2024-2025 Tank Race

[FrenchJazzFa]

Other teams seem to have no problem finding building blocks in the top 10.


Are you kidding me? They sat Lauri with a fake injury, "rested" Kessler (LOL), Collins has apparently dropped off the face of the earth and there's all kinds of G-League level players out there instead.

As has been said time and time again, the players are going to compete hard, they're fighting for their professional futures and have no incentive to tank. On the contrary.

WTF do people want.

That's a good point. An ex NBA player playing now in European League say, In NBA , people fight for their contract, in Europe they fight for their team. Not totally wrong. You can expect from young guys who wanna play in NBA ( and get the Money involved) n to play hard and trying to show up. Tanking is a FO and coach responsibility. At mid season, Hardy should have learn it. End games with players who have good contract already and no incentive to play well as they are interest of tanking to get better soon.
Tonight is not a good example as most of the starters were not available.

Charlotte ,NO end most of the games with the starters, and keep losing.

 

[Schrödinger's Gerbil]

Sound familiar to anyone?

Fisher, B. (2012). Fandom, identity, and online communities: A review of sports fan studies. Sport in Society, 15(5), 720-734.

This paper discusses the role of fandom in digital spaces, where extreme loyalty and commitment to a team can sometimes result in the marginalization of opposing viewpoints and lead to highly vocal and passionate fan factions dominating online discussions.

Brinkmann, S. (2014). Fanaticism in Sports Fandom: The Role of Social Media in the Development of Team Identity. Journal of Sports and Social Issues, 38(3), 203-221.

Brinkmann’s study looks at how social media platforms amplify the voices of the most fanatical fans. Extreme behaviors often dominate online discussions, leading to an environment where these extreme voices are more visible than the more moderate fans.

Kassing, J. W., & Sanderson, J. (2010). Fan or foe? Examining the role of social media in the development of online sports fan communities. Journal of Sports Communication, 4(3), 367-388.

This research examines the role of social media in building and maintaining fan communities. It highlights how the highly emotional and zealous behavior of fans often leads to the formation of polarized, extreme subgroups that can dominate discussions and influence the broader community.

Harris, R., & Waddington, I. (2005). Social media and fan fanaticism: Understanding the online dynamics of modern fandom. Communication & Sport, 4(2), 183-202.

This article looks at how social media platforms have changed the way fans interact with each other, and how more fanatical voices often rise to prominence in these digital spaces.

Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2010). Sports fandom as a form of entertainment in online communities. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(2), 95-103.

Trepte and Reinecke analyze the motivations behind sports fandom. The study explains how the most zealous fans dominate the conversation.

Gantz, W., & Wenner, L. A. (1991). Fanatic behavior in sports: A research agenda. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 15(3), 213-227.

This foundational article addresses fanaticism within the context of sports fandom. It outlines how deeply engaged fans often control online fan communities through their passionate contributions. These individuals tend to set the tone for discussions and can overshadow more neutral or balanced viewpoints.

 

[Strutter]

Well after seeing the data what do you think?

I think it shows top 5 picks are usually important for a finals team. Sometimes that means you're picking a bona fide superstar for your team. Sometimes that means you're getting that bona fide superstar in free agency. And sometimes that means you're getting a solid contributor to pair with a star.

I'm pro tanking overall, and I hope we get to bottom out this year and get a top 5 pick. But it was also a small reminder that sometimes that superstar is a bit of a diamond in the rough (Giannis, Curry, Kobe, Butler, and of course Jokic)

 

[Rubashov]

Sound familiar to anyone?

Fisher, B. (2012). Fandom, identity, and online communities: A review of sports fan studies. Sport in Society, 15(5), 720-734.

This paper discusses the role of fandom in digital spaces, where extreme loyalty and commitment to a team can sometimes result in the marginalization of opposing viewpoints and lead to highly vocal and passionate fan factions dominating online discussions.

Brinkmann, S. (2014). Fanaticism in Sports Fandom: The Role of Social Media in the Development of Team Identity. Journal of Sports and Social Issues, 38(3), 203-221.

Brinkmann’s study looks at how social media platforms amplify the voices of the most fanatical fans. Extreme behaviors often dominate online discussions, leading to an environment where these extreme voices are more visible than the more moderate fans.

Kassing, J. W., & Sanderson, J. (2010). Fan or foe? Examining the role of social media in the development of online sports fan communities. Journal of Sports Communication, 4(3), 367-388.

This research examines the role of social media in building and maintaining fan communities. It highlights how the highly emotional and zealous behavior of fans often leads to the formation of polarized, extreme subgroups that can dominate discussions and influence the broader community.

Harris, R., & Waddington, I. (2005). Social media and fan fanaticism: Understanding the online dynamics of modern fandom. Communication & Sport, 4(2), 183-202.

This article looks at how social media platforms have changed the way fans interact with each other, and how more fanatical voices often rise to prominence in these digital spaces.

Trepte, S., & Reinecke, L. (2010). Sports fandom as a form of entertainment in online communities. Journal of Media Psychology, 22(2), 95-103.

Trepte and Reinecke analyze the motivations behind sports fandom. The study explains how the most zealous fans dominate the conversation.

Gantz, W., & Wenner, L. A. (1991). Fanatic behavior in sports: A research agenda. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 15(3), 213-227.

This foundational article addresses fanaticism within the context of sports fandom. It outlines how deeply engaged fans often control online fan communities through their passionate contributions. These individuals tend to set the tone for discussions and can overshadow more neutral or balanced viewpoints.

Academic articles on Jazzfanz? Is this a highpoint or a low point? I'm so confused.

 

[Shad]

I'm going to be really sad when we beat the hornets twice in the next coming days

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I'm going to be really sad when we beat the hornets twice in the next coming days

If we sit players like we did vs Brooklyn I think it's a loss.

 

[underdog]

I'm curious: Can anyone guess the odds that a #1 draft pick will lead the team that drafted it to 1) an NBA championship or 2) an NBA final?

Answer: 1) Since 2000, 8.3%. 2) Since 2000, 20.8%. The only #1 picks to win an NBA championship with the team that drafted it since 2000 are LeBron James and Kyrie Irving. The only #1 picks to go to a finals with the team that drafted it since 2000 are James, Irving, Kenyon Martin, and DeAndre Ayton. (Percentage calculated by the number of #1 picks winning a championship or going to the finals with the team that drafted it divided by the number of #1 picks over the time period.)

The odds that draft picks 1-5 will lead the team that drafted it to an NBA championship or NBA final since 2000 are 5% and 10.8%. Besides Lebron, Kyrie, Martin, and Ayton, they include Durant (#2); Harden, Brown, Tatum, and Luka (#3); Westbrook and Tristan Thompson (#4, although Thompson was a role player at that point); and Wade (#5).

(Quick caveat: I did the calculations quickly, so I may be off a bit here or there, but it should not affect the general order of magnitude.)

Conclusion: By historical standards, the odds that Cooper Flagg or any other person drafted by the Jazz as part of their structural teardown tank will lead the Jazz to an NBA championship are remote. The odds that they lead the Jazz to the NBA finals are no better than 1 in 5.

Now, we come to the cost-benefit question. Are 5-6 years (likely duration) of sucking worth it for such paltry odds? For those who tout Wembenyama as a successful structural tank, keep in mind that 1) there's no guarantee the Spurs will win anything, and 2) the Spurs' average winning percentage for the last five years was 37%. Five years is not an unsubstantial amount of time for a fanbase to suffer through lousy basketball. Are Jazz fans prepared for the possibility of another 3-4 years, and possibly more, of sucking for the remote odds that hitting on a lottery pick will lead to a championship or even finals appearance?

Of course, this analysis omits any discussion of opportunity cost, i.e., what are the odds of success of alternative strategies? If we knew them, tanking might actually be the best strategy. Unfortunately, we can't answer this other than to say that no other team has won an NBA championship as the result of a structural tanking strategy. Every other team that's won an NBA championship has followed a different strategy to get there. Thus, the question: Why the irrational, exuberant confidence that the structural tanking strategy is the best (or even only) strategy to put the Jazz on the championship path?

Sure, tanking doesn't guarantee anything. We all know that. But let’s not forget why teams choose to tank. They do it because they believe it’s the best option for them in their situation. I’m not a fan of tanking. It sucks. But I support it if the alternatives are worse. Danny told us he might have to pivot if his big game hunting fails. And that is then what happened. So now, with a roster that has a lot of young players and isn't nearly good enough for the playoffs, we’ve got to stick with this and do everything we can to boost our odds of landing a top prospect. Why? Because it simply makes the most sense in our situation.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

If we sit players like we did vs Brooklyn I think it's a loss.

Good news is it seems Hornets and Pelicans are about as healthy as they ever get. So I won't complain. I don't think we will get as nasty as we did last night until after the trade deadline. If they did get that nasty I would support it but I would bet we get a note from the league.

 

[Tanktastic]

But let’s not forget why teams choose to tank. They do it because they believe it’s the best option for them in their situation.

Most tanking teams end up tanking, because it's the only option to get better.

In the pursuit of success or just simply because bad management, they've ended up with bad contracts, at best average players and their only way out is through their only assets: their own draft picks.

The Jazz chose to tank, because the new owner thought that he wants a dynasty team that's competing for the championship right at the top every year. He's of course not the only one who wants to make his mark immediately - someone like Mat Ishbia of the Suns just went a different route. (And is definitely one of the teams whose future might look like their only option is to tank in a few years time.)

 

[Zombie]

I think poring over historical data and assessing how many championship teams had X number of high draft picks, and whether or not they drafted/traded for/signed them in free agency, is kind of pointless. There are just so many variables at play that determined how those teams came together: status of the CBA at that time, teams' free agency desirability, trade assets, lottery odds, sheer unadulterated good luck etc. I just don't know how valuable that data is in making a judgment about what the best course of action is for any particular team today.

What IS clear, is that you need to have top level talent to compete at that level, and top level talent is overwhelmingly easier to find at the top of the draft than in the middle or bottom.

That said, I don't begrudge anyone for having a distaste for tanking, nor do I think that it is the only viable path forward, but every other path is also fraught with uncertainty.

 

[idiot]

Sure, tanking doesn't guarantee anything. We all know that. But let’s not forget why teams choose to tank. They do it because they believe it’s the best option for them in their situation. I’m not a fan of tanking. It sucks. But I support it if the alternatives are worse. Danny told us he might have to pivot if his big game hunting fails. And that is then what happened. So now, with a roster that has a lot of young players and isn't nearly good enough for the playoffs, we’ve got to stick with this and do everything we can to boost our odds of landing a top prospect. Why? Because it simply makes the most sense in our situation.

I think one of the problems (especially this year) is the unacknowledged assumption that tanking is easy. Sure, everyone agrees it sucks to lose a lot. But we don't often factor in that we're not the only ones playing this game. We tend to assume there's a fairly easy, straightforward path to the bottom. Especially this year, when you have anywhere between 5-7 teams making serious tanking bids, not all teams (or even most) that are trying to do this are going to succeed.

Finishing worst guarantees no better than a 5th pick. 2nd worst guarantees no better than a 6th pick.

And now we have a situation where it's looking more like a 2-player draft than the 6-player draft that we were promised before the season started.

As @Handlogten's Heros lamented a couple of days ago, we're trying hard at losing (losing even more than most teams that have had gotten great players through the draft in the past), yet we're only 5th in odds because the competition is so stiff this year.

You'd think that this all would change the calculations about whether tanking is the best/only thing to do in our situation. But it doesn't seem to for most people.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I think one of the problems (especially this year) is the unacknowledged assumption that tanking is easy. Sure, everyone agrees it sucks to lose a lot. But we don't often factor in that we're not the only ones playing this game. We tend to assume there's a fairly easy, straightforward path to the bottom. Especially this year, when you have anywhere between 5-7 teams making serious tanking bids, not all teams (or even most) that are trying to do this are going to succeed.

Finishing worst guarantees no better than a 5th pick. 2nd worst guarantees no better than a 6th pick.

And now we have a situation where it's looking more like a 2-player draft than the 6-player draft that we were promised before the season started.

As @Handlogten's Heros lamented a couple of days ago, we're trying hard at losing (losing even more than most teams that have had gotten great players through the draft in the past), yet we're only 5th in odds because the competition is so stiff this year.

You'd think that this all would change the calculations about whether tanking is the best/only thing to do in our situation. But it doesn't seem to for most people.

Yeah they have to separate the HUGE benefit of getting lucky in the draft with your team's record as much as possible. Its a conflict of interest. Smoothing the odds just made it less profitable on the top end.

I think there are some ways you could do it within the current system that may dissuade tanking and I have a completely different idea that would be pretty fun but I think these billionaire owners want "control" as that is how they have lived their non-basketball lives. So even this fake "control" will be hard to get from them.

I just want to lean into being the plucky underdog that can make the play in or at least not see us sitting so many guys and pulling the reigns back on guys for the sake of lotto odds.