Freakonomics: Losing is not a Winning Strategy

[dice]

When you consider you still have Derrick Rose, tanking is not that risky.

Even if you trade Deng and Noah, and amnesty Boozer then you are left with Derrick Rose, Nikola Mirotic, Jimmy Butler, Taj Gibson, and Tony Snell as your core moving forward + whatever you get for Deng and Noah. Then you could conceivably have $10M+ in cap space.

Let's just look at you bare bones rotation if the Bulls were to blow it up.

C-_________/___________
PF-Mirotic/Gibson
SF-Butler/Snell
SG-_________/Snell
PG-Rose/__________

Keep in mind, that does not include any return for Noah and Deng, which would be significant. It also doesn't include any draft picks, which could also be significant.

To me this draft has 6 elite prospects (Embiid and Smart are just a touch below the big 4, but still excellent). In addition to that, there are several more guys that would be top 5 candidates in most other drafts. The Bulls were sent a blessing in disguise, and it would be a travesty if they didn't take advantage.

i have no problem with the strategy you suggest if indeed we can get good value for noah and deng. crap expiring contracts to facilitate tanking + picks/prospects, for example

[bentheredengthat]

I posted a similar study, and odds a couple times in past threads discussing it. Tanking is most likely to just make you suck for a long time. But w/e, if people chanting "Jabari" after every loss helps them get through this tough year, more power to them.

Luckily I don't think there is any fear of the Bulls actually totally blowing it up, and if they did, most likely people would just have to chant a new name each successive year that we continued to be bad as a result of it.

The study is trivial, how often does a number 1 draft picking team already have stars in place and a proven coach?

This article holds no merit

I think that might be part of the problem on the board right now.

We need some clarity around here: do you (not you, but people in general) want to Nuke the team, tank this season, mini-tank by just trading Deng?

Seems like all the tanking talk is just riling people up, when many seem to have different ideas of what the word means.

[DuckIII]

I think that might be part of the problem on the board right now.

We need some clarity around here: do you (not you, but people in general) want to Nuke the team, tank this season, mini-tank by just trading Deng?

I think lots of people hold different views. Some probably consider the team broken and want a complete blow-up. Others want the Deng-gone-only (or minor players like Hinrich/Dunleavy) option, which is pretty close to where I am. But I'm also interested in the Bulls exploring all trade options involving all players just to see what's up.

Ultimately, I think trading Deng (plus a spare part of two as noted) is sufficient. He won't be back anyway, so there's no downside. And I think his departure will be destructive to the team this year, enhancing the draft asset. For all the "role player" knocks Deng takes, the team typically crumbles when he's not out there.

Seems like all the tanking talk is just riling people up, when many seem to have different ideas of what the word means.

Regardless of the meaning, it shouldn't rile anyone up. These are just different fan views of team building.

[bentheredengthat]

Seems like all the tanking talk is just riling people up, when many seem to have different ideas of what the word means.

Regardless of the meaning, it shouldn't rile anyone up. These are just different fan views of team building.

Yep. And thank for helping me understand that yesterday. Made my participation in the game thread much more enjoyable. I've taken on Re's zen attitude I think.

[Mech Engineer]

IMO, a good team missing a piece plays every team close and just do not know how to finish which should be better next year. If they are getting blown out every game by 20+ points, then it is not tanking...it is a d-league/bad team. Those kind of teams will probably be bad even next year and the year after that.

[MalcolmXing]

The only downside I find is, Deng leaves and it's a clear head on tank that means Thibs walks maybe.

It's like worrying about dumping Jay Cutler and losing B Marsh

[League Circles]

I don't really understand the notion that one would want the Bulls to trade Deng to tank because they believe the Bulls won't keep him, while ignoring that the Bulls won't tank as proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the subtle Teague/James thing. I guess I don't get the arbitrary context of partial reality where some people draw the lines on their dreams. The Bulls not wanting to tank is much more certain than them not wanting to re-sign Deng IMO.

[DuckIII]

The only downside I find is, Deng leaves and it's a clear head on tank that means Thibs walks maybe.

And that would be terrible. But - and I'm a huge Thibs homer - the simple reality is that the roster matters more than the coach. Thibs is one of the few exceptions in that he's a coach that matters a lot, but the roster still ultimately trumps the coach.

Plus, he's got enough time on his contract that hopefully he'd see that it wasn't a "real" tank and that by next year the team is competitive again, but younger. Assuming Rose can return.

[Action Paxson]

OK, let's go with optimism. I'll flesh out the "do nothing" plan.

Chicago holds onto Deng and resigns him to a deal that makes everyone here puke.
Chicago amnesties Boozer, allowing them to use the MLE.
Chicago signs Mirotic with that
Chicago gets the Charlotte pick at #15 and selects a combo guard
Chicago gets its own pick at #14 and selects a center

Team
Rose / Combo guy taken at 15
Butler / Snell
Deng / Dunleavey
Mirotic / Gibson
Noah / center taken at 14

I challenge people to put together a realistic team likely better than that over the remainder of Rose's contract. The "do nothing" plan is probably the best one. If you are optimistic, then Rose comes back well, Mirotic is a stud and the draft picks contribute in limited minutes.

The full on tank plan requires you to burn the roster to the ground. Even if it nets you a top 3 pick, then you likely have to spend years training that guy and rebuilding the roster. You probably lose Thibodeau in the process. The full on tank plan is the worst plan.

If the full tank plan gets you a top 3 pick it is definitely not the worst plan. That plan puts you in contention for 10 more years. It also likely gives you near max cap space, or productive players.

So to play your game, I'll give you a trade that seems realistic to give you an idea of a full tank:

Bulls trade: Noah, Deng
Bulls get: ATL 1st (right to swap with Brooklyn), Omer Asik, rights to Lucas Noguiera, cap fillers (Elton Brand, Lou Williams, Donatas Montiejunas)

Houston gets Deng, Atlanta gets Noah

So then you go into next season with:
Asik/Noguiera
Mirotic/Gibson
Butler/Dunleavy
Snell
Rose/Williams

+3 picks (CHI, BKN, CHA). I doubt the Bulls use all 3 picks, but maybe they can use some to trade up. If you can dump Williams and Dunleavy, you can make a run at a very good free-agent. It may not be a ready made contender, but I don't see it being much worse than the do-nothing group, with the ability to contend into Derrick Rose's next contract.

[Red Larrivee]

The only downside I find is, Deng leaves and it's a clear head on tank that means Thibs walks maybe.

It's like worrying about dumping Jay Cutler and losing B Marsh

Thibs is probably gone at some point anyway if we believe reports. The Jerry Sloan's and Gregg Popovich's of the coaching world are extremely rare.

The roster is always more important and tanking yields a better chance to improve the roster than standing pat does.

[DuckIII]

I don't really understand the notion that one would want the Bulls to trade Deng to tank because they believe the Bulls won't keep him, while ignoring that the Bulls won't tank as proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the subtle Teague/James thing. I guess I don't get the arbitrary context of partial reality where some people draw the lines on their dreams. The Bulls not wanting to tank is much more certain than them not wanting to re-sign Deng IMO.

There is no connection between those things. The Bulls could genuinely want Teague to be able to operate and develop in a context providing him with more freedom and responsibility. The opposite certainly hasn't worked. That isn't at all necessarily a "we're not tanking" move, but rather a "we aren't willing to give up on Teague yet, and this the only option left to see if we can salvage him."

Moreover, I don't think the Bulls will "tank" in the sense of playing worse players over better ones anyway. Hell, I'm not convinced they'll do anything at all to reduce the wins - which includes trading Deng. Its just that I firmly believe it is what they should do.

[SpinninHouse]

I came across an article that offers an interesting take on the tanking debate. More specifically, it argues that tanking is "not a winning strategy in the NBA." I think it's a useful read for everyone on the board, and may shed some new insight into the board's debate.

http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/29/losi ... n-the-nba/

One section particularly stood out to me:

Now some might argue that this next draft is different. This next draft is supposed to have such players as Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, and Julius Randle.

But let’s imagine these players are like LeBron. It is important to remember that LeBron never won a title with the teams that acquired his services on draft night. In fact, in the lottery era (since 1985) only the San Antonio Spurs (with David Robinson and Tim Duncan) have drafted a player number one and won a title with that player. Every other number one pick failed to bring a title to the team that “won” the lottery.

Personally, I felt even more compelled to post this because the enthusiasm some posters have for the Bulls losing games disgusts me.

Mods: I apologize if this article has been posted elsewhere.

What disgusts me is the thought of us being stuck in NBA hell - winning 40 games a year and promptly getting eliminated every single year with no hope of winning a title.

The NBA to me is about championship rally's in Grant Park and hoisting a 7th trophy. It's the 7th trophy or nothing. I'm not about to cheer for us to win 41 games and get destroyed in round 1 by Miami or Indiana. To win a title you need a franchise player and last I checked - we haven't been able to sign or trade for one.

[coldfish]

OK, let's go with optimism. I'll flesh out the "do nothing" plan.

Chicago holds onto Deng and resigns him to a deal that makes everyone here puke.
Chicago amnesties Boozer, allowing them to use the MLE.
Chicago signs Mirotic with that
Chicago gets the Charlotte pick at #15 and selects a combo guard
Chicago gets its own pick at #14 and selects a center

Team
Rose / Combo guy taken at 15
Butler / Snell
Deng / Dunleavey
Mirotic / Gibson
Noah / center taken at 14

I challenge people to put together a realistic team likely better than that over the remainder of Rose's contract. The "do nothing" plan is probably the best one. If you are optimistic, then Rose comes back well, Mirotic is a stud and the draft picks contribute in limited minutes.

The full on tank plan requires you to burn the roster to the ground. Even if it nets you a top 3 pick, then you likely have to spend years training that guy and rebuilding the roster. You probably lose Thibodeau in the process. The full on tank plan is the worst plan.

If the full tank plan gets you a top 3 pick it is definitely not the worst plan. That plan puts you in contention for 10 more years. It also likely gives you near max cap space, or productive players.

So to play your game, I'll give you a trade that seems realistic to give you an idea of a full tank:

Bulls trade: Noah, Deng
Bulls get: ATL 1st (right to swap with Brooklyn), Omer Asik, rights to Lucas Noguiera, cap fillers (Elton Brand, Lou Williams, Donatas Montiejunas)

Houston gets Deng, Atlanta gets Noah

So then you go into next season with:
Asik/Noguiera
Mirotic/Gibson
Butler/Dunleavy
Snell
Rose/Williams

+3 picks (CHI, BKN, CHA). I doubt the Bulls use all 3 picks, but maybe they can use some to trade up. If you can dump Williams and Dunleavy, you can make a run at a very good free-agent. It may not be a ready made contender, but I don't see it being much worse than the do-nothing group, with the ability to contend into Derrick Rose's next contract.

Your scenario versus mine boils down to:
Deng + Noah versus Brooklyn pick + big money free agent

Given the histories, Deng + Noah are probably better over the next few years at least.

[coldfish]

I came across an article that offers an interesting take on the tanking debate. More specifically, it argues that tanking is "not a winning strategy in the NBA." I think it's a useful read for everyone on the board, and may shed some new insight into the board's debate.

http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/29/losi ... n-the-nba/

One section particularly stood out to me:

Now some might argue that this next draft is different. This next draft is supposed to have such players as Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, and Julius Randle.

But let’s imagine these players are like LeBron. It is important to remember that LeBron never won a title with the teams that acquired his services on draft night. In fact, in the lottery era (since 1985) only the San Antonio Spurs (with David Robinson and Tim Duncan) have drafted a player number one and won a title with that player. Every other number one pick failed to bring a title to the team that “won” the lottery.

Personally, I felt even more compelled to post this because the enthusiasm some posters have for the Bulls losing games disgusts me.

Mods: I apologize if this article has been posted elsewhere.

What disgusts me is the thought of us being stuck in NBA hell - winning 40 games a year and promptly getting eliminated every single year with no hope of winning a title.

The NBA to me is about championship rally's in Grant Park and hoisting a 7th trophy. It's the 7th trophy or nothing. I'm not about to cheer for us to win 41 games and get destroyed in round 1 by Miami or Indiana. To win a title you need a franchise player and last I checked - we haven't been able to sign or trade for one.

As I have said before, if you go through NBA history a top 2 player has won the vast majority of NBA titles. The Bulls don't have Lebron or Durant and have no way to get them in the short term. If you want a ring, you either come up with a "Durant plan" or then you go full tank, trade everyone and hope you get one of those guys. Maybe in the next 30 years it will work.

[Rerisen]

The study is trivial, how often does a number 1 draft picking team already have stars in place and a proven coach?

This article holds no merit

Here's the problem with thinking Rose gives you a fail safe option. Most of the teams that tanked or fell down to utter crap, weren't even close enough within 5 years, that adding Derrick Rose to them would make them a championship team.

Also, you know the odds of us getting the #1 pick are exceedingly slim right.

[Action Paxson]

I suppose the biggest flaw with the whole study is how few NBA champions there have been in the last 25 years.

Pistons, Bulls, Rockets, Spurs, Lakers, Heat, Mavericks

7 organizations, and only one of those was not a multi-winner. The plan isn't building a team to win one championship, its to build a team that will compete for multiple championships. The number 1 is pick is not a ticket to title, but it is the best way to get a superstar, which is the best way to win a title.

So when there is only 7 teams to win a championship, the Pistons were led by their number 2 pick, the Bulls were led by their number 3 pick, the Rockets were led by their number 1 pick, Spurs by their TWO number 1 picks, Lakers by someone else's number 1 pick and a superstar lotto pick, Heat by their star top 5 pick (and two different number 1 overall picks), and the Mavs by Dirk. If we go further back its just teams lead by a trio of NBA legends.

You can argue the Bulls have their star number 1 pick in Rose, but I don't trust him like I did one month ago, and definitely not like I did two years ago. The Pacers may not have a top 9 pick in their rotation, but they have not won a title yet. The one anomaly being that "starless" Pistons team, which has become near impossible in the new CBA.

[Rerisen]

Moreover, I don't think the Bulls will "tank" in the sense of playing worse players over better ones anyway. Hell, I'm not convinced they'll do anything at all to reduce the wins - which includes trading Deng. Its just that I firmly believe it is what they should do.

BTW, has any fanbase been more out of step with their management than Bulls fans are now?

Gar Forman says team has no plans for dramatic roster change

Calling Derrick Rose's torn medial meniscus in his right knee "a freak injury," Chicago Bulls general manager Gar Forman said Tuesday the team is "positioned well" and has no immediate plans to make dramatic changes to the roster.
...
"Though this is a severe injury, it's not as severe as the other. He'll get over it and be able to get his career back to the highest level."
..
"We're not going to make rash decisions. We feel we have a bright future ahead and we're positioned well. We have good players in their 20s, Derrick is going to come back, we're positioned well with draft picks into the future and we have some level of flexibility which we haven't had under this new CBA."
...
"I know we have the makeup and character in that locker room," Forman said. "I know guys will continue to work."

Asked again if the franchise is still confident it can build its team around Rose, Forman did not hesitate.

"Yeah, he's obviously a big, big part of our future," he said. "This was a freak injury. According to doctors, it had nothing to do with over-compensating or any type weakness or any type of fatigue. It was just a freak injury."

[Action Paxson]

Your scenario versus mine boils down to:
Deng + Noah versus Brooklyn pick + big money free agent

Given the histories, Deng + Noah are probably better over the next few years at least.

Agreed. There are two things that push me the other direction.

1.) Trading those two is the difference between the Bulls making the playoffs and having a pick in the teens, and being a bottom 10 team.

2.) I don't trust Joakim as the 2nd best player on this team. If you're moving forward with this team as is, you're accepting the current dynamic. In my opinion, a shake up is needed.

The comparison that could be made is Dallas. They traded everyone when they seemingly had a contender. However, they banked solely on cap space, and did not have much of any good young talent. The Bulls are loaded with good pieces and excess draft picks.

[coldfish]

Moreover, I don't think the Bulls will "tank" in the sense of playing worse players over better ones anyway. Hell, I'm not convinced they'll do anything at all to reduce the wins - which includes trading Deng. Its just that I firmly believe it is what they should do.

BTW, has any fanbase been more out of step with their management than Bulls fans are now?

Gar Forman says team has no plans for dramatic roster change

Calling Derrick Rose's torn medial meniscus in his right knee "a freak injury," Chicago Bulls general manager Gar Forman said Tuesday the team is "positioned well" and has no immediate plans to make dramatic changes to the roster.
...
"Though this is a severe injury, it's not as severe as the other. He'll get over it and be able to get his career back to the highest level."
..
"We're not going to make rash decisions. We feel we have a bright future ahead and we're positioned well. We have good players in their 20s, Derrick is going to come back, we're positioned well with draft picks into the future and we have some level of flexibility which we haven't had under this new CBA."
...
"I know we have the makeup and character in that locker room," Forman said. "I know guys will continue to work."

Asked again if the franchise is still confident it can build its team around Rose, Forman did not hesitate.

"Yeah, he's obviously a big, big part of our future," he said. "This was a freak injury. According to doctors, it had nothing to do with over-compensating or any type weakness or any type of fatigue. It was just a freak injury."

That's Gar Forman. He may be telling the truth and he might be lying through his teeth. His comments to the media have little value other than letting us know what the organization wants us to think. He is a very good press secretary.

[coldfish]

Your scenario versus mine boils down to:
Deng + Noah versus Brooklyn pick + big money free agent

Given the histories, Deng + Noah are probably better over the next few years at least.

Agreed. There are two things that push me the other direction.

1.) Trading those two is the difference between the Bulls making the playoffs and having a pick in the teens, and being a bottom 10 team.

2.) I don't trust Joakim as the 2nd best player on this team. If you're moving forward with this team as is, you're accepting the current dynamic. In my opinion, a shake up is needed.

The comparison that could be made is Dallas. They traded everyone when they seemingly had a contender. However, they banked solely on cap space, and did not have much of any good young talent. The Bulls are loaded with good pieces and excess draft picks.

The third way is to shake up the roster by trading for established talent. If the Bulls acquire two quality prospects this offseason in the draft, that further increases their trade base.

You really can't plan around it because you don't know what is available but IMO, a roster reorganization based on the acquisition of talent is the best route. What happens if Noah + picks for Love becomes an option for example?