The Value of Tanking

[C Court]

This just isn't true. The Spurs are the only team that hit the big time with late 1sts/2nds, which means that one has to treat it as an aberration, not a game plan.

Plus, they tanked twice to land their true franchise players.

The Spurs got lucky with Robinson and Duncan. They had the #1 picks in two years in which future hall-of-famers were available. If they had the #1 pick in the Bargnani or Bogut year, then its a different story and Buford doesn't look so smart.

Fact is the tanking game plan backfires more often than it works. The Clippers, the post Jordan Bulls, the T-Wolves and others have languished in mediocrity for years with tanking bringing them no closer to the goal of a championship.

There are more failed tanking models than successful ones. The Lakers didn't tank. The Heat didn't tank. The Celtics tanked, but it was trades that brought them a ring. The Spurs got lucky with two #1's, but built a championsip with late picks.

I'm not saying that the Raptors shouldn't tank. My problem is that I have no confidence that they will make the right pick.

Jim Kelly is still the Sr. Director of Scouting and Bob Zuffaleto is their Senior Scout. Both have been with the Raptors for eons. What makes anyone think that all of a sudden these two guys will turn into draft wizards?

[timdunkit]

Awesome analysis Schad ... however, my fear is that most people walk into this thread and look "OMG TANK!!! now its statistically cause and effect".

To me your analysis shows probabilities ... simply put, its a higher probability to draft the best player at the #1 pick then at the #2 pick and etc ... and correlation studies show that .

This doesn't mean that if we get the #1 pick that we are set for a franchise player. In the end your player has to develop into that player. But there is a reason why a player goes first overall or goes top 5 ... those are the players with the best odds of becoming big impact players.

Now that I think about it ... are you really showing the value of tanking or the value of each pick in the draft? It be nice to see how the amount of balls you have in the draft lottery effects your draft lottery slot. I can't remember the last time the team with the highest chance won the lottery. You'd likely still see the same trend (duh ... more balls more chances for higher slot, plus the draft is such that you can only move down 3 spots from where ur slated anyways).

The value of tanking isn't to get a high draft pick ... its to give your self a higher chance at a higher draft pick.

[isyed]

Lets hope we loose the next few games and dig a hole which we cannot absolutely get out off. Use the TPE to get an injured player and some assets like young players and picks. Let Reggie and Banks Expire please. Shut down Barbosa for the year. If the Cavs want to win i would send Bargs and Jose at the end of the year for Jamison and someone else. Use Jamison or Barbosa next year to trade to a contendor and pickup some young pieces or let them expire (or buy them out to save money).

Start fresh. Get more picks and lets tank away.

Only downfall to this is th effect on the psyche of our yougn players ie DD, Weems, Amir and Davis. But if they are good enough (strong enough and talented enough) then we won't need to worry about getting a top pick since they could be the stars. As we know this is not the case , it only allows them to grow more and get better while we wait for our option 1 and 2 in the draft/free agency.

[Double Helix]

Looking at Kyrie Irving and Harrison Barnes mixes has me awfully excited about a proper rebuild. I would call Centre Sports the day after the draft to buy either one of those jerseys.

Just thinking about talents like that helping to take Bargnani, Derozan and Davis to new heights next year and beyond makes everything that's happened in Raptorland the past few years seem somehow worth it.

I like that both are seen as likely top 3 candidates and that both are exciting players at positions we could use upgrades at. I can imagine either making the young players that are already here better, especially Irving.

Might be a good time for a jersey redesign too to signal a new era in Raptors basketball.

[Schad]

To me your analysis shows probabilities ... simply put, its a higher probability to draft the best player at the #1 pick then at the #2 pick and etc ... and correlation studies show that .

Absolutely, and that's the idea. There are no guarantees in drafting or in life, so all you can do is take the route which gives you the best odds of success. You can draft a bust first overall...it's just far more likely that you will draft a star, and if you do draft a star, it's far more likely that they will have an outsized impact. It's why I went with win shares rather than something like the PER breakdown that 82games used in the article Hendrix linked...it gives teams more credit for drafting superduperuber stars, and faults them more when they draft massive busts.

Now that I think about it ... are you really showing the value of tanking or the value of each pick in the draft? It be nice to see how the amount of balls you have in the draft lottery effects your draft lottery slot. I can't remember the last time the team with the highest chance won the lottery. You'd likely still see the same trend (duh ... more balls more chances for higher slot, plus the draft is such that you can only move down 3 spots from where ur slated anyways).

The second set of numbers is actually weighted by the number of balls you have in the draft lottery.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I don't have time to do any research on the matter, but in the past I've looked into it and it seems like there's an awful lot of contending teams that haven't relied on having their own top 3 pick, either using it to acquire a better player or building around that pick.

I can't disagree with the numbers provided, and the general sentiment that a top pick is going to add more wins than each subsequent pick. Does that mean it's the best gameplan? I'm not sure.

[Lionel Messi]

Thanks Schad.

What's really sad is that we weren't really trying to tank. Our GM just built such an incredibly flawed roster, that even when it's REALLY trying to win games, it can't.

Thank God for all of BC's stupid mistakes.

[Rude Boy 1]

Excellent read dude thanks,

I somehow doubt we will end up tanking just because BC isn't that smart.

[Lionel Messi]

Not that I'm against it, but tanking is over-rated. None of this means anything if your talent evaluation on draft day sucks as Sub points out with the T-Wolves example.

Yes, the foundation of a winning team is typically built on the talents of a top pick. But the most successful franchises have the extraordinary ability to find stars with late first round and second round picks.

The Raptors have shown no ability to do this over their 15 year history. As long as Jim Kelly remains at the table, I don't see this changing.

The Raptors have also shown no aptitude for finding free-agent gems or landing impact players through trade, though.

My hope for the draft is that our pick is high and there's a no-brainer selection at that spot that even Kelly, Colangelo and co. can't eff up.

http://www.draftexpress.com/

4 European front-court players in the top 7.
Be afraid, be very very afraid.













/green

[Rude Boy 1]

Not that I'm against it, but tanking is over-rated. None of this means anything if your talent evaluation on draft day sucks as Sub points out with the T-Wolves example.

Yes, the foundation of a winning team is typically built on the talents of a top pick. But the most successful franchises have the extraordinary ability to find stars with late first round and second round picks.

The Raptors have shown no ability to do this over their 15 year history. As long as Jim Kelly remains at the table, I don't see this changing.

The Raptors have also shown no aptitude for finding free-agent gems or landing impact players through trade, though.

My hope for the draft is that our pick is high and there's a no-brainer selection at that spot that even Kelly, Colangelo and co. can't eff up.

http://www.draftexpress.com/

4 European front-court players in the top 7.
Be afraid, be very very afraid.

Its happened before!

[Basketball_Jones]

This team needs to tank hard to grab Donatas when nobody else really wants him.

[gcsw]

There's no value in tanking if you got BC as your GM who drafts guys like Bargnani as a first round pick and still cannot admit his mistake

[Rude Boy 1]

Thanks Schad.

What's really sad is that we weren't really trying to tank. Our GM just built such an incredibly flawed roster, that even when it's REALLY trying to win games, it can't.

Thank God for all of BC's stupid mistakes.

come on dude you don't actually believe that do you?

[Hendrix]

I don't have time to do any research on the matter, but in the past I've looked into it and it seems like there's an awful lot of contending teams that haven't relied on having their own top 3 pick,

They might/might not of had a top 3 pick. But they probably drafted a star/superstar, which is what we need to do at this point in time, and is far easier to do the higher the draft spot. Sure it's possible to get a superstar once in a while @ the 6-12 picks but it's very hit or miss. We dont need "hit of miss" right now imo, we need to be shooting fish in a barrell.

either using it to acquire a better player or building around that pick.

I think this should be a pro tank statment no? As in Boston tanked to get an asset, and ended up getting Ray Ray who'll prob give them 45 W's over 5 years. I think it just kinda depends on what position your team is in for how to utilize that asset.

I can't disagree with the numbers provided, and the general sentiment that a top pick is going to add more wins than each subsequent pick. Does that mean it's the best gameplan? I'm not sure.

I think it depends on the situations. I think ours calls for it. I would however like to see some positioning by BC to make some moves to create a good team for a lotto pick to walk into. Maybe unclog the PG position. Trade Bargs for a useful piece if Davis shows hes good. Consolidate our assets to find a #2, #3 player, shed some salary etc...

[Rhettmatic]

I can't disagree with the numbers provided, and the general sentiment that a top pick is going to add more wins than each subsequent pick. Does that mean it's the best gameplan? I'm not sure.

I think it depends on the situations.

Agreed, and in our case, we honestly had no choice but to tank. Honestly, our team was/is pretty much in shambles. Our players are terrible and we're capped out with very few tradeable assets. What other avenues were available to us?

Aside from being a testament to Colangelo's stunning failure these past four years, it was a convenient situation because we were pretty much forced to rebuild.

Even for those (including me) worried that we'll use the TPE on an overpaid vet, who's even out there? I don't think you get Iggy for the TPE and I'm hopeful that even Colangelo would stay away from the likes of Arenas and Brand (regardless of the numbers he's putting up thus far this year). So while I'm still tempering my optimism, we should ride out this year at least and get a very high pick.

The real test comes next off-season. I firmly believe we need another year of this -- maybe not tanking intentionally, but next off-season is not the time to swing for the fences with vets, IMO. I'm not sure Colangelo (or MLSE) has the patience to endure two seasons of this, though.

[Zuul]

Probability allows us to determine the expected value of all possible outcomes. Reality only allows for one possible outcome to occur - no matter what the probability of each outcome prior to the event taking place (unless that probability is zero).

In the Raptors case they have always been on the wrong end of reality when it comes to 1st overall. No Allen Iverson in their first draft.
No High School players in the 2005 draft.

Now I won't get into the concept of fate, but I am having visions of somehow being screwed over by a lockout in 2011. Manifest desitiny my a**.

[Lionel Messi]

Thanks Schad.

What's really sad is that we weren't really trying to tank. Our GM just built such an incredibly flawed roster, that even when it's REALLY trying to win games, it can't.

Thank God for all of BC's stupid mistakes.

come on dude you don't actually believe that do you?

You think the Raptors are trying to lose games on purpose? Have you been watching?

We just suck.

[Alfred]

Not that I'm against it, but tanking is over-rated. None of this means anything if your talent evaluation on draft day sucks as Sub points out with the T-Wolves example.

Yes, the foundation of a winning team is typically built on the talents of a top pick. But the most successful franchises have the extraordinary ability to find stars with late first round and second round picks.

The Raptors have shown no ability to do this over their 15 year history. As long as Jim Kelly remains at the table, I don't see this changing.

The Raptors have also shown no aptitude for finding free-agent gems or landing impact players through trade, though.

My hope for the draft is that our pick is high and there's a no-brainer selection at that spot that even Kelly, Colangelo and co. can't eff up.

http://www.draftexpress.com/

4 European front-court players in the top 7.
Be afraid, be very very afraid.

Wait until the NCAA season gets into full swing.

[lucky777s]

The flipside to this... Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Minnesota Timberwolves:
2010: Pick #4
2009: Pick #5
2009: Pick #6
2008: Pick #2 No, they did not have this pick at all
2008: Pick #3 but they traded it for #5 and Miller
2007: Pick #7
2006: Pick #5 No, it was Foye at 7

2010 record: 2-7 (30th on offence, 27th on defence).

re-post from another thread
MIN draft position (I think you messed up a couple above which changes a 2, 3, and 5 to just a 5 and a 7)

2004 - forfeit pick - last penalty from Joe Smith signing
2005 14 McCants good talent pick in bad middle draft. They passed on Granger with DLee and Ellis much later
2006 7 Foye in the obvious miss of BRoy that made no sense at all.
2007 7 Brewer was a reach, they passed on Noah, Wilson Chandler, Rudy, ThadYoung in another blah draft
2008 3 Mayo/traded for 5 Love - in what looked like a horrible move but Love has been good. Eric Gordon, Brook Lopez available with their pick
2009 5&6 Rubio&Flynn in a high profile whiff. Pass on Curry, Derozan, Jennings. Plus they trade Ty Lawson their 18 pick for just a future pick
2010 too early to call whether Wes Johnson is the BPA

But the point is there was talent at their spots. The picks give you a chance. Takes some luck but they could have potentially been sitting with all of Granger, Roy, Noah, Love, Curry, Derozan, Ty Lawson after the 2005-2009 drafts. And those were some pretty weak drafts when you look at who went after their picks.

Now that would likely never happen but it was definitely possible given where they did draft those years. That is the power of the draft.

[Rude Boy 1]

I can't disagree with the numbers provided, and the general sentiment that a top pick is going to add more wins than each subsequent pick. Does that mean it's the best gameplan? I'm not sure.

I think it depends on the situations.

Agreed, and in our case, we honestly had no choice but to tank. Honestly, our team was/is pretty much in shambles. Our players are terrible and we're capped out with very few tradeable assets. What other avenues were available to us?

Aside from being a testament to Colangelo's stunning failure these past four years, it was a convenient situation because we were pretty much forced to rebuild.

Even for those (including me) worried that we'll use the TPE on an overpaid vet, who's even out there? I don't think you get Iggy for the TPE and I'm hopeful that even Colangelo would stay away from the likes of Arenas and Brand (regardless of the numbers he's putting up thus far this year). So while I'm still tempering my optimism, we should ride out this year at least and get a very high pick.

The real test comes next off-season. I firmly believe we need another year of this -- maybe not tanking intentionally, but next off-season is not the time to swing for the fences with vets, IMO. I'm not sure Colangelo (or MLSE) has the patience to endure two seasons of this, though.

Just as an interjection. I would entertain acquiring these players if they came accompanied with an unprotected pick.