The Value of Tanking

[J-Roc]

Too much risk with this tanking method. We could end up making the wrong picks, or our picks bust out, and we're just worse and worse. Suddenly tv station drop the Raps and the team becomes an afterthought. Sometimes fans want management to pony up money to increase salary. We'd be asking MLSE to subsidize the tanking process, understanding fans will come back when they're ready.

[Schad]

Do they move Smith for the TPE and a 2012 first? then add Davis in a second deal?
Do they negate the need for the pick if we take Williams contract in exchange for shorter or expiring deals?

You're vastly underrating Smith here...unless that pick is in 2011 and likely to fall in the top 5, they don't go near it. Smith is a terrific player, and they aren't going to dump him. And they certainly aren't going to throw in their starting SF and ask for even less in return as a result.

In the case of Love, I have no idea.
I think its completely possible to retain the 2011 pick and still make a reasonable offer if that is the type of player you want.

We literally have nothing other than the pick that Minny would want, and even that probably doesn't get it done alone. Love is that good...no combination of Davis, DeRozan, and whatever else we have is even going to keep them on the phone, let alone close a deal. He's averaging 17/13 in 28 minutes; if the shoe were on the other foot, would you consider dealing that for a middling guard prospect (who happens to be just one year younger) and a rookie who has yet to see the court?

[Morris_Shatford]

Neither of us can be correct in either of our assessments.
We just don't know.

Is Bargnani beside a brooding five and a slashing defensive oriented 2/3 a better player?
Is DeRozan beside a dynamic PG and brooding five a better player?
Is Ed Davis at 100% beside a scoring center and a strong go to the basket three a good player?

I think there is some tread on these tires, you don't.

Lets put a pin in that;
We can debate it over beers in a few years.

But there's the problem. The players that you're describing as if they were complements would be the best two or three guys on the team, and we don't really have any means of getting them unless we're going after cheap imitations.

I hate tying names to theoretical discussions because the players is either unavailable or old or otherwise, but lets say in theory.

Does Okafor at the five mask our wing defense? does he do a more effective job doing "center things" then our current center? Does he provide a body in the paint when Jack/Jose's man blows by them?

Does an Andre Iguodala at the three improve the defense we are seeing out of the wing rotation? Does he constitute a defender or two on him during offense?

Bargnani can be a points and blocks guy, he may never become that rebounder or defensive help monster, however you can add a guy who does that at the five and if Bargnani tosses up 22/5/2 next to a guy who does "center things" and gives us even 10/10 and steps in front of the odd man charging to the hoop I am less incline to be throwing whiskey bottles at the TV.

The correct parts around the parts we have, in conjunction with a respectable pick in the draft may very well facilitate a good team.

[Ponchos]

Question for the non-tankers:

Has there EVER been a team that was bad (with no potential all-star players) and then turned themselves into a winning team without landing a top-5 draft pick?

I can't think of one.

[Schad]

I hate tying names to theoretical discussions because the players is either unavailable or old or otherwise, but lets say in theory.

Does Okafor at the five mask our wing defense? does he do a more effective job doing "center things" then our current center? Does he provide a body in the paint when Jack/Jose's man blows by them?

Does an Andre Iguodala at the three improve the defense we are seeing out of the wing rotation? Does he constitute a defender or two on him during offense?

Bargnani can be a points and blocks guy, he may never become that rebounder or defensive help monster, however you can add a guy who does that at the five and if Bargnani tosses up 22/5/2 next to a guy who does "center things" and gives us even 10/10 and steps in front of the odd man charging to the hoop I am less incline to be throwing whiskey bottles at the TV.

The correct parts around the parts we have, in conjunction with a respectable pick in the draft may very well facilitate a good team.

The problem is that if the answer is "no" to any of those questions (and there's a very good chance that it will be), we are utterly screwed. That's why I don't like the Knicks' style of randomly throwing name players on big deals together and seeing what happens...every time you're wrong, you set the franchise back two years, as now you have a Jack/DeRozan/Iggy/Bargs/Okafor lineup that wins 35 games a year, is in cap hell through '12/'13, and is missing whatever young guy you sent the other way to get the deal done.

[Dr Positivity]

Iggy won't get any more than Kevin Martin did, which is not much. I wouldn't trade for him anyways. Expensive coach killer. Would rather keep sucking.

Josh Smith is awesome but would take our pick to get him. Same with KLove

Iggy, I have no idea what my thoughts are on him anymore. the balance however...

Lets say in theory you are the Hawks; and you are looking to move Smith.
I would imagine that if you move him in an ideal world you move him with the intention of landing a five so you can move Horford to the four, as well as adding a prospect to the mix, and perhaps a pick.

Do they move Smith for the TPE and a 2012 first? then add Davis in a second deal?
Do they negate the need for the pick if we take Williams contract in exchange for shorter or expiring deals?

In the case of Love, I have no idea.
I think its completely possible to retain the 2011 pick and still make a reasonable offer if that is the type of player you want.

I think Atl moves Smith for a similarly win now player if they did, and probably a C so they could have legit size up front with Horford at PF. Something like Chris Kaman would fit, even though he's only good in even years, lol.

Love might be traded this year. It sounds like he's David Lee but with a worse attitude. No defense, stats overrate play. I like to check out other team's boards to get fan reactions on players, Minnesota fans have been HATING on Kevin Love this year. Very similar to the David Lee situation but less people are watching the Wolves than NY

With that said he's young and cheap so he'd command something. We couldn't get him for less than our pick, IMO

[Dr Positivity]

I hate tying names to theoretical discussions because the players is either unavailable or old or otherwise, but lets say in theory.

Does Okafor at the five mask our wing defense? does he do a more effective job doing "center things" then our current center? Does he provide a body in the paint when Jack/Jose's man blows by them?

Does an Andre Iguodala at the three improve the defense we are seeing out of the wing rotation? Does he constitute a defender or two on him during offense?

Bargnani can be a points and blocks guy, he may never become that rebounder or defensive help monster, however you can add a guy who does that at the five and if Bargnani tosses up 22/5/2 next to a guy who does "center things" and gives us even 10/10 and steps in front of the odd man charging to the hoop I am less incline to be throwing whiskey bottles at the TV.

The correct parts around the parts we have, in conjunction with a respectable pick in the draft may very well facilitate a good team.

The problem is that if the answer is "no" to any of those questions (and there's a very good chance that it will be), we are utterly screwed. That's why I don't like the Knicks' style of randomly throwing name players on big deals together and seeing what happens...every time you're wrong, you set the franchise back two years, as now you have a Jack/DeRozan/Iggy/Bargs/Okafor lineup that wins 35 games a year, is in cap hell through '12/'13, and is missing whatever young guy you sent the other way to get the deal done.

Nobody likes the Knicks style of throwing together expensive players. The Isiah era was a damn joke.

[dillio]

Question for the non-tankers:

Has there EVER been a team that was bad (with no potential all-star players) and then turned themselves into a winning team without landing a top-5 draft pick?

I can't think of one.

I don't think you can definitely say that we have no potential all-star players. DD is still only 21, Ed Davis is a lottery talent that hasn't seen 1 minute of NBA action and who knows, maybe Bargs overachieves for 1/2 of 1 season and flukes his way in as a backup C.

[Schad]

Nobody likes the Knicks style of throwing together expensive players. The Isiah era was a damn joke.

But if we're looking at the TPE and our expiring contracts as the way to close our talent gap, that's all we're going to get. Good players on cheap deals do not get moved for cap space...you either get more role players, or you get expensive guys on contracts that every other team has balked at taking.

[Ponchos]

Question for the non-tankers:

Has there EVER been a team that was bad (with no potential all-star players) and then turned themselves into a winning team without landing a top-5 draft pick?

I can't think of one.

I don't think you can definitely say that we have no potential all-star players. DD is still only 21, Ed Davis is a lottery talent that hasn't seen 1 minute of NBA action and who knows, maybe Bargs overachieves for 1/2 of 1 season and flukes his way in as a backup C.

Bargs will never get chosen by the coaches. If he is ever an All-Star I will blow my brains out on a livestream.

DD... Maybe but I really really really doubt it.

Ed Davis, who knows.

Anyhow I'll compromise, sub in 1 young all-star into my original question. I still can't think of any.

[Morris_Shatford]

Do they move Smith for the TPE and a 2012 first? then add Davis in a second deal?
Do they negate the need for the pick if we take Williams contract in exchange for shorter or expiring deals?

You're vastly underrating Smith here...unless that pick is in 2011 and likely to fall in the top 5, they don't go near it. Smith is a terrific player, and they aren't going to dump him. And they certainly aren't going to throw in their starting SF and ask for even less in return as a result.

In the case of Love, I have no idea.
I think its completely possible to retain the 2011 pick and still make a reasonable offer if that is the type of player you want.

We literally have nothing other than the pick that Minny would want, and even that probably doesn't get it done alone. Love is that good...no combination of Davis, DeRozan, and whatever else we have is even going to keep them on the phone, let alone close a deal. He's averaging 17/13 in 28 minutes; if the shoe were on the other foot, would you consider dealing that for a middling guard prospect (who happens to be just one year younger) and a rookie who has yet to see the court?

Smith is a great player;
But a great player being paid a lot of money to be a 14/9 guy on a team with a lot of options.

The idea of "throwing" in their starting small forward seems to be more a product of Atlanta trying to get out from under that deal, or at least I reach that conclusion based on what I have read, perhaps its incorrect.

However that is neither here nor there.
Without using the Pau Gasol example, talented players have been moved for financial reasons rather then talent reasons, and the Hawks are a team that have 60m in cap space tied to five players in 2012/13, and will be paying 40m for two in 2015/16.

I don't see them parlaying Smith into another long term commitment.

[Paradokz]

can we scout the spurs' scouting staff and draft whoever they're looking at?

...seriously

[Alfred]

Nobody likes the Knicks style of throwing together expensive players. The Isiah era was a damn joke.

But if we're looking at the TPE and our expiring contracts as the way to close our talent gap, that's all we're going to get. Good players on cheap deals do not get moved for cap space...you either get more role players, or you get expensive guys on contracts that every other team has balked at taking.

This is exactly what the TPE, what expirings get you. Old has been name players on big contracts, or overpaid roleplayers.

Of course you can hope that that player gets their act together and lives up to their deal, but how often does that happen, and more importantly, do you trust Bryan Colangelo to identify which player that is? Hedo, Jermaine O'Neal, Marion; these are all guys who Bryan brought in in the hopes that they could bounce back on our roster. They were all spectacular failures.

[Ponchos]

Nobody likes the Knicks style of throwing together expensive players. The Isiah era was a damn joke.

But if we're looking at the TPE and our expiring contracts as the way to close our talent gap, that's all we're going to get. Good players on cheap deals do not get moved for cap space...you either get more role players, or you get expensive guys on contracts that every other team has balked at taking.

We won't even achieve what the Knicks did with just expirings and TPE. The Knicks also threw around a ton of draft picks in trades to get their scrubs, and ultimately they were able to sign Amare with their cap space. Even if we had the cap space, there's no way Amare comes to Canada as an FA.

[Schad]

Smith is a great player;
But a great player being paid a lot of money to be a 14/9 guy on a team with a lot of options.

The idea of "throwing" in their starting small forward seems to be more a product of Atlanta trying to get out from under that deal, or at least I reach that conclusion based on what I have read, perhaps its incorrect.

However that is neither here nor there.
Without using the Pau Gasol example, talented players have been moved for financial reasons rather then talent reasons, and the Hawks are a team that have 60m in cap space tied to five players in 2012/13, and will be paying 40m for two in 2015/16.

I don't see them parlaying Smith into another long term commitment.

Smith is also one of the best defensive players in the league, and an integral part of their 53-win season last year. Yes, Williams is overpaid, but they aren't going to gut a top-4 team in the conference to save a little cash, especially as they aren't in danger of hitting the luxury tax in the next couple years.

[Schad]

This is exactly what the TPE, what expirings get you. Old has been name players on big contracts, or overpaid roleplayers.

Of course you can hope that that player gets their act together and lives up to their deal, but how often does that happen, and more importantly, do you trust Bryan Colangelo to identify which player that is? Hedo, Jermaine O'Neal, Marion; these are all guys who Bryan brought in in the hopes that they could bounce back on our roster. They were all spectacular failures.

And even if they do rebound, they generally aren't the types capable of carrying teams. Which leaves us right back where we started: needing to lose a tonne of games in the hopes of landing a star in the draft.

[Dr Positivity]

Question for the non-tankers:

Has there EVER been a team that was bad (with no potential all-star players) and then turned themselves into a winning team without landing a top-5 draft pick?

I can't think of one.

It's clear we're going to get at least one top 5 pick and probably many. When you're as talent starved as us that's a given. There's NO debate over what the Raptors will be doing from now until next July. Stink, then draft.

As I said the real debate will be what to do after that point. I'm guessing we stink again next year. Similar to Washington this year, Sac last year, etc. If we draft a bust we're in the exact spot we are now. But if we get a legit player like Irving then things get interesting and the paths open up

[C Court]

When we looked pretty interesting after 2006/07 they said basically the same thing as you, no desire or interest to get back in.

We can debate the "basketball" aspect of this all we want;
If MLSE isn't making money on the Raps, they won't spend the money to make us better.

The more "rebuilds" we go through, the more fans we lose.

We can't keep jerking around the paying customers, and then be surprised when they don't come back.

I walked away from my PSL and only wish I'd done it a couple of years earler. From the day the ACC opened to today, there is only one Day One ACC season seatholder left in my (old) area.

Prior to the opening tip, the camera pans up to my seats. For the two home games this year they have been empty. So no one is even buying them as a single game ticket.

I heard last week from someone I trust who is close to a person inside MLSE that the outlook for Raptor ticket sales this year is very bleak and the 87% season ticket renewal rate that was publicly circulated is inflated.

[Ponchos]

can we scout the spurs' scouting staff and draft whoever they're looking at?

...seriously

The spurs have been successful because of the type of the team they have built with the foundation of Tim Duncan. They look like geniuses on every obscure draft pick or FA pickup because they know exactly what kind of players will fit into their system. Same thing with the Jazz.

[Rhettmatic]

Do they move Smith for the TPE and a 2012 first? then add Davis in a second deal?
Do they negate the need for the pick if we take Williams contract in exchange for shorter or expiring deals?

You're vastly underrating Smith here...unless that pick is in 2011 and likely to fall in the top 5, they don't go near it. Smith is a terrific player, and they aren't going to dump him. And they certainly aren't going to throw in their starting SF and ask for even less in return as a result.

In the case of Love, I have no idea.
I think its completely possible to retain the 2011 pick and still make a reasonable offer if that is the type of player you want.

We literally have nothing other than the pick that Minny would want, and even that probably doesn't get it done alone. Love is that good...no combination of Davis, DeRozan, and whatever else we have is even going to keep them on the phone, let alone close a deal. He's averaging 17/13 in 28 minutes; if the shoe were on the other foot, would you consider dealing that for a middling guard prospect (who happens to be just one year younger) and a rookie who has yet to see the court?

Smith is a great player;
But a great player being paid a lot of money to be a 14/9 guy on a team with a lot of options.

The idea of "throwing" in their starting small forward seems to be more a product of Atlanta trying to get out from under that deal, or at least I reach that conclusion based on what I have read, perhaps its incorrect.

However that is neither here nor there.
Without using the Pau Gasol example, talented players have been moved for financial reasons rather then talent reasons, and the Hawks are a team that have 60m in cap space tied to five players in 2012/13, and will be paying 40m for two in 2015/16.

I don't see them parlaying Smith into another long term commitment.

I don't know cosmo, basing your anti-tanking argument on the likes of Josh Smith and Kevin Love just doesn't seem very realistic.

Aside from a throwaway comment from Chad Ford and some vague rumblings about Kevin Love's mood, we've seen nothing to indicate those guys are actually going to be traded -- and certainly not for the pu pu platter we'd be offering.

http://blogs.ajc.com/hawks/2010/11/05/a ... logs_hawks

I haven’t said much about the Josh Smith trade rumors because there’s nothing to them. You can guess how well that approach worked.

It started with Chard Ford’s ESPN.com blog post, which he based on league GMs looking at Atlanta’s roster and speculating that ASG can’t afford to keep Josh, J.J., Al, and Marvin together after this season (Rick Sund said he never heard from Ford).

That led to more speculation but still not much in the way of hard news. And as these things tend to go, the secondhand speculation aspect of the original “story” gets lost and suddenly the rumor is the Hawks are looking to move Smoove. (Rule of thumb in these cases: Beware the question mark headline.)

It’s not true. Sund didn’t want to comment on the rumors, which is his usual policy, but Smoove confirmed that team management reassured him he’s not on the trading block.

“They didn’t need to,” he said. “Some people just want to make it interesting and put lies out there on blogs and stuff to amuse people.”

So then why would the Hawks re-sign J.J., extend Al and then suddenly be “forced to put Smith on the market soon” as Ford speculates? They wouldn’t. They aren’t.

The Hawks have built their core and now will wait and see what happens. If they are struggling in January, then maybe all this speculation would make more sense, but right now the Hawks want to see how far they can go with this group. And if they make the East finals or otherwise show real progress, then they would have to decide just how much they are willing to spend to add more pieces to the core next season (and, again, the CBA is going to play into that).

Now if some team came along and offered a top 5 or 10 talent for Smoove, then of course Sund would consider that deal just like any other sane GM. But Sund is not looking to move Josh and the Hawks aren’t under any pressure, financial or otherwise, to trade him or any of their other core players right now.

So I suggest you do as Smoove does and shrug off the speculation, focus on basketball and see how this all plays out.

Andre Iguodala? Gilbert Arenas? Elton Brand? Emeka Okafor? Yeah, we might be able to get guys like that. But as Schad pointed out, moves like that likely won't even lead to a playoff berth, let alone a consistent 50-plus-win team. And again, we'd be capped-out, old and without the necessary pieces to make further improvements.

If another GM loses his mind and offers an ultra-talented young player for our garbage then, yeah, you take it. But relying on that strategy, to me, seems much more ridiculous/risky/unlikely to pan out than trying to build through the draft.