Its Time to Tank

[Ron Mexico]

Hard disagree. We were at best a .500 team. We benefitted early winning all the close games and had incredible shooting luck (opponent free throw percentage for example). Also had no injuries really and benefited from opponents missing guys like Ja, Bane, Kawhi... We also did some cute gimmicky things that worked at the beginning of the year (like aggressively trying to create turnovers) that have now been eliminated. We were always a 35-40 win team when healthy but had and made some luck.

Conley goes out and we are 0-5 with home losses to Detroit and Chicago. We are historically bad protecting the paint (not an exaggeration... we allow the most points in the paint ever) which is a good baseline for losing a **** ton of games... just like it was a great baseline for winning a bunch of games in the Rudy years. Basically, the way we are playing we have to have amazing shooting nights to win. Too many turnovers, not forcing enough turnovers, allowing a **** ton of offensive rebounds and points in the paint. We have good shooters so will stay close... we also play hard so will be competitive.

Removing Conley and one other vet and replacing minutes with Sexton/THT/NAW and Ochai/Kessler/Doke will absolutely leave us winning 30-40% of our games depending on Lauri and other players health. Won't get us bottom 5 but the 7-8 seed is possible if we make a move soon. Outside chance that OKC could pass us but it would mean they play it pretty straight.

Long term it is the right strategy. This stretch was beneficial as we saw what Lauri can do... and what having a good game managing point guard does for the group. Its time to embrace the pain of losing while letting Sexton, Kessler, THT, Ochai spread their wings.

That's not a Strong disagree. I'll meet you at 40% after trading away 2 good players. That's still pretty damn close to .500. You also pointed out the good luck in winning only. So...

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

That's not a Strong disagree. I'll meet you at 40% after trading away 2 good players. That's still pretty damn close to .500. You also pointed out the good luck in winning only. So...

The shooting luck we had early was a big part of several wins. We have not experienced bad luck… yet.

Big difference between 35% win percentage and 50%… fully healthy with luck smoothing out we are a .500 team… lose Mike and Vando and we are a .350 team which is firmly in the tank race. If we make no trades and have no big injuries… like nothing more than 5 games for our key guys… then we win 40 games and make the play in. That’s where I am… I think dropping an additional 6-7 games or so makes a huge difference in our draft position and will be worth it long term.

Now that I’ve said that we rip off like 5 straight… book it.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

The shooting luck we had early was a big part of several wins. We have not experienced bad luck… yet.

Big difference between 35% win percentage and 50%… fully healthy with luck smoothing out we are a .500 team… lose Mike and Vando and we are a .350 team which is firmly in the tank race. If we make no trades and have no big injuries… like nothing more than 5 games for our key guys… then we win 40 games and make the play in. That’s where I am… I think dropping an additional 6-7 games or so makes a huge difference in our draft position and will be worth it long term.

Now that I’ve said that we rip off like 5 straight… book it.

Losing Vando would help us win, not lose.

Dude is terrible

 

[cctrackstar]

nba teams who tank should be taken into class action lawsuits for false advertising, forcing them to refund ticketholders.

 

[The Midnight]

nba teams who tank should be taken into class action lawsuits for false advertising, forcing them to refund ticketholders.

Hahahaha.. and Barbies are real.

GSW tanked hard and they’re now a quadruple champion.

 

[The Midnight]

Losing Vando would help us win, not lose.

Dude is terrible

He has tremendous upside tho.

 

[hgb]

Hahahaha.. and Barbies are real.

GSW tanked hard and they’re now a quadruple champion.

Because they tanked their way to Harrison Barnes?

 

[The Midnight]

Because they tanked their way to Harrison Barnes?

What’s your point?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Losing Vando would help us win, not lose.

Dude is terrible

He's a fine 3rd big... he got overhyped fo sho. Ideally he is coming off the bench playing 20 minutes a night. Vando is not prime Dennis Rodman... but whoever replaces him would likely be worse.

 

[LogGrad98]

Hahahaha.. and Barbies are real.

GSW tanked hard and they’re now a quadruple champion.

GSW is actually the best example of natural team-building in league history, with excellent drafting and filling in the gaps with savvy vets. They hardly tanked anywhere, they naturally fell into bad teams for the longest time and were essentially a laughing stock for a long time, along with the Clippers. But when they finally got it right, they really got it right. And there was virtually no tanking involved. You have to respect how they got there, and the consistency and staying power they have had, and had they not had so many injuries all at once we may be talking about them winning 3 or 4 of the last 5, not just 2, and there was a very real possibility they would have made the finals 6 or 8 times in a row, not just 5. LOL just 5. That team went to the finals an insane 5 times in a row, and only were beaten by the best series in the career of the top 2 player of all-time in LBJ, and derailed by injuries in the loss to Toronto. Otherwise they were a dynasty for the ages. Hell they still are. They have exceeded many of the modern (say post-2000) dynasties in their success, playing in 6 of the last 8 finals and winning 4 of them. The only reason they even ended up at the top of the draft was due to heavy injuries to key players and the breakup with Durrant. Not even questionable phantom injuries like to the Admiral that netted the Spurs Tim Duncan. They really never tanked. And even in their worst year in this stretch the guy they got in the draft has so far been a bust (Wiseman). So no, GSW didn't do anything through tanking. Their best player was pick #7 and 2nd best was #11. The year we drafted Penis Cancer at #3 we could have drafted Klay. Draymond was a 2nd round pick. No they did virtually no team building from tanking. It was all organic and frankly probably the best example of team building and coaching system combo in NBA history. Literally the only thing that stopped them was themselves in the form of injuries, likely from over-use of playing so many games in the post season for so many years in a row.

 

[HermanG]

GSW is actually the best example of natural team-building in league history, with excellent drafting and filling in the gaps with savvy vets. They hardly tanked anywhere, they naturally fell into bad teams for the longest time and were essentially a laughing stock for a long time, along with the Clippers. But when they finally got it right, they really got it right. And there was virtually no tanking involved. You have to respect how they got there, and the consistency and staying power they have had, and had they not had so many injuries all at once we may be talking about them winning 3 or 4 of the last 5, not just 2, and there was a very real possibility they would have made the finals 6 or 8 times in a row, not just 5. LOL just 5. That team went to the finals an insane 5 times in a row, and only were beaten by the best series in the career of the top 2 player of all-time in LBJ, and derailed by injuries in the loss to Toronto. Otherwise they were a dynasty for the ages. Hell they still are. They have exceeded many of the modern (say post-2000) dynasties in their success, playing in 6 of the last 8 finals and winning 4 of them. The only reason they even ended up at the top of the draft was due to heavy injuries to key players and the breakup with Durrant. Not even questionable phantom injuries like to the Admiral that netted the Spurs Tim Duncan. They really never tanked. And even in their worst year in this stretch the guy they got in the draft has so far been a bust (Wiseman). So no, GSW didn't do anything through tanking. Their best player was pick #7 and 2nd best was #11. The year we drafted Penis Cancer at #3 we could have drafted Klay. Draymond was a 2nd round pick. No they did virtually no team building from tanking. It was all organic and frankly probably the best example of team building and coaching system combo in NBA history. Literally the only thing that stopped them was themselves in the form of injuries, likely from over-use of playing so many games in the post season for so many years in a row.

This is why I like our future outlook. We have a coach that runs a system that already in its first season has proven to cause problems even for elite defensive teams. Add to that the fact that we have many young guys who have already shown this year that they can be better than they were credited for when coming in and a boatload of picks, its really interesting to follow this team atm.

Lauri might be the unicorn that was promised.
Sexton showing that he can be more than just a squirrel on coke with his recent strides in playmaking (plus, his decission making is only gonna get better with more reps at that role).
Beasley might be the best bench 3 point shooter in the league. Hell if there wasnt Steph, he might be the best 3pt shooter period.
Kessler is a rookie and has shown promising flashes. Some say traditional big is a dying race, but we don't know what else this guy can do.
Vando has Rodmanesque qualities, albeit he has a long way to go to be the type of defensive and hustle leader a championship team needs (mainly learn to defend better lol).

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

GSW is actually the best example of natural team-building in league history, with excellent drafting and filling in the gaps with savvy vets. They hardly tanked anywhere, they naturally fell into bad teams for the longest time and were essentially a laughing stock for a long time, along with the Clippers. But when they finally got it right, they really got it right. And there was virtually no tanking involved. You have to respect how they got there, and the consistency and staying power they have had, and had they not had so many injuries all at once we may be talking about them winning 3 or 4 of the last 5, not just 2, and there was a very real possibility they would have made the finals 6 or 8 times in a row, not just 5. LOL just 5. That team went to the finals an insane 5 times in a row, and only were beaten by the best series in the career of the top 2 player of all-time in LBJ, and derailed by injuries in the loss to Toronto. Otherwise they were a dynasty for the ages. Hell they still are. They have exceeded many of the modern (say post-2000) dynasties in their success, playing in 6 of the last 8 finals and winning 4 of them. The only reason they even ended up at the top of the draft was due to heavy injuries to key players and the breakup with Durrant. Not even questionable phantom injuries like to the Admiral that netted the Spurs Tim Duncan. They really never tanked. And even in their worst year in this stretch the guy they got in the draft has so far been a bust (Wiseman). So no, GSW didn't do anything through tanking. Their best player was pick #7 and 2nd best was #11. The year we drafted Penis Cancer at #3 we could have drafted Klay. Draymond was a 2nd round pick. No they did virtually no team building from tanking. It was all organic and frankly probably the best example of team building and coaching system combo in NBA history. Literally the only thing that stopped them was themselves in the form of injuries, likely from over-use of playing so many games in the post season for so many years in a row.

GS tanked for Barnes... and they tanked super duper hard. It had three benefits... gave them Barnes when they would have sent that pick to Utah. Barnes not a world beater but was good enough by time he left to sign a 4/100M deal. He was a cheap starter who contributed to their winning. It helped improve their second round pick... which nabbed Draymond Green... but one of the biggest overlooked things is that it landed them Bogut. They traded a healthy Monta Ellis for a hurt Andrew Bogut. If they had played it straight they don't trade for an injured player.

They also tanked the year Steph got hurt. They ended up with James Wiseman which is the funny thing... but they tanked that year once Steph got hurt. Green sat out a ton... they played all the young guys a ton... weren't concerned with winning at all.

Do they win titles without it... sure... did they see it as a valuable strategy to build their team... **** yes they did and they engaged in it twice.