framer
Well-Known Member
Yep, because fans will totally be OK with that. Remember "I'm getting a pay raise regardless?" How well did that go over?
Some on here say that the players won't tank.
- Thread starter green
- Start date
Yep, because fans will totally be OK with that. Remember "I'm getting a pay raise regardless?" How well did that go over?
green
Well-Known Member
Huh? Stoked has a good argument...yours? Eh.
Competitiveness and personal pride, right? So, if Hayward is averaging 18 pts a night and shooting 45% from the field in March and the Jazz have 15 wins, and he takes a couple of weeks off to let his nagging injuries get better, he isn't competitive?
Salary cap with a punitive luxury tax? That doesn't apply to Hayward and Favors. If Hayward is averaging 18 pts and 45% fg, or Favors is at 18 and 9, they are getting paid whether they play the last 20 games or not. In fact, playing the last 20 games can only hurt those player.
A finite number of possessions and minutes? If they sit out the last 20 games, they have extended their career by 20 games, and given themselves the chance to play in 20 games that matter, instead of 20 games that are irrelevant.
"If all this is above your head, maybe you should stop."
"No one is stealing Favors' and Hayward's spotlight, I just think they'll quit because they know that they're worse than a kid that hasn't played college basketball yet and are desperately hoping this kid will come in and be the superstar of the team and save their careers."
Fitting that you put that after your failed attempt at understanding something. Try again.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I have and the effort might be a bit less, but not to the level green is suggesting. Losing does wear on you mentally. Yes, there's a certain amount of pride that remains, but maybe it's just that little "extra" that disappears - a step slower down the court on defense, not taking a hard foul, putting up a jumper instead of driving to the hoop or looking for a teammate. We all saw that in Paul Millsap last season.
Hayward and Favors are pro's. They're not going to sit with nagging injuries, not when the most important contract in their life is right ahead of them. What I hope happens is that throughout the season, the Jazz training/medical staff is OVERLY cautious with any injuries. Sprained ankle? Sit them out until they're 100%, not 85-90%. That's for next season.
Nobody wants players that quit and they shouldn't, even on command. Players have a small window to earn their money and whether it's personal pride or earning a paycheck, they have to know that their value is tied to their effort. If they don't know that, then they are not very intelligent and will likely take a hit on their role, reputation, and/or contract. It doesn't make sense for anyone for players to tank. If their organization decides to pull them, then that's on the organization.
All I will add is that the Jazz went in on an organizationally-driven but not floor-driven tank when they let EVERYONE walk, signed John Lucas III, and didn't fire Corbin. You have to try to put a barrier between the stink of planned losing and having a winning roster and that's what we're going to see. If the Jazz do well, then that's great too. Either way, I don't think Corbin lasts beyond this year for a number of reasons unless he shows a whole lot more than he has.
All I will add is that the Jazz went in on an organizationally-driven but not floor-driven tank when they let EVERYONE walk, signed John Lucas III, and didn't fire Corbin. You have to try to put a barrier between the stink of planned losing and having a winning roster and that's what we're going to see. If the Jazz do well, then that's great too. Either way, I don't think Corbin lasts beyond this year for a number of reasons unless he shows a whole lot more than he has.
Like Lindsey said, The C4 wanted more responsibility and here it is. How will the FO see it if they repay that chance with half hearted effort and quitting down the stretch? The youth is being evaluated right now. Do they have what it takes? Are they worth it? The youth knows this. They have alot riding on this year. They need to come ready to play and leave it all on the court. Time to put up or shut up.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Great point. If the Jazz are struggling to win 20 games, Corbin and the rest can be quick to defend them, praising their individual progress and saying it's going to take time to grow and gel, but that the most important thing, this year, was to give them playing time. I don't think egos and confidence will be shaken that much. In the case of the team "leaders" (Favors, Hayward, Burke?), it should serve as motivation to get after it again next off-season.
And, if the team is unexpectedly making a run to the playoffs? Fantastic! That means quite a few of these players have vastly exceeded expectations and the Jazz have a solid core to build around. Personally, I don't think that happens: the WC is too strong and the Jazz bench is too weak. Portland was a perfect example of this last season.
Huge difference between taking care of injuries in a losing season that you would play through if you were a top contender and players tanking.
I agree with PKM that they may go 90% instead of 100%, or they may opt to let a nagging injury heal rather than play on it. That's so different than a player tanking.
Tanking benefits the FO in a very limited way...a chance at a higher draft pick. If the draft pick turns the team into a contender that may ultimately benefit the other players on the team, but if you think players are willing to sacrifice anything for the future of a team they could get traded from at any moment I think you need to reconsider.
Like you said, this is their job. If you're an employee plugging away what sacrifice would you be willing to make in your own work that would drop the production of your department enough to encourage leadership to recruit the available top talent in your field? Sure, it'll be just great when the new guy is there taking all the high visibility work and your department's production takes a huge jump.
I agree with PKM that they may go 90% instead of 100%, or they may opt to let a nagging injury heal rather than play on it. That's so different than a player tanking.
Tanking benefits the FO in a very limited way...a chance at a higher draft pick. If the draft pick turns the team into a contender that may ultimately benefit the other players on the team, but if you think players are willing to sacrifice anything for the future of a team they could get traded from at any moment I think you need to reconsider.
Like you said, this is their job. If you're an employee plugging away what sacrifice would you be willing to make in your own work that would drop the production of your department enough to encourage leadership to recruit the available top talent in your field? Sure, it'll be just great when the new guy is there taking all the high visibility work and your department's production takes a huge jump.
bjunior
Well-Known Member
players will not tank, those who thinks otherwise need to take a break from this board
but i expect that core4 are ok with the moves that lindsey did and realize that this will be a rebuild year and next year there will be some better backups + a chance to a good rookie
but i expect that core4 are ok with the moves that lindsey did and realize that this will be a rebuild year and next year there will be some better backups + a chance to a good rookie
green
Well-Known Member
You keep bringing up money. For Favors and Hayward, once the season is 2/3rds the way over, your argument is irrelevant. Heck, it might even be irrelevant now. No matter what happens this year, Favors will get 10 million from somebody. Hayward probably needs to prove a little more, but if he is averaging 18 and 5 in March, then if he sits the rest of the year, he still makes over 10 a year.
Money is relevant this year for Kanter and Burks as well (Burke too). If Kanter and Burks suck this year, then average 15 pts a night next year, they will get paid.
The only people money matters to this year are Williams, Jefferson, Beidrens, Rush, Lucas III, McNeal. That's it. And they suck. In fact, beantown brought up the fact that as the season goes on, and if the Jazz suck, those players could hurt the Jazz as they try to get "theirs" and set themselves up for their next deal. Favors and Hayward don't have to worry about that.
So you think Hayward and Favors will be motivated to tank for the sake of the team tanking? Like they'll be in on the plan?
That's different than "checking out" because you're numb from all the losing or realizing you're not making the playoffs and taking care of injuries.
You want to tell us over and over that once March hits the players will be onboard for the tank, but their motivation will not be the tank. Players do not tank. I mean, if they were actively tanking they would do things like miss shots on purpose, throw the ball away, bail other players out by fouling them on missed/bad shots. So, since you're telling us all how dumb we are because we can't see it, do you think the players will actually tank by throwing games? If not I don't really know what you're arguing about.
candrew
Well-Known Member
This premise is asinine - tanking is a conscious decision which comes from the top down - not the other way around. That's how you end up with a team like Golden State that at one point played 5 shooting guards for an entire quarter two seasons ago.
Even if you're on the worst team in the league there are 29 other teams watching you. Every player in the league has this pounded into their heads by their agent from day 1.
Besides, there is no player on this team with that type of guaranteed money who can afford to mail it in. And the ones that would you wouldn't want hanging around anyway.
Even if you're on the worst team in the league there are 29 other teams watching you. Every player in the league has this pounded into their heads by their agent from day 1.
Besides, there is no player on this team with that type of guaranteed money who can afford to mail it in. And the ones that would you wouldn't want hanging around anyway.
Thee Jazz Fan
Well-Known Member
Green!!! I'm not even going to respond to your crap, and neither should the rest of you. Let green stew in his own turd.
I'm sure Burks and Hayward are chomping at the bit to lose games so Andrew Wiggins can take their minutes.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
How about because you don't want the franchise to decide that you are the guy that needs replacing? And your position is the problem that needs solved. Thereby causing them to draft at your position giving you more competition for the spot you play and the money you can make in the future.
Scenarios
First, your comment seems condescending. Maybe that wasn't the tone you were going for, so perhaps you could clarify.
Second, I think your analysis is a bit simplistic, let's break it down
Scenario #1: young guns compete hard for 82 games and develop, getting real, in-game experience and developing as they go
Sencario #2: young guns compete hard for 57 games and develop, getting real, in-game experience and developing as they go. Then they tank for the last 25 (whether that is fewer minutes, out for games, or not competing hard).
Your hypothesis is that Hayward, Burke, Burks, Kanter, Favors wind up at the exact same place in their career arc in either scenario. I guess this could be true, but why risk stifling their development? Isn't their development the bottom line for the year?
First, your comment seems condescending. Maybe that wasn't the tone you were going for, so perhaps you could clarify.
Second, I think your analysis is a bit simplistic, let's break it down
Scenario #1: young guns compete hard for 82 games and develop, getting real, in-game experience and developing as they go
Sencario #2: young guns compete hard for 57 games and develop, getting real, in-game experience and developing as they go. Then they tank for the last 25 (whether that is fewer minutes, out for games, or not competing hard).
Your hypothesis is that Hayward, Burke, Burks, Kanter, Favors wind up at the exact same place in their career arc in either scenario. I guess this could be true, but why risk stifling their development? Isn't their development the bottom line for the year?
Because both of these players are up for contract extensions and the fact that both of these guys have worked their butts off this summer to get an opportunity to be the leaders of the team. I know both guys don't like losing. Why would players tank knowing they are replaceable? The guy the Jazz draft might be the guy replacing their tanking butts. I don't believe the Jazz are tanking (yes I know I am in the minority and probable have used the work a time or two) but they are rebuilding. There is a difference.
Tanking is if the coach keeps players out or guys fake injuries. GS tanked not because guys got hurt but because they intentionally kept their best players off the court when the game was still in doubt. Now if Ty plays the GS guys and roster bottom feeders over the Core5 then you claim the Jazz are tanking.