Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Tanking does not work


Eazy-E

Recommended Posts

Here is a break down of the last 12 drafts and the all stars taken in the top 5. As you can see there is a better chance of drafting a bust than there is an All Star.

2018
1 Luka (will be allstar 100% next year)
4
2017
1 Tatum ( Will be an all star soon enough)
4
2016
1 Simmons (Can't shoot)
4
2015
3 Towns  D Russel(meh) Porzing(injured)
2
2014
1 Embiid (missed extended time injury risk)
4
2013
1 Oladipo
4
2012
2 AD Beal
3
2011
1 Kyrie
4
2010
2 Wall Boogie
3
2009
2 Griffin Harden
3
2008
3 D Rose (we all know the story) Westbrook Love (injuries)
2
2007
2 KD Horford (no longer an allstar)
3

The Sixers Tanked 5 seasons and still had to trade for 2 other All Stars to even compete and still wont beat the Warriors. Also every star the Warriors drafted was selected outside the top 5. That team was able to win a Championship before signing KD.

So based on facts and statistics, Tanking does not work. Good scouting and making correct draft picks does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, GeorgeHanson said:

Cavaliers tanked and secured one lebron james in the draft.

We tanked, had the worst winning percentage in nba history and still didn’t get the number one pick because it’s a total crap shoot and fug David Stern for rigging the lottery.

Kemba and AD would have had us in the top half of the east for the foreseeable future if the team was managed correctly. As we have seen though, that probably wouldn’t have happened. This team is historically bad at drafting so what good does tanking do us? Maybe Biz would have worked out better playing next to AD. I would hope most of our picks after 2012 would have been traded for established players to help build around a Kemba and AD core. We can only dream.

In reality big stars like AD end up leaving the team that drafted them without accomplishing anything to go form super teams and take the easy way out. So I would fully expect us to be in the same situation the Pelicans are in with Davis now. I would hope we wouldn’t be stupid enough not to trade him because I don’t think they will get a much better offer than what the Lakers offered. They can hold him for another year but he is gone regardless of what they do.

We should feel lucky that Kemba hasn’t demanded a trade to go chase rings with Lebron or who ever else because in today’s NBA there is no loyalty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Eazy-E said:

We tanked, had the worst winning percentage in nba history and still didn’t get the number one pick because it’s a total crap shoot and fug David Stern for rigging the lottery.

Kemba and AD would have had us in the top half of the east for the foreseeable future if the team was managed correctly. As we have seen though, that probably wouldn’t have happened. This team is historically bad at drafting so what good does tanking do us? Maybe Biz would have worked out better playing next to AD. I would hope most of our picks after 2012 would have been traded for established players to help build around a Kemba and AD core. We can only dream.

In reality big stars like AD end up leaving the team that drafted them without accomplishing anything to go form super teams and take the easy way out. So I would fully expect us to be in the same situation the Pelicans are in with Davis now. I would hope we wouldn’t be stupid enough not to trade him because I don’t think they will get a much better offer than what the Lakers offered. They can hold him for another year but he is gone regardless of what they do.

We should feel lucky that Kemba hasn’t demanded a trade to go chase rings with Lebron or who ever else because in today’s NBA there is no loyalty.

The problems with the Bobcats tanking strategy was Michael Jordan pulled the plug on it half way through the process.  The financial pain due to lagging fan support became too much for him to bear and he did not see it through (takes more than 1-year).  

Spurs got Tim Duncan after a tank job, he stuck around.  If an organization is winning great players do not leave. 

Bottom line, Michael Jordan is not qualified to run an NBA franchise.  He lacks all the necessary tools...intellectual horsepower, education & training, business experience, proper funding....all absent.

Until he sells this team it will always be mired in mediocrity. 

Worst part is if the NBA had just chosen the Larry Bird Syndicate instead of checking the box with Bob Johnson the history of this franchise would be completely different.

The Stern foisted a 2nd bad owner onto us......SMH.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, GeorgeHanson said:

He lacks all the necessary tools...intellectual horsepower, business experience, proper funding....all absent.

I know a couple of people who work for him, in the arena management area. They'll tell you he's a smart guy who runs a tight ship. In reality, the Hornets organization is pretty well run.

Except when it comes to actual basketball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NBA is a joke. It doesn't matter if you tank because the draft lottery is rigged. Then you have GMs that don't know what the fug they are doing and are just puppets for their clueless owner that only cares about his own brand. 

Also the NBA is a joke and the tanking doesn't matter because these super teams being put together to win championships. That's why every single year you have the same teams over and over and over in the Finals. Who gives a fug about the NBA anymore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Daddy_Uncle said:

The NBA is a joke. It doesn't matter if you tank because the draft lottery is rigged. Then you have GMs that don't know what the fug they are doing and are just puppets for their clueless owner that only cares about his own brand. 

Also the NBA is a joke and the tanking doesn't matter because these super teams being put together to win championships. That's why every single year you have the same teams over and over and over in the Finals. Who gives a fug about the NBA anymore

Well, since it's the 3rd most popular sport after CFB and the NFL. I would say a lot of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...