Ford: 7 teams prepared to tank for wiggins

[Ditchweed]

Point is: "winning it all or bust" seems to be rather a motto on the internet than a motto among those season ticket holders.

Yes, I agree, and as I mentioned in other posts ... "Tanking really exists in RealGM junior GM wannabees minds and not so much in real GMs." Real life GMS do want to show a presentable and liked product for their fans. It is a business and unless the team is the absolute bottom zero with nothing to show its fans, it really doesn't help itself by tanking.

[mysticbb]

People don't complain about not having every team contending for a title, but we want every team to COMPETE.

Who is "we"? ;)

I'm talking about "fans" who are quickly asking for a rebuild of their supposed favorite team, because it seems as if that said team can't win it all. Last season, for example, there were multiple people on the Bulls message board who wanted to "tank" or "rebuild". And usually those people voiced their opinion the most. That's what I'm talking about.

There seems to be a consensus among those "fans" that the team is only worth watching, if it has a great chance to win the title.

If not for a title for the chance to make the first round, or to be 12th instead of your division rival who is 13th. I don't care what you compete for, I want you to try to WIN, not feeling that if you win 40 games is worse than if you win 5.

I'm with you on that one, really, I also want to see every team to compete, because that ensures the best quality basketball overall. And it seems like the people who are actually really paying for that agree with that view as well. Just on a message board you will see constantly people claiming that the only solution for a team would be "tanking" or "rebuilding", once it gets really tough to win more games than to lose.

In the NBA, if you're not contending the best you can do is lose on purpose, that's very different that what you suggest.

I guess you misunderstood my post ... at least your answer does not make much sense in regarding to the things I wrote.

[mysticbb]

Yes, I agree, and as I mentioned in other posts ... "Tanking really exists in RealGM junior GM wannabees minds and not so much in real GMs." Real life GMS do want to show a presentable and liked product for their fans. It is a business and unless the team is the absolute bottom zero with nothing to show its fans, it really doesn't help itself by tanking.

Ah, I see, I clearly missed the intention of your post. I fully agree with you on this.

[QRich3]

People don't complain about not having every team contending for a title, but we want every team to COMPETE.

Who is "we"?

lol "We" is the people complaining about tanking. I guess I did misunderstood your point as I was only refering to the bolded phrase and I used it to drive my point. But yeah we seem to mostly agree

[QRich3]

If not for a title for the chance to make the first round, or to be 12th instead of your division rival who is 13th. I don't care what you compete for, I want you to try to WIN, not feeling that if you win 40 games is worse than if you win 5.

I'm with you on that one, really, I also want to see every team to compete, because that ensures the best quality basketball overall. And it seems like the people who are actually really paying for that agree with that view as well. Just on a message board you will see constantly people claiming that the only solution for a team would be "tanking" or "rebuilding", once it gets really tough to win more games than to lose.

You gotta admit though, that a lot of the times is the easier way. Not that it should be acceptable, but it does increase the chances of your team getting better.

But as a Clippers fan I'm with you on that if my team is not contending I'd rather see them try to fight out of the first round for 7 years in a row than tanking 5 years for a chance to contend in the next 2.

[83SixersRocked]

If there are fire sales, there will be takers. It could be especially beneneficial to not tank this coming season, depending on how many assets are out there to be had.

[mysticbb]

I guess I did misunderstood your point as I was only refering to the bolded phrase and I used it to drive my point.

The bolded part contained a generalization; I can see how that can lead to the wrong impression. Thus, bad choice of words on my part, sorry.

You gotta admit though, that a lot of the times is the easier way. Not that it should be acceptable, but it does increase the chances of your team getting better.

Actually, that isn't the case. A team doesn't get better by trading the better players away, it rather gets worse. And if you follow what the best teams in the league have done over the years, you can see that it is not a winning strategy. Usually those teams are adding pieces to improve the team, they usually take an expiring and adding some talent in order to get that piece which helps them to improve.

What makes it easier is getting lucky in the draft, getting a high pick in a strong draft (pick via trade or lucky in the lottery) and use it well, or just be lucky with a later pick. It also helps a lot, if the team stays healthy. I think people don't like it, but in sports "luck" is very much involved. Obviously, you need the talent to somewhat "force the luck", but in the end just talent alone will usually not overcome bad luck.

Well, as a Clipper fan, the trade for Redick and Dudley is the perfect example. Use the expiring Butler and the talent Bledsoe to improve both wing positions. Getting Dudley might be even the better part of that deal.

[Hendrix]

I don't understand why people keep referring to it as 'tanking for Wiggins'.

I am open to the Raps tanking. But, not because of Wiggins. Because like Ford said. :

In fact, I could go one step further and say those six players I just mentioned would've likely been picks 1-6 in the 2013 NBA draft. Bennett, Olaipo, Porter, Zeller, Len, Noel and McLemore would've been picks 7-13 in some order.

I (and most teams) wouldn't even consider wanting to tank for Wiggins if the rest of the draft was filled with crap. The reason people are tanking is because of the next 5 players or so. You can maybe get Wiggins, but if you miss you still could end up with the next Melo, or Bosh, or Griffin.

[The Sebastian Express]

If only Portland was one of them. Alas.

[zronv7]

way more than that...he means only 7 teams are competing for a playoff spot.

[yaaar]

Pathetic. Teams that tank should suck forever and be shunned by free agents. They tank and look pathetic and wonder why the top tier players that they tanked for leave as soon as their contract is up. What's worse is that their fans go around crying about how unfair it is that no one wants to play for their loser team and how players only want to sign with the teams that actually want to win? No way! Players don't want to play for loser teams that have a history of sucking on purpose? Players should be honored to be in the presence of loser teams with loser fans that actually want them to lose.

[Canada_7]

Wiggins to Toronto. It only makes sense

[boateng]

can't the nba change the system....

maybe the best team not to make the playoffs get's the no.1 pick and the 2nd best not to make the playoffs get's the no.2 pick etc....

i think this system is horrible. It's a joke that teams deliberately lose just so they can get a high pick. I don't blame them, but i blame the system

The EC is going to be horrible next season/.

[bwgood77]

Pathetic. Teams that tank should suck forever and be shunned by free agents. They tank and look pathetic and wonder why the top tier players that they tanked for leave as soon as their contract is up. What's worse is that their fans go around crying about how unfair it is that no one wants to play for their loser team and how players only want to sign with the teams that actually want to win? No way! Players don't want to play for loser teams that have a history of sucking on purpose? Players should be honored to be in the presence of loser teams with loser fans that actually want them to lose.

I agree. And tanking sets you back years. Half the teams that tank won't get a REAL difference maker either. They will just have trained a bunch of players to not care if you win.

[miltk]

Wiggins, Gordon, Parker, Randle, and Smart all would have gone #1 this year. There are 3-5 other players next year that would have been considered for the #1 pick this year as well.

if he doesn't bust out of the gate i think parker could stay another year. some duke players leave after 1, but most don't. he is not a given to leave. and all i've seen gordon do is dunk. zona players don't leave after 1 and it's not because they love schooling,,,it's because they don't live up to the hype.

[miltk]

a bunch of teams positioning themselves for the first 5 or 6 lottery spots makes tanking an easy idea. it's done all the time anyway. philly is tanking whether they want to or not. they're guaranteed 2 lotteries. noel will do zero for them.

[sweet_jesus]

can't the nba change the system....

maybe the best team not to make the playoffs get's the no.1 pick and the 2nd best not to make the playoffs get's the no.2 pick etc....

i think this system is horrible. It's a joke that teams deliberately lose just so they can get a high pick. I don't blame them, but i blame the system

The EC is going to be horrible next season/.

Man that would be horrible. That means basement teams like the Bobcats would be blowing the 13-14 pick every year instead of the top 5. They have no means to build a team through the lottery anymore. They have to start overspending on free agents just so the can compete to be the 17th best team in the league?

The NBA lottery system is much better than other leagues the worst gets first system. At least in the NBA there is risk in tanking with no guaranteed reward.

[stock01234]

posted this in other thread

IMHO following should be done to limit tanking :

1) Every non-playoff team pays the playoff team. Something like
#30 -> #1 : $750000
#29 -> #2 : $700000
#28 -> #3 : $650000
and so on... #15 & #16 don't get anything

2) eliminate conference in playoffs.. meaning during regular season.. teams within conferences play each other 4 times, 2 home and 2 away. Interconference : 2 games, 1 home and 1 away. The extrapolate the interconference games for overall standing.
So basically a team plays
14x4 = 56 games
15x2 = 30 games
Total 86 games.. almost inline with current 82 games

However after extrapolation, the final standing will be based on 56 + 30 + 30 = 116 games

In playoffs, #1 plays # 16, #2 plays #15 and so now.

This gives a level playing field for all teams.

3) Penalize teams that don't make playoffs more than 3 years in a row. Meaning first three years of rebuilding/sucking/tanking waived. Fourth year if the team doesn't make playoff, fine $1M, second year $2M and so now. NBA can decide how to disperse these money. May be award all playoff teams equally the fine collected that year. More incentive to be in playoffs.

[nyc6]

can't the nba change the system....

maybe the best team not to make the playoffs get's the no.1 pick and the 2nd best not to make the playoffs get's the no.2 pick etc....

i think this system is horrible. It's a joke that teams deliberately lose just so they can get a high pick. I don't blame them, but i blame the system

The EC is going to be horrible next season/.

The system is fine

A team in an already weak conference grabbed 2 of its biggest competitors to all join up one team

The other teams need to be patient and concede 3-4 years and tank for players like kyrie Irving and John wall, etc.

You don't wipe out your biggest competitor Overnight. It's a long process. Patience

Even oKc was unable to do it so it's not easy.

The new CBa makes forming superteams too difficult. Miami's team was formed under a different CBa

[RunSunRun]

1. Keep salary cap and luxury tax

2. Eliminate max contract, if Lebron got paid what he is truly worth, good luck trying to form "super teams"

Pretty much limits every team in the league to one or two all-star talents unless they are willing to take a lot less money. Don't want a system like MLB where some teams just completely outspend others due to location, tv contracts, etc. etc.

Retains a somewhat fair system where every team has the same budget and if one team tries to form a superteam, another team can just offer a massive contract to prevent it from happening.

If some team offers a player 50% of their cap, that would be incredibly hard to turn down, winning is nice and all, but turning down a huge contract isn't likely to happen all that much.