft odds among your tier. You get demoted to the top of the next tier if you are the worst in your tier.

This season, if we said the cut off was 60 games, and we took the last 22 games, the bottom 5 tier would be:
Utah (2-20)
Washington (7-15)
Charlotte (5-17)
New Orleans (5-17)
Philadelphia (3-19)

Odds would be:
1) Washington 14%
2) Charlotte 14% (1-1 vs New Orleans, won point differential)
3) New Orleans 14%
4) Philadelphia 12.5%
5) Team with best record among bottom 6-10 tier 10.5%
6) Utah 9.0%

You get demoted to the top of the next tier if you are the worst in your tier, except for the teams in the bottom 11-14 tier, since no one gets demoted out of the lottery, they can get promoted from 2% (11th) to 3% (10th).

Utah could definitely have won a lot more than 2/22 games to end the season if there was any incentive to do so. In this system, they go from best odds to 6th best odds. So while they still have a chance at #1, it's 5% lower this time, and while they still get talent, they are not rewarded for extra sucking.

This is a good non overly drastic solution that still lives up to the purpose of the draft (helping poor teams get better), but also doesn't create secondary problems like some of the people who say, "everyone in the lottery", or "no draft, all free agents", lol, or those kinds of ideas.

Now, yes, of course you can still tank the beginning of the season, but the aim isn't to make a perfect solution, but simply to smoothen out that end of season mess that can happen with teams going full give up mode.

[HotelVitale]

Why didn't he take a low deal to help his team have more resources to help win games?

Why did he agree to sit out games?

He is just wrong, everyone is "trying to win", but just not all at the same time, because there are constraints in this system.

Your Welcome.

Criticism in the middle makes sense but the part about Markkanen himself is a logical fallacy, a version of ad hominem but even worse IMO. I still try to get good health insurance for myself even though I don't like the health insurance system, millions of people use things like Walmart, Google, etc even though they have valid criticims of them and would prefer sometihng else, etc.

It's not a valid criticism to say that, unless you're being personally extreme and doing all you can to take down a system, you cannot criticize that system or have any opinion about it.

Doesn't mean Markkanen is right but he's not automatically logically or theoretically wrong because he's not costing himself millions to disrupt or personally (and uselessly/symbolically) protesting that system.

They should all play for free to help their teams win.

Or if they dont, they’re never allowed to say ‘winning is important’ or ‘I’d like to be on a winning team.’

[Nate505]

There shouldn't be a draft. You can disagree with him, most Americans do, but he's clearly arguing for the Euro system. And I agree with him. Americans valorizing companies for trying to lose sucks.

The European system absolutely sucks. Unless you're a fan of like 2-4 teams.

[Nate505]

Still trying to figure out how Utah blew that Donavon Mitchell team up,

Him and Gobert couldn't co-exist, and Mitchell pretty much said he didn't want to stay in Utah.

[The Master]

Arguably those teams are doing the wrong thing, because of the way the league incentivizes tanking. But even having 7 teams that aren't trying to win should be embarrassing to the league. Zero teams should be trying to lose, it's an insult to the fans that the league makes losing a desirable outcome and the fans who spend hard earned money in those markets are being cheated out of seeing their team trying to do its best every night. It's a travesty that half the season is a joke and completely pointless. I freaking love the Blazers but seeing them intentionally throw games and players sitting out and being uncompetitive makes me not want to watch them. The league loses fans and potential fans by having this stupid system in place.

To be honest, I don't think it works this way - there are fans mad at tanking and losing their interest, sure, but also big part of fanbase understanding the whole dynamics of rebuilding. Especially seeing Rockets, Thunder or Cavs thriving this year.

Draft system is far from being perfect - and there are several minor changes to be made that can at least (hopefully) partially fix it - but the problem is that there's no serious alternative, and this thread (with all due respect) is a good example, if you think a revolution in this regard.

E.g. flat lottery odds - in 2023, OKC (Holmgren a year before), Magic (Banchero a year before), Mavs (Doncic) and Pelicans (Zion) would've had ~30% chances to get Wembanyama. Very quickly we would've gotten some crazy outcomes in terms of talent distribution in the league.

[cornchip]

I think tanking is terrible for the league but it's legitimately a necessary evil.

You can make small changes to slightly disincentivize it but I think the better option is to make tanking more palatable. The best way to do that is by raising the age limit.

With the age limit at 20, you're at least getting players a little more developed in all areas. Theoretically, this should help tanking teams get better faster. With all the NIL money floating around, it's also fairer to the players than it once was.

[Catchall]

No team is giving up a shot at the playoffs for a chance at a pick. More often than not you will end up with the 14th pick and look like a chump. If they were good enough to get themselves in the situation than they were playing competitively at the end of the season and the players and coaching staff wants to make the playoffs.

Dallas did it in 2023 and traded up from #12 for Dereck Lively.

[KGtabake]

Markkanen comes from Europe where tanking,as in we're gonna intentionally suck for a whole season,simply doesn't exist.This is a player in his prime who wasted a whole year away,of course he's not gonna be happy.Tbh as a european myself, seeing fans of NBA teams actually wanting their teams to lose and getting angry when they win is one of my least favorite ascpects of the league.

It is the worst part of American sports culture. We're obsessed with sending the best young players to terrible teams in the pursuit of parity that we create tons of unwatachable teams every year.

As if in the free market European soccer, there are no unwatchable teams.

Everybody loves to watch Alaves, Leganes, Crystal Palace, and Southampton games.

These teams don't try to lose. They're just not good enough. And if they're not good enough, they get relegated to the lower division.
I don't know what's the point of your post.