You said they tanked to grab Tatum.
Culture of winning or tank?
- Thread starter str8line
- Start date
Point is Both Celtics and GSW were winning 20 something games before they are this good. Do they not have a winning culture now?
Well they got bad and got the picks that led to Tatum. Whatever.
They do, but not because of players they acquired via tanking.
W
How did GSW get Curry?
By finishing 10th in the West and drafting him in the following offseason.
Tanking and winning cultures are not mutually exclusive guys c’mon.
U
Yeah and 10th is a good record?
It's not tanking.
What IS tanking? To me it’s being bad for a few years to reload. It’s wide. It doesn’t mean you have to be the WoRst team.
Yeah that's different than tanking I think. Making moves for the purpose of rebuilding/reloading is fine. If you win fewer games as a result and get a better pick, that's an added bonus but it's not the purpose of those moves.
Making moves just for the purpose of losing games is tanking. Sitting good players out for no reason other than to lose is tanking.
To me Tanking is a PROCESS that starts with the GM trading away all your best talent and decides that the team will be bad for a while to accumulate new talent via you being bad & the picks that you get later down the line.
Many here have said it, the PLAYERS and the COACH themselves don't tank. They actually do their best to win.
It's the GM that actually decides on how much talent the team has.
Many here have said it, the PLAYERS and the COACH themselves don't tank. They actually do their best to win.
It's the GM that actually decides on how much talent the team has.