Its Time to Tank

[ONE LOVE]

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.

 

[ONE LOVE]

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?

 

[ONE LOVE]

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.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I dont think losing Vando would help us win games.

IDK, it's a very weird thing with Vando. I think the on/off numbers and stuff like that are misleading. He's an overrated defender for sure, but I dont think he is bad defensively, and definitely not to the tune of what the on/off numbers show.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

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.

If we traded Mike for Lonzo knowing he'd be out all year... sat Lauri a ton... played Ochai at point guard... we'd be accused of tanking big. I attended a Warriors game during their epic tank. Dominic Macguire started at point guard. They went 9-25 last 2 months of the season. They tanked the **** outta that thing... just because it didn't net an all star doesn't mean they didn't try.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I dont think losing Vando would help us win games.

IDK, it's a very weird thing with Vando. I think the on/off numbers and stuff like that are misleading. He's an overrated defender for sure, but I dont think he is bad defensively, and definitely not to the tune of what the on/off numbers show.

With him I think he is a great fit with shooting centers... but Ideally those centers would protect the rim and be better rebounders than KO. I think he'd be pretty great with the Lakers for example if AD figures out how to shoot again.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

With him I think he is a great fit with shooting centers... but Ideally those centers would protect the rim and be better rebounders than KO. I think he'd be pretty great with the Lakers for example if AD figures out how to shoot again.

Yeah, the defensive rebounding thing is an issue, but I think the thing might be just his spots on the court are very weird. We are kind of moving him all around the court and having him try a lot of different things vs in Minnesota where his role was more defined.

My wet dream is still to get Ben Simmons in this offense. The things Ben Simmons could do with the space Vanderbilt has in the offense would be very very good.

 

[LogGrad98]

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.

What is really funny about that is it isn't the tank that got them ahead, it is the player they traded for in order to facilitate the tank.

Former Warriors executive: Golden State tanked to get Harrison Barnes

Hawks GM Travis Schlenk gives perfect illustration of NBA's real tanking problem

nba.nbcsports.com

Bogut was central to the Warriors’ defensive resurgence, and they sent Utah the No. 21 pick the next year. Barnes became a key player on Golden State’s 2015 title team, and the franchise’s rise with him and Bogut helped lure Andre Iguodala and eventually Kevin Durant in free agency.

So the player they tanked for didn't do much to help them, but Bogut did, who was the guy they acquired in the trade intending to tank.

 

[Elizah Huge]

What is really funny about that is it isn't the tank that got them ahead, it is the player they traded for in order to facilitate the tank.

Former Warriors executive: Golden State tanked to get Harrison Barnes

Hawks GM Travis Schlenk gives perfect illustration of NBA's real tanking problem

nba.nbcsports.com

So the player they tanked for didn't do much to help them, but Bogut did, who was the guy they acquired in the trade intending to tank.

Harrison Barnes is not some bum though. He was a key piece to a championship team. You need guys like him.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

What is really funny about that is it isn't the tank that got them ahead, it is the player they traded for in order to facilitate the tank.

Former Warriors executive: Golden State tanked to get Harrison Barnes

Hawks GM Travis Schlenk gives perfect illustration of NBA's real tanking problem

nba.nbcsports.com

So the player they tanked for didn't do much to help them, but Bogut did, who was the guy they acquired in the trade intending to tank.

And I don't think they make that move unless they are in fact tanking. Barnes also gave them a super solid wing on the cheap... and you wonder if they don't tank and they give that pick up what the butterfly effect becomes.

I just more wanted to make mention that those mfers tanked twice... they got their hands dirty and it had its benefits.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yeah, the defensive rebounding thing is an issue, but I think the thing might be just his spots on the court are very weird. We are kind of moving him all around the court and having him try a lot of different things vs in Minnesota where his role was more defined.

My wet dream is still to get Ben Simmons in this offense. The things Ben Simmons could do with the space Vanderbilt has in the offense would be very very good.

No thanks... he broken.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

No thanks... he broken.

 

[Jaanipoeg]

If we traded Mike for Lonzo knowing he'd be out all year... sat Lauri a ton... played Ochai at point guard... we'd be accused of tanking big. I attended a Warriors game during their epic tank. Dominic Macguire started at point guard. They went 9-25 last 2 months of the season. They tanked the **** outta that thing... just because it didn't net an all star doesn't mean they didn't try.

I would be interested in a Lonzo/Blazers 23 first for Conley/Vanderbilt trade. If Lonzo is expected to miss significant more time then it could be a good win move for the Bulls to maximize whatever they think they have there. Vucevic has a more similar game to KAT and would be able to play that role he best thrived in. Bulls fans may be wary of anything that takes away minutes from Pat Williams though. I think Blazers are one Dame injury away from being lottery this year.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I would be interested in a Lonzo/Blazers 23 first for Conley/Vanderbilt trade. If Lonzo is expected to miss significant more time then it could be a good win move for the Bulls to maximize whatever they think they have there. Vucevic has a more similar game to KAT and would be able to play that role he best thrived in. Bulls fans may be wary of anything that takes away minutes from Pat Williams though. I think Blazers are one Dame injury away from being lottery this year.

The Bulls dont really need PG play though. They have good backup PG's and they have two very good playmaking wings. The Bulls making their last shot Mike Conley just doesnt make any sense. Maybe you can get just Lonzo, but you arent getting a pick for taking on the better player.

 

[fishonjazz]

We have not experienced bad luck… yet.

.

I think conley qualifies. The THT 3 point play getting overturned to a charge qualifies. Lauri getting flagrant fouled on the jump ball and the opponent getting to call a timeout without possession of the ball qualifies. Not a ton of bad luck but to say we haven’t experienced any bad luck is incorrect imo



Sent from my iPad using JazzFanz mobile app