Throwing games?

[BBen]

Hey guys, I'm not sure if this question has been asked here before but I haven't seen it mentioned and it's killing me, so here it is: is the current Sonics organization intentionally tanking a la San Antonio '96/'97? Or Houston '84?

The remarks about those teams are almost always about how it was a business decision so that they could rapidly improve their roster through the draft. However, do you guys feel like this is an appropriate tactic given our current social situation?

The reason I bring this up is any idiot with half a mind could have coached the Sonics into a blowout victory over the Knicks. They were on a roadtrip, had just finished a demoralizing loss to Portland and just played bad the whole game. It felt as if PJ was really trying to let them into the game so that they could control it. However, the Knicks were SO inept they trumped his efforts to lose. Durant played at inappropriate times and sat so much leading into the fourth that when he came in his shot was icy cold and he was lucky to hit the three that eventually won it... oh and we didn't win because of the three, we won cause Robinson missed.

[D5150]

no, the sonics won because of durants three. the knicks lost because robinson missed. and yes, this has been discussed, about a week ago.

here you go,

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=754061

[Det the Threat]

Hey guys, I'm not sure if this question has been asked here before but I haven't seen it mentioned and it's killing me, so here it is: is the current Sonics organization intentionally tanking a la San Antonio '96/'97? Or Houston '84?

We neither have the talent, nor do we have the experience those teams had.
Everybody knew that we'd be in the bottom 5 of this league after we traded away our two best players from last years team and startet a rebuild.

So no, there's no intentional tanking by the Sonics. We're just not all that good of a team right now.

[djthesonicsfan]

Going into this season, having made the dramatic change to opt for a full rebuilding process, myself and many others estimated the Sonics would win 20-25 games this season. Half way through the season that's still how I see it. In fact, taking a quick glance at the remaining schedule I count 11 winnable games. Assuming they get all of those (they won't, but they'll win others they shouldn't) that puts the Sonics at 23 wins for the year. Which sucks big time, but is exactly what most everybody expected.

But I also agree with you that the Sonics are not being coached in a way to optimize the number of wins. Instead, it's been about (a) getting K Durant & J Green maximum experience and, IMO, (b) showcasing E Watson as a starting PG to facilitate trading him. Anytime a team has strategic objectives other than flat out winnning it's a tough sell to the players. Fundamentally, that's why many of the Sonics' veterans are starting to whine.

Having said the above, I whole heartedly agree with the approach because even if the Sonics strategic objective was winning every game instead of those noted above the difference would only be, at most IMO, 5 more wins or so. Frankly, there's no reason to try to be so competitive with a 30 win team. Way better to focus on developing players for next season. And next season I honestly believe the Sonics will surprise a lot of folks by playing something close to 0.500 basketball.

[Dick Tate]

But I also agree with you that the Sonics are not being coached in a way to optimize the number of wins. Instead, it's been about (a) getting K Durant & J Green maximum experience and, IMO, (b) showcasing E Watson as a starting PG to facilitate trading him. Anytime a team has strategic objectives other than flat out winnning it's a tough sell to the players. Fundamentally, that's why many of the Sonics' veterans are starting to whine.

Agreed. So the answer to Ben's question is yes, the Sonics are indeed tanking.

O/T: I don't know what the whole "conduit" comment was all about. I haven't talked to Wiffler about anything. It didn't take too much detective work to look up his last post. I would still like to know what a Global Mod does and what kind of power they have over regular mods.

[CatchNShoot]

Isn't the first rule of tanking that you have to be able to win games in order to lose them on purpose?

[D5150]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

AH-HA!

[Sweezo]

O/T: I don't know what the whole "conduit" comment was all about. I haven't talked to Wiffler about anything. It didn't take too much detective work to look up his last post. I would still like to know what a Global Mod does and what kind of power they have over regular mods.

I just decided to err on the side of caution there, as it appeared to me that maybe your statements were a result of wiff talking to you.

Global mods are just mods that have cross-board access, which I don't think is any sort of secret I'm giving away.

[BBen]

I agree with everyone except the people saying that we can't win games. The fact is, we could obviously be winning more games than we are winning. We do NOT have an untalented roster even though we could use some work at the 1. If you accept that they are not doing everything they can to win, you acknowledge they are tanking don't you? Perhaps not on the scale of the Rockets or the Spurs. However, when one tanks usually one has a specific player in mind. Who do you think we're targeting in the draft?

[D5150]

how could the sonics obviously be winning more games? it is a team of back ups, roll players, and two rookies. i have always felt that unless you have a truely transcendent superstar on your team you must have at least either a top tier point guard or a top tier center to have any kind of success. guess what? the sonics currently have NONE of those.

what i accept is that this team is almost half way through year one of a total rebuild. so far i have seen no evidence of this team in any way intentionally losing games. to sugest otherwise is ludicrous.
talk all you want about substitution patterns, but this team right now is just not very good.

[BBen]

Yes, but you said "I have always thought..." and then treated your statement like fact. My suggestion is not ludicrous and is based on just as much evidence as your assertions.

I simply think they're a better team than they're playing based on a rotation centered on young players. I also have a number of people who agree with me. I somewhat resent your statements but I understand your emotion.

[djthesonicsfan]

I think what brings in the emotion is equating "tanking" and "effort". Best I can tell no one has quit on this team. They're playing remarkably hard, especially considering their record and their youth. The guys the coach puts in the game are giving it their all.

[D5150]

let me rephrase that ben. most people who have observed the game of profesional basketball would agree that if you do not have a very solid 1 or a very solid 5 or a superstar on your squad, then you will likely noy be very good. your assertations are based ONLY on your opinion. you can not point to what you call questionable substitution patters as solid evidence of intentional tanking. resent my statements all you want, but i am frankly a little sick of this intentional tanking talk. there is simply no solid evidence to support that. however, there is plenty of evidence to support the fact that the sonics do not have a top tier point, do not have a top tier center, and do not have a trancendent superstar (yet) on the roster. they have talented players, but they are weak in key areas. and i would bet that if there was some sinister plan to tank games, some of the vets and even some of the young players would speak up about that. i would think that would piss some of those guys off. yes some have started to gripe, but that is born out of frustration from losing. they realize they are not very good, that to win games they have to play with max energy and efficency, and catch some breaks. they are simply not that good.

[BBen]

The problem is, your premise is faulty. My case is based on the fact that we generally outrebound teams and we have a solid inside core. Many playoff teams would be better off with our 4 and 5 situation. I'm also not convinced that our 1 spot is as bad as it looks. The reason you are viewing them as bad is because of the tanking efforts. If the rotation were more consistent/focused on winning the talent that is already there would look entirely different.

[D5150]

my premise is faulty, ok. the sonics do have a solid inside rotation. and if you combine all of their production it looks good. but tell me, who can consistently draw a double in that group? why is it headline news when wilcox has back to back games rebounding in double figures? dont get me wrong i like some of the players on the team, but luke ridnour? come on, earl has been steady, but he is a back up. remember you are talking about the same core of players that have been in place for 2 and a half years. was the team tanking when ray and rashard where there? your premise is faulty because you are looking at the team through green and gold colored glasses. as many homers do, you over value your teams players and sometimes fail to see the truth, your team is not very good. so enjoy your little fantasy world, enjoy the obvious "tanking efforts". take solace in your belief if that helps you. but if you want to convince a reasonable person, you better come with something better than "we generally outrebound teams" and "i am not convinced that our one spot is as bad as it looks". actually, its worse than it looks. i am sorry man, what you percieve as tanking is simply a total rebuild, an evaluation top to bottom of all the players. in case you missed it, we where told that they would be doing this back in training camp. i tell you want, if i was convinced my favorite team was intentionally throwing games, i wouldn't watch them.

[Dick Tate]

For someone who says they're sick of the tanking talk, you sure do like to argue about it. It doesn't take an entire season to evaluate a roster. That's tanking.

[D5150]

i'm sorry dick, let me be more clear. i am sick of people saying that the sonics are intentionally tanking. i would be glad to discuss it, or argue about it as you put it, for as long as you like. how do you know it doesn't take an entire season to evaluate a roster? have the sonics even played a whole season yet? no. do you think injuries might slow the process just a little? or is this all about how you think that the sonics are better than they really are and you just want to blame the whole thing on what you consider questionable substitution patterns?

tell us, what would you do differently? please, be specific. i really would like to know how you would run this team.

[BBen]

I can't argue with you. Your faith in your own words is close to religious. Anyone else have an opinion that differs?

[D5150]

then dont argue with me. point to some other stat than the sonics outrebound the other team a lot to support your assertation. i believe what i am saying, but you believe what you are saying too. does that mean your faith in your own words is close to religious? we all have different opinions, but generally when we have nothing to back up those opinions, we start making smart-ass comments. i think you will certainly find people on this board that believe as you do. i think you will also find many that believe as i do. if you are looking for some kind of consensus or ground swell of support, you might be looking in the wrong place.

[AbdicatedReign]

Meh. There's a difference between losing on purpose and just not being very good. The Sonics are clearly the latter. Now, if you want to say this team's goal isn't to win games, you may have some ground to stand on (their main goal is to develop certain players). But to suggest that losing is their primary focus (a connotation the term "tanking" has) is utterly false and rather indefensible.