Image ImageImage Image

Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy

Moderators: HomoSapien, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man

Red8911
RealGM
Posts: 14,836
And1: 4,716
Joined: Jul 13, 2010
Location: BROOKLYN

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#41 » by Red8911 » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:30 am

Tenchi Ryu wrote:
Red8911 wrote:As a bulls mod,all these ppl that want the bulls to lose arent they trollers? why don't you guys ban them? You keep on locking threads from everything,but that u let go

Becasue its not trolling at all. The tankers want the team to have the maximum level of talent possible, and we feel that's only possible through the draft at this point. This front office has failed to get it done through trades and signings.

I disagree and this is pissing off a lot of ppl not just me ..Look at the Post game thread,why is that acceptable?
weneeda2guard
RealGM
Posts: 10,485
And1: 5,005
Joined: Feb 07, 2011

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#42 » by weneeda2guard » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:30 am

I don't recall many saying get rid of everybody

The most I have seen is just trying to get a good asset or core piece for deng. Which by all indications makes sense since deng is outta here next off season. So if the right player comes about I would do that. Of course you don't just take anything

I think boozer is only amnestyed in the circumstance a player like zbo wants to come here and letting boozer go gets us the cap space to sign zbo for example

And I myself only want to trade Noah in the condition that we getting a star for him.

The main thing for me is rose needs a running mate for the future that is special if we want any chance of getting past Miami. Sorry deng and boozer are good players but history in the playoffs tell us they are not the reliable type

So if we can land one of these great players (the sleeper is smart, he would play great next to rose) then you have to go for it. Even if we get enough cap, the likely hood is lebron and melo staying put Or melo going to the lakers or Brooklyn. So who we signing that can be that legit 2nd option? I see a lot of 3rd options in free agency once bron and melo are off the table.

That leaves hoping we can draft that 2nd option and if it was any draft to get that type of player it's this one
"they taking rose kindness for a weakness"
User avatar
TheSuzerain
RealGM
Posts: 17,389
And1: 11,404
Joined: Mar 29, 2012

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#43 » by TheSuzerain » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:31 am

The reason the tank is such a beautiful plan is Deng is not coming back anyway.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#44 » by Rerisen » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:31 am

logical_art wrote:You of course get some immediate pleasure from a win, because they're the Bulls after all, but if they lose that's good too.


Sure, win or lose, neither one bothers me now. After Rose went down, I'm zen about this year.

I don't see us getting Parker or Wiggins, as I don't see the org is going that direciton to get bad enough to do it. So why punish myself by being mad 35 times this year when the Bulls win? They may trade Deng to help us get into the lottery. We might also get the Charlotte pick. So there's some young assets to add.

But big picture, and factoring the above realities, this team's future is all hanging on Rose's knees and recovery. These random games won't mean much in the end. Each loss might give us .03 better odds at a superstar or something, not worth losing sleep over.
DRose4MVP
General Manager
Posts: 7,761
And1: 214
Joined: Oct 04, 2009
Location: Illinois

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#45 » by DRose4MVP » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:32 am

Red8911 wrote:
Tenchi Ryu wrote:
Red8911 wrote:As a bulls mod,all these ppl that want the bulls to lose arent they trollers? why don't you guys ban them? You keep on locking threads from everything,but that u let go

Becasue its not trolling at all. The tankers want the team to have the maximum level of talent possible, and we feel that's only possible through the draft at this point. This front office has failed to get it done through trades and signings.

I disagree and this is pissing off a lot of ppl not just me ..Look at the Post game thread,why is that acceptable?

Maybe the mods understand the situation at hand with the Bulls (Rose being hurt), and also believe that tanking is the best solution for the Bulls in their current state?
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/r_shinn
DRose4MVP
General Manager
Posts: 7,761
And1: 214
Joined: Oct 04, 2009
Location: Illinois

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#46 » by DRose4MVP » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:34 am

patagonia wrote:
DRose4MVP wrote:
patagonia wrote:And then what happens if we dismantle the team, end up with the 11th pick, and draft a bust? People who think the grass is always greener end up disappointed when they find out it's not the case.


Ummm we are not going to dismantle the team. At the most we'll trade Deng, amnesty Boozer, and trade Noah. We will get something for those guys that is of value. It's not like we trade them for no one.

Plus, um hello, we still have former MVP Derrick Rose coming back, Jimmy Butler, up and coming Snell, Taj Gibson, and Nikola Mirotic. On top of that add perhaps 2 top 10-12 picks in a loaded draft. Sign me up for a bright future!


Who are we drafting that is going to replace those three? You just got rid of a lot of defense, rebounding, and points.

Deng is not coming back regardless, so you better start looking for his replacement whether we tank or not.

How to replace Boozer? Have you met my friend Taj Gibson? He's pretty good. Had 26 and 14 tonight.

I only see us moving Noah for another big man, so there ya go.
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/r_shinn
User avatar
Hokie
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,956
And1: 1,907
Joined: Dec 30, 2011
     

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#47 » by Hokie » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:35 am

Red Larrivee wrote:So what is the winning strategy then? Fight hard, make the playoffs, lose in the 1st or 2nd round and draft at 17-20?

We all agree that this season was championship or bust. With Rose out, it's bust and the Bulls have no shot at winning a chamiponship. If they tank for the lottery, mathematically they have a shot at landing into the top three. Favorable? No, but I'll take my chances over a pointless playoff appearance. Crazier things have happened in the lottery and we would know that first hand.

Nobody who tanks is guaranteed a superstar but they're all guaranteed a chance at a superstar. That's the point and in this draft there are 3, some would even say 4 of those talents available.


I'd be beyond thrilled with any of the following:

Wiggins
Parker
Exum
Randle
Smart
Embiid

I'd be content with any of the following:

Gordon
Harris Jr.
Young
Robinson III
Payne
McAdoo

And that's just off the top of my head. It stands to reason that a few of these guys won't declare for the 2014 draft, but most of them will. In such a loaded class, while you really hope to land a top 5 pick, something like the 8-10th pick could net you a potential All-Star. It should net you a solid role player at the very least.

Tanking obviously wouldn't be the preferred strategy if the 2014 class was replaced with the 2013 class. Oladipo is probably the best player in the 2013 class, and I'm not sure if he even goes top 8 in this upcoming draft.
KornelDavid'sJ wrote:What I like best about Boozer is that someday he'll retire.
patagonia
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,804
And1: 2,032
Joined: Feb 17, 2010

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#48 » by patagonia » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:36 am

DRose4MVP wrote:
Red8911 wrote:
Tenchi Ryu wrote:Becasue its not trolling at all. The tankers want the team to have the maximum level of talent possible, and we feel that's only possible through the draft at this point. This front office has failed to get it done through trades and signings.

I disagree and this is pissing off a lot of ppl not just me ..Look at the Post game thread,why is that acceptable?

Maybe the mods understand the situation at hand with the Bulls (Rose being hurt), and also believe that tanking is the best solution for the Bulls in their current state?


The mods are some of the biggest trolls in this forum (no offense, mods). Do you see some of the topics they start?
logical_art
RealGM
Posts: 11,095
And1: 3,672
Joined: May 14, 2001

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#49 » by logical_art » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:37 am

Rerisen wrote:
logical_art wrote:You of course get some immediate pleasure from a win, because they're the Bulls after all, but if they lose that's good too.

I don't see us getting Parker or Wiggins, as I don't see the org is going that direction to get bad enough to do it.


I don't know much about this draft, but its not only the top players who become stars and so draft positioning is not all or nothing. If we had lost a few more games in 2002, we could have had Wade instead of Hinrich, for example.
Red8911
RealGM
Posts: 14,836
And1: 4,716
Joined: Jul 13, 2010
Location: BROOKLYN

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#50 » by Red8911 » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:37 am

You guys can want to tank all you want,but you know it wont happen.I truly believe they will get the third seed.Its just very annoying and embarrassing to see bulls fans wanting to lose.
patagonia
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,804
And1: 2,032
Joined: Feb 17, 2010

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#51 » by patagonia » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:37 am

DRose4MVP wrote:
patagonia wrote:
DRose4MVP wrote:
Ummm we are not going to dismantle the team. At the most we'll trade Deng, amnesty Boozer, and trade Noah. We will get something for those guys that is of value. It's not like we trade them for no one.

Plus, um hello, we still have former MVP Derrick Rose coming back, Jimmy Butler, up and coming Snell, Taj Gibson, and Nikola Mirotic. On top of that add perhaps 2 top 10-12 picks in a loaded draft. Sign me up for a bright future!


Who are we drafting that is going to replace those three? You just got rid of a lot of defense, rebounding, and points.

Deng is not coming back regardless, so you better start looking for his replacement whether we tank or not.

How to replace Boozer? Have you met my friend Taj Gibson? He's pretty good. Had 26 and 14 tonight.

I only see us moving Noah for another big man, so there ya go.


Wanting to get an asset for Deng doesn't require wanting the team to lose. And what big man are we going to get that is better than Noah?
DRose4MVP
General Manager
Posts: 7,761
And1: 214
Joined: Oct 04, 2009
Location: Illinois

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#52 » by DRose4MVP » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:38 am

Hokie wrote:
Red Larrivee wrote:So what is the winning strategy then? Fight hard, make the playoffs, lose in the 1st or 2nd round and draft at 17-20?

We all agree that this season was championship or bust. With Rose out, it's bust and the Bulls have no shot at winning a chamiponship. If they tank for the lottery, mathematically they have a shot at landing into the top three. Favorable? No, but I'll take my chances over a pointless playoff appearance. Crazier things have happened in the lottery and we would know that first hand.

Nobody who tanks is guaranteed a superstar but they're all guaranteed a chance at a superstar. That's the point and in this draft there are 3, some would even say 4 of those talents available.


I'd be beyond thrilled with any of the following:

Wiggins
Parker
Exum
Randle
Smart
Embiid

I'd be content with any of the following:

Gordon
Harris Jr.
Young
Robinson III
Payne
McAdoo

And that's just off the top of my head. It stands to reason that a few of these guys won't declare for the 2014 draft, but most of them will. In such a loaded class, while you really hope to land a top 5 pick, something like the 8-10th pick could net you a potential All-Star. It should net you a solid role player at the very least.

Tanking obviously wouldn't be the preferred strategy if the 2014 class was replaced with the 2013 class. Oladipo is probably the best player in the 2013 class, and I'm not sure if he even goes top 8 in this upcoming draft.


Naw. I'd rather lose in 5 games to the Heat in the playoffs, feel like crap after its over with, and then draft #19 and get a guy who will never be anything other than a role player.
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/r_shinn
User avatar
Tenchi Ryu
RealGM
Posts: 17,372
And1: 6,426
Joined: Aug 04, 2012
Location: South Side Wild 100's
     

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#53 » by Tenchi Ryu » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:38 am

Red8911 wrote:You guys can want to tank all you want,but you know it wont happen.I truly believe they will get the third seed.Its just very annoying and embarrassing to see bulls fans wanting to lose.

It's not that we believe Thibs will tank. We just flat out suck hot ass this year. And if we make that Deng trade, we've indirectly tanked ourselves anyway. He's literally carry this sorry squad right now.

We just lost to a Davis-less Pelicans team.
[x] Fire Thibs
[x] Fire Kirk
[x] Fire Noah
[x] Fire GarPax
Bisonbull8
Banned User
Posts: 857
And1: 335
Joined: Feb 23, 2013

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#54 » by Bisonbull8 » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:39 am

Red8911 wrote:
Tenchi Ryu wrote:
Red8911 wrote:As a bulls mod,all these ppl that want the bulls to lose arent they trollers? why don't you guys ban them? You keep on locking threads from everything,but that u let go

Becasue its not trolling at all. The tankers want the team to have the maximum level of talent possible, and we feel that's only possible through the draft at this point. This front office has failed to get it done through trades and signings.

I disagree and this is pissing off a lot of ppl not just me ..Look at the Post game thread,why is that acceptable?


Hahaha so mad for no reason. If you were a mod and were banning people just because they dont agree with your viewpoint, you would literally be the worst mod on any forum.

But using your logic, anti-tankers could be trolls too because pro-tankers might be upset that you want to get to the playoffs just to get knocked out and get a lower draft pick. That isnt acceptable to everyone. So should mods ban you for trolling?
Red8911
RealGM
Posts: 14,836
And1: 4,716
Joined: Jul 13, 2010
Location: BROOKLYN

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#55 » by Red8911 » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:39 am

patagonia wrote:
DRose4MVP wrote:
Red8911 wrote:I disagree and this is pissing off a lot of ppl not just me ..Look at the Post game thread,why is that acceptable?

Maybe the mods understand the situation at hand with the Bulls (Rose being hurt), and also believe that tanking is the best solution for the Bulls in their current state?


The mods are some of the biggest trolls in this forum (no offense, mods). Do you see some of the topics they start?

I know some stuff got to be reported to the site,it aint right.
patagonia
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,804
And1: 2,032
Joined: Feb 17, 2010

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#56 » by patagonia » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:40 am

DRose4MVP wrote:
Hokie wrote:
Red Larrivee wrote:So what is the winning strategy then? Fight hard, make the playoffs, lose in the 1st or 2nd round and draft at 17-20?

We all agree that this season was championship or bust. With Rose out, it's bust and the Bulls have no shot at winning a chamiponship. If they tank for the lottery, mathematically they have a shot at landing into the top three. Favorable? No, but I'll take my chances over a pointless playoff appearance. Crazier things have happened in the lottery and we would know that first hand.

Nobody who tanks is guaranteed a superstar but they're all guaranteed a chance at a superstar. That's the point and in this draft there are 3, some would even say 4 of those talents available.


I'd be beyond thrilled with any of the following:

Wiggins
Parker
Exum
Randle
Smart
Embiid

I'd be content with any of the following:

Gordon
Harris Jr.
Young
Robinson III
Payne
McAdoo

And that's just off the top of my head. It stands to reason that a few of these guys won't declare for the 2014 draft, but most of them will. In such a loaded class, while you really hope to land a top 5 pick, something like the 8-10th pick could net you a potential All-Star. It should net you a solid role player at the very least.

Tanking obviously wouldn't be the preferred strategy if the 2014 class was replaced with the 2013 class. Oladipo is probably the best player in the 2013 class, and I'm not sure if he even goes top 8 in this upcoming draft.


Naw. I'd rather lose in 5 games to the Heat in the playoffs, feel like crap after its over with, and then draft #19 and get a guy who will never be anything other than a role player.


The playoffs are an invaluable experience. Look at what it did for Butler last year.
User avatar
Tenchi Ryu
RealGM
Posts: 17,372
And1: 6,426
Joined: Aug 04, 2012
Location: South Side Wild 100's
     

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#57 » by Tenchi Ryu » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:40 am

patagonia wrote:
Wanting to get an asset for Deng doesn't require wanting the team to lose. And what big man are we going to get that is better than Noah?

Big men are not as necessary anymore. Miami is proving that. You're better off with multiple GOOD 3 point shooters than a offensively limted big man nowadays.

Hell, Boozer and Taj can handle the C position nowadays.
[x] Fire Thibs
[x] Fire Kirk
[x] Fire Noah
[x] Fire GarPax
G I N T
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,368
And1: 202
Joined: Jun 16, 2008

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#58 » by G I N T » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:40 am

Sure it is. Or rather, it's a much wiser strategy than scratching and clawing your way to a 7th or 8th seed only to await an inevitable annihilation at the hands of the Heat or Pacers. The simple truth is nothing good comes out of this team trying to win this year. Even getting a 3rd seed ensures a second round butt-whooping with a fairly useless 21st pick that will not amount to much. A 6th or 7th seed means you get bounced one round earlier and are once again without a useful future asset (high lottery draft pick) to show for it.

Even if the Bulls only finish with the 9th or 10th worst record, which isn't far-fetched at all, I'll gladly take a 9th or 10th pick (with a slim chance at a top 3) over a 1st/2nd round exit and useless pick. Lots of drafts have produced very, very good players in the 9-12 range. And it's far more likely you get a good player in this range than in the 17-21 range. So yeah, don't see the upside to winning 40 games and getting ousted in the 1st round. As for the "promoting losing culture" silliness, please... this team could not have been any more shell-shocked than when they found out their franchise player suffered his second straight season-ending knee injury. One lottery appearance won't ruin this team for life.
DRose4MVP
General Manager
Posts: 7,761
And1: 214
Joined: Oct 04, 2009
Location: Illinois

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#59 » by DRose4MVP » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:42 am

patagonia wrote:
DRose4MVP wrote:
patagonia wrote:
Who are we drafting that is going to replace those three? You just got rid of a lot of defense, rebounding, and points.

Deng is not coming back regardless, so you better start looking for his replacement whether we tank or not.

How to replace Boozer? Have you met my friend Taj Gibson? He's pretty good. Had 26 and 14 tonight.

I only see us moving Noah for another big man, so there ya go.


Wanting to get an asset for Deng doesn't require wanting the team to lose. And what big man are we going to get that is better than Noah?


I doubt the Bulls trade Noah, although he is becoming overrated lately. Defensively, which is the most surprising part. Bynum ripped him apart the other night. His offensive game is extremely limited too. I like him on this team though going forward.

So you want us to get something for Deng, and then go into the playoffs without him? That doesn't make alot of sense now, does it? If you're trading Deng then the season is even more of a throw away than what is was after Rose went down.
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/r_shinn
User avatar
IcemanGervin
Veteran
Posts: 2,654
And1: 1,535
Joined: Jun 27, 2012

Re: Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy 

Post#60 » by IcemanGervin » Tue Dec 3, 2013 5:42 am

This isn't your grandpa's tank job though. We have Rose coming back (top 10-25 player maybe???) Mirotic the highly coveted Euro, and possibly having a top pick in a "special" "generational" draft. This season became a wash when Rose went down. Adding a long term asset to this team via the draft, is more important than a 2nd round playoff exit.

Return to Chicago Bulls