The Tank Debate Thread

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

I do find it funny that for so long it was "get Bargs off this team and all will be good", and now that he's traded, it's "let's not even try, let's just be as bad of a team as we can an hope to land a high pick"

[vini_vidi_vici]

I do find it funny that for so long it was "get Bargs off this team and all will be good", and now that he's traded, it's "let's not even try, let's just be as bad of a team as we can an hope to land a high pick"

But since then the narrative has changed. We signed an overpaid Fields, we signed DDs extension (which isnt terrible) which was over paid, we have an upcoming UFA thats currently overpaid, we have another UFA PG upcoming whos mercurial and another enigma (like Bargs), not too mention the improving AJ is up in 2 years too. A lame duck coach. Cap hell if we extend these players.

I hate when I type "we" but im too lazy to delete it all.

[J-Roc]

I think Tim is creep,

Your ranting on Leiweke has me worried the last day. Like, from what you're saying, we'll soon all find this guy to just be the next Richard Peddie. And it makes sense. MLSE would be happy if this guy did what Peddie did. TL is talking about doubling the $2B business of MLSE. You don't do that just on the ice/court/field. That's where Peddie's condos came into play. So maybe MLSE gets into the business of buying a new subway station, or a new airport or nuclear plant.

So negative eastcoast...

[Blast Tyrant]

http://www.thenbageek.com/articles/news-flash-tanking-isn-t-actually-a-problem

Thank you Mirrornick and onlyeastcoastrapsfan for being Raptors fans. That seems to be as rare of a commodity as young star shooting guards or centers. (which our so called horrible team already has developing ironically enough)

This article is the proof tankers need to change their mind. The facts show teams that tank continue to suck. Teams that try to get better end up becoming the top teams in the league. Look at how Indiana, Memphis, Denver, Golden State, Portland and Houston have all become top tier teams without tanking. It just shows the false ideology behind tanking, and what a worthless strategy it is overall.

[JustaKnickFan]

The way I see it, to build a contender you need to have a franchise player from the draft preferably, a few draft steals, and a lot of luck. Tanking gets you in a position to achieve a franchise player, which alone is worth tanking. Teams like Charlotte, Sacramento, and the Clippers of the past have had awful management which made it very difficult for them to succeed in the draft.

However, a team like SA sat out Robinson in a lost year (don't give me the "Robinson was injured" crap because the Spurs sat lots of key players on their team, and arguably could have brought Robinson back sooner instead of resting him) and lucked out and got the first pick, and Miami (got a pick in the STACKED 2003 draft) who had Detroit pass on Wade/Melo, had the luck.

The main reason for tanking is it puts the team in an opportunity to become a contender and puts them over the biggest obstacle (obtaining a franchise player). Especially in this 2014 draft, there is enough talent that even if you get the 4-5 pick you still win.

So, the way I see it, the Raptors can stay stuck in the 9-6th seed with no assets to gain a franchise player and put them into contention, or they can tank a year and get their "Dwayne Wade", and then have Urji steal some role players through the upcoming drafts.

I don't know about you, but a team featuring a Wade-like player with a legit center in Val and a bunch of solid role players is already a playoff team in my book.

[IvanIV]

I am a trained mathematician and I can confidently say that, by any reasonable metric to quantify player performance, the probability of every Raptors starter having a career year is not materially different than zero.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

I think Tim is creep,

Your ranting on Leiweke has me worried the last day. Like, from what you're saying, we'll soon all find this guy to just be the next Richard Peddie. And it makes sense. MLSE would be happy if this guy did what Peddie did. TL is talking about doubling the $2B business of MLSE. You don't do that just on the ice/court/field. That's where Peddie's condos came into play. So maybe MLSE gets into the business of buying a new subway station, or a new airport or nuclear plant.

So negative eastcoast...

I just don't buy into the idea that MLSE is anything but a crappy organization as it pertains to sports and I see Tim as more of that cycle than a fix. I understand the some will love him for his harshness towards BC, just know that he's knows and uses that, I just think there should be a higher test. I like Masai, but if this job is such a peach, why didn't we let a few possible GM's interview for it? He didn't bring all the titles to the Lakers, Buss did. He won some North American soccer titles and one Stanley cup.

I posted a vid that showed how dishonest he was, even while under oath in the Michael Jackson wrongful death deposition. Other that treating some people with disrespect, and blowing a lot of hot air about championships and parades, I don't see what people are so excited about. Is it that he wants to double profits, where only 30% of it will come from winning? I thought we wanted to get away from being about the profits. He may talk championships to fans and media, but he didn't commit to cups with his bosses, he committed to increasing profits.

I just wonder how the convo goes when he calls Masai and says how can I help you win a championship today, and Masai's like, well Tim, like I told you yesterday, you can rebound for Ross here in Summer league?

It's just a real weird situation to fire the last Gm for his poor performance, when in realty everyone wants to be even worse. If that's what MLSE wanted, BC could have given that to them. MLSE is removed from the day to day implementation, they aren't removed from the plan.

[Blast Tyrant]

The way I see it, to build a contender you need to have a franchise player from the draft preferably, a few draft steals, and a lot of luck. Tanking gets you in a position to achieve a franchise player, which alone is worth tanking. Teams like Charlotte, Sacramento, and the Clippers of the past have had awful management which made it very difficult for them to succeed in the draft.

However, a team like SA sat out Robinson in a lost year (don't give me the "Robinson was injured" crap because the Spurs sat lots of key players on their team, and arguably could have brought Robinson back sooner instead of resting him) and lucked out and got the first pick, and Miami (got a pick in the STACKED 2003 draft) who had Detroit pass on Wade/Melo, had the luck.

The main reason for tanking is it puts the team in an opportunity to become a contender and puts them over the biggest obstacle (obtaining a franchise player). Especially in this 2014 draft, there is enough talent that even if you get the 4-5 pick you still win.

So, the way I see it, the Raptors can stay stuck in the 9-6th seed with no assets to gain a franchise player and put them into contention, or they can tank a year and get their "Dwayne Wade", and then have Urji steal some role players through the upcoming drafts.

I don't know about you, but a team featuring a Wade-like player with a legit center in Val and a bunch of solid role players is already a playoff team in my book.

Let's look at every team from last years Eastern Conference Playoffs and see how they got their franchise player.

1) Heat - Signed LeBron via Free Agency
2) New York - Traded for Melo, signed Chandler
3) Indiana - Drafted all their core players. No picks higher than Paul George at 10.
4) Brooklyn - Traded for Deron Williams using a player drafted at 3, and next year's 3rd overall pick. Shows the value of draft picks, but they still had to trade to acquire a star, and those 2 picks haven't turned into stars yet.
5) Chicago - Didn't tank for Rose, Noah or Deng...
6) Atlanta - Didn't tank for Smith. They just sucked when they drafted Horford, they weren't intentionally selling off assets to lose. Have tried getting better every year and stayed a playoff team when they could have tanked.
7) Celtics (drafted Rondo and Peirce, did not tank to get them, traded for Garnett mainly using Jefferson and Green, two other players who weren't tanked for)
8) Milwaukee - Anti tank, but probably the worst team at trading in the entire league.

Basically tanking doesn't get you anywhere. Sure Oklahoma lucked out, but you can't let that skew your perception into thinking losing lots somehow transforms your team into a winner magically overnight.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

http://www.thenbageek.com/articles/news-flash-tanking-isn-t-actually-a-problem

Thank you Mirrornick and onlyeastcoastrapsfan for being Raptors fans. That seems to be as rare of a commodity as young star shooting guards or centers. (which our so called horrible team already has developing ironically enough)

This article is the proof tankers need to change their mind. The facts show teams that tank continue to suck. Teams that try to get better end up becoming the top teams in the league. Look at how Indiana, Memphis, Denver, Golden State, Portland and Houston have all become top tier teams without tanking. It just shows the false ideology behind tanking, and what a worthless strategy it is overall.

I'm not really anti tank, as I don't see a whole lot of hope now that they haven't really done anything to improve the Roster. They've taken a step back, imo. Not even considering Andrea. It's that I don't have the faith in MLSE to do the long term stuff to see it through, especially now when they are talking about doubling profits. I thikn they'll give this rebuild even less time than they gave the last one. Anyone who thinks a quick rebuild is possible, think we can jsut keep Lowry Gay, detour this season, grab a top 4 pick, and pick back up where we left off.

In actuality we'd have to lose Gay and Lowry to tank, imo and I don't know how long it would take to get pieces that good, contract notwithstanding, back.

[Reignman]

The next time someone uses the Clippers as an example of successful tanking I'm going to immediately put them on ignore. Their opinion isn't worth it.

The Clippers have in one season had more success than we have in our entire history. They currently have a top-3 player on their roster, and another top-15 (possibly top-10 in the future) player. We can only dream of ever constructing a team of that calibre.

So you must have started watching the NBA 3 years ago? It's laughable that you have the nerve to use the Clippers as a reason we should tank.

Or, you're really not a Raps fan but a troll who wants to cement us as the NBA's laughing stock franchise.

You think our history is bad, go take a look at the Clippers history.

[JustaKnickFan]

The way I see it, to build a contender you need to have a franchise player from the draft preferably, a few draft steals, and a lot of luck. Tanking gets you in a position to achieve a franchise player, which alone is worth tanking. Teams like Charlotte, Sacramento, and the Clippers of the past have had awful management which made it very difficult for them to succeed in the draft.

However, a team like SA sat out Robinson in a lost year (don't give me the "Robinson was injured" crap because the Spurs sat lots of key players on their team, and arguably could have brought Robinson back sooner instead of resting him) and lucked out and got the first pick, and Miami (got a pick in the STACKED 2003 draft) who had Detroit pass on Wade/Melo, had the luck.

The main reason for tanking is it puts the team in an opportunity to become a contender and puts them over the biggest obstacle (obtaining a franchise player). Especially in this 2014 draft, there is enough talent that even if you get the 4-5 pick you still win.

So, the way I see it, the Raptors can stay stuck in the 9-6th seed with no assets to gain a franchise player and put them into contention, or they can tank a year and get their "Dwayne Wade", and then have Urji steal some role players through the upcoming drafts.

I don't know about you, but a team featuring a Wade-like player with a legit center in Val and a bunch of solid role players is already a playoff team in my book.

Let's look at every team from last years Eastern Conference Playoffs and see how they got their franchise player.

1) Heat - Signed LeBron via Free Agency
2) New York - Traded for Melo, signed Chandler
3) Indiana - Drafted all their core players. No picks higher than Paul George at 10.
4) Brooklyn - Traded for Deron Williams using a player drafted at 3, and next year's 3rd overall pick. Shows the value of draft picks, but they still had to trade to acquire a star, and those 2 picks haven't turned into stars yet.
5) Chicago - Didn't tank for Rose, Noah or Deng...
6) Atlanta - Didn't tank for Smith. They just sucked when they drafted Horford, they weren't intentionally selling off assets to lose. Have tried getting better every year and stayed a playoff team when they could have tanked.
7) Celtics (drafted Rondo and Peirce, did not tank to get them, traded for Garnett mainly using Jefferson and Green, two other players who weren't tanked for)
8) Milwaukee - Anti tank, but probably the worst team at trading in the entire league.

Basically tanking doesn't get you anywhere. Sure Oklahoma lucked out, but you can't let that skew your perception into thinking losing lots somehow transforms your team into a winner magically overnight.

It's easy to look at it from your point of view to prove your argument, but each contender had great luck in the draft.

1. Miami - Got a very high pick in a STACKED draft (what the Raptors should do) to get a franchise player in order to lure Lebron there
2. NY- Build through the draft and acquired assets, then cashed in on Melo (tough for Raps to do since they're not NY)
3. IND - Sucked for years to get those players though, and had a good GM doing the drafting
4. Brooklyn Acquired very good assets through the draft and cashed in
5. CHI-They got lucky by getting Rose and taking advantage of Isaiah's stupidity

The rest aren't mentioning, but the point is, all those teams had a lot of luck and took advantage of the draft, specifically, in the lottery. The Raptors need to do this with Urji in order to get talent that can be turned into a franchise player, or just tank all together so they have role players AND a franchise player.

[Blast Tyrant]

In actuality we'd have to lose Gay and Lowry to tank, imo and I don't know how long it would take to get pieces that good, contract notwithstanding, back.

This is the problem. If we trade away all our good players (the starters) it could take 5 years before we get players that good back. Why not build with the 5 starters we have for now and fill out depth? It's not like our core is old, Amir is the veteran of the bunch. Demar and Val in particular can be MILES better than they are now in a year or two. At that point having above average starters like Gay, Lowry and Johnson makes our team more than respectable. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. I do agree though that Masai will only give this group a year or two at max, at which point he'll take his own direction if things aren't moving smoothly. This group actually does have some potential though, we just need to add depth.

[Blast Tyrant]

The way I see it, to build a contender you need to have a franchise player from the draft preferably, a few draft steals, and a lot of luck. Tanking gets you in a position to achieve a franchise player, which alone is worth tanking. Teams like Charlotte, Sacramento, and the Clippers of the past have had awful management which made it very difficult for them to succeed in the draft.

However, a team like SA sat out Robinson in a lost year (don't give me the "Robinson was injured" crap because the Spurs sat lots of key players on their team, and arguably could have brought Robinson back sooner instead of resting him) and lucked out and got the first pick, and Miami (got a pick in the STACKED 2003 draft) who had Detroit pass on Wade/Melo, had the luck.

The main reason for tanking is it puts the team in an opportunity to become a contender and puts them over the biggest obstacle (obtaining a franchise player). Especially in this 2014 draft, there is enough talent that even if you get the 4-5 pick you still win.

So, the way I see it, the Raptors can stay stuck in the 9-6th seed with no assets to gain a franchise player and put them into contention, or they can tank a year and get their "Dwayne Wade", and then have Urji steal some role players through the upcoming drafts.

I don't know about you, but a team featuring a Wade-like player with a legit center in Val and a bunch of solid role players is already a playoff team in my book.

Let's look at every team from last years Eastern Conference Playoffs and see how they got their franchise player.

1) Heat - Signed LeBron via Free Agency
2) New York - Traded for Melo, signed Chandler
3) Indiana - Drafted all their core players. No picks higher than Paul George at 10.
4) Brooklyn - Traded for Deron Williams using a player drafted at 3, and next year's 3rd overall pick. Shows the value of draft picks, but they still had to trade to acquire a star, and those 2 picks haven't turned into stars yet.
5) Chicago - Didn't tank for Rose, Noah or Deng...
6) Atlanta - Didn't tank for Smith. They just sucked when they drafted Horford, they weren't intentionally selling off assets to lose. Have tried getting better every year and stayed a playoff team when they could have tanked.
7) Celtics (drafted Rondo and Peirce, did not tank to get them, traded for Garnett mainly using Jefferson and Green, two other players who weren't tanked for)
8) Milwaukee - Anti tank, but probably the worst team at trading in the entire league.

Basically tanking doesn't get you anywhere. Sure Oklahoma lucked out, but you can't let that skew your perception into thinking losing lots somehow transforms your team into a winner magically overnight.

It's easy to look at it from your point of view to prove your argument, but each contender had great luck in the draft.

1. Miami - Got a very high pick in a STACKED draft (what the Raptors should do) to get a franchise player in order to lure Lebron there
2. NY- Build through the draft and acquired assets, then cashed in on Melo (tough for Raps to do since they're not NY)
3. IND - Sucked for years to get those players though, and had a good GM doing the drafting
4. Brooklyn Acquired very good assets through the draft and cashed in
5. CHI-They got lucky by getting Rose and taking advantage of Isaiah's stupidity

The rest aren't mentioning, but the point is, all those teams had a lot of luck and took advantage of the draft, specifically, in the lottery. The Raptors need to do this with Urji in order to get talent that can be turned into a franchise player, or just tank all together so they have role players AND a franchise player.

See this is the problem. You think New York and Indiana sucked and built through the draft by tanking? They didn't! The Knicks trade half their picks and the guys they dealt outside of Gallo weren't even top 10 picks. The Pacers never sucked, they tried every year to make the playoffs. They are an anti-tank franchise clearly. Anybody can get lucky in the draft. Just look at the teams who win the Lottery. Orlando is the only one who was actually the worst team in the league. Read the article I posted a page back, it's literally percentages showing how tanking actually makes it more likely your team continues to suck for another 10 years. I don't know how many more facts pro tankers need. The best teams will draft good players regardless of where they're picking.

[J-Roc]

In actuality we'd have to lose Gay and Lowry to tank, imo

Just Lowry imo. With no PG, this team would be cooked. With no Rudy Gay we'd be as good/bad as we usually have been.

[Reignman]

Thank you reignman for being one of the few posters who believes in our team.I, like you, think that we are much better than projected. In fact I think we are the underdogs. I believe we are a rising team, like the pacers.

Much respect to you reignman

TBH, I have a good feeling about this team but it's far from a guarantee that they'll do anything. My issue is throwing out the baby with the bath water like most tankers want. I also understand that the odds of building a championship contending team is slim to none so for me, I don't lose any sleep over not tanking. The tankers have this weird obsession with tanking and they've completely closed off their mind to the huge possibility that tanking will lead to years and years of futility. Considering we're already 5 years in I'm not willing to sit out of the playoffs for a decade or more. Only a loser wants that and we have a bunch of losers on this board.

I'm not stupid enough to think that everything on this team outside of JV is crap. I'd like to see what this team does and then make the appropriate moves if needed.

As an example, guys are going to improve. We have a bunch of stat hounds on this board that don't believe it'll happen but it will and I'm going to remind them that they don't understand this sport. That's what you get when you run around making absolute statements. If I'm wrong I'll be here to take the heat but I know these guys and they won't make a peep or they'll come up with some nonsense about why they said what they said. I've been here long enough to know how it happens. Just look at all the Jose Calderon fans on this board, not one of them has manned up and said we made a mistake signing that guy.

There are countless examples of players continuing to improve till there late 20's. In fact, I'd call it a common occurance which is why most superstars win their rings around age 30. If players stopped developing at age 24/25 like many here believe that wouldn't be the case.

The GOAT (MJ) and a guy that will likely be the GOAT very soon (LBJ) both won there first rings at age 27. That's the best of the best. The reason is that they make improvements (as subtle as they may seem) that can have a major impact on their teams performance.

Anyway, glad Masai isn't a knucklehead like these tankers and he's taking the reasonable approach of looking at what he has and then taking the best course of action. It's the most reasonable way to approach things.

[ansoncarter]

I am a trained mathematician and I can confidently say that, by any reasonable metric to quantify player performance, the probability of every Raptors starter having a career year is not materially different than zero.

well I am a trained Scientologist and have shared wisdom with the Grand Overseer and he assures me the chances are 100%

also said the draft is meaningless and the raptors should treadmill for another 100 life cycles

[Raps in 4]

The next time someone uses the Clippers as an example of successful tanking I'm going to immediately put them on ignore. Their opinion isn't worth it.

The Clippers have in one season had more success than we have in our entire history. They currently have a top-3 player on their roster, and another top-15 (possibly top-10 in the future) player. We can only dream of ever constructing a team of that calibre.

So you must have started watching the NBA 3 years ago? It's laughable that you have the nerve to use the Clippers as a reason we should tank.

Or, you're really not a Raps fan but a troll who wants to cement us as the NBA's laughing stock franchise.

You think our history is bad, go take a look at the Clippers history.

Cement us? That's already been done. The only way to return credibility to the franchise is to build a contender. The Clippers just did that.

[Raps in 4]

I am a trained mathematician and I can confidently say that, by any reasonable metric to quantify player performance, the probability of every Raptors starter having a career year is not materially different than zero.

well I am a trained Scientologist and have shared wisdom with the Grand Overseer and he assures me the chances are 100%

also said the draft is meaningless and the raptors should treadmill for another 100 life cycles

[Rhettmatic]

Really tiring of reading all the casual insults being included in certain members' posts. So tired of it that warnings, suspensions and bans will be handed out from now on. Whether you're insulting a specific poster or a wide swath of posters, you will be disciplined all the same.

[Reignman]

The Clippers have in one season had more success than we have in our entire history. They currently have a top-3 player on their roster, and another top-15 (possibly top-10 in the future) player. We can only dream of ever constructing a team of that calibre.

So you must have started watching the NBA 3 years ago? It's laughable that you have the nerve to use the Clippers as a reason we should tank.

Or, you're really not a Raps fan but a troll who wants to cement us as the NBA's laughing stock franchise.

You think our history is bad, go take a look at the Clippers history.

Cement us? That's already been done. The only way to return credibility to the franchise is to build a contender. The Clippers just did that.

No, no, no, you really don't get how laughable that Clippers franchise has been for the past 2 decades.