What's new
By:

How long does a SUCCESSFUL tank need to be?

jazznik said:
I would expect such thorough empiricist as Davide Hume to be way more attentive to easily measurable differences in the draft process over that time before aggregating the results.

It is absolutely useless to look at the draft results of the 60s and 80s looking for the insights for the modern drafting. Back then they were drafting exclusively American players and (almost exclusively) only after they finished college, so the prospects typically were 22. Now most talented drafted players are drafted when they are 18 or 19 and a lot of them have never played in America but come from all kind of countries and playing experience. It is really hard to identify future superstars at that age and we can see that about 20 years ago the number of MVPs selected at the very top of the draft took a huge nosedive with the exception of an athletic freak LeBron, whose athletic dominance was evident way before 18.

Of course, Garnett, Kobe and Giannis would have gone 1st if they were drafted at the age of 22.
Click to expand...
Kind Sir, I made no pronouncements of an analytic nature regarding the significance of these results. I provide historical figures here so that analysts such as yourself can provide robust commentary regarding import. Your judicious attention to the shift in draft age over thy decades is laudable.
 
Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Don’t know how many times I have to say it but this **** is predicated on luck. The draft has almost nothing to do with skill, and mostly making a lucky or unlucky pick. For example the Jazz drafted Stockton because they needed a good backup for Ricky Green. No one knew how good he’d be. Look at the blazers, they drafted two bigs that had all the potential in the world but were derailed by horrific injuries and both times passed on generational talents. So it’s all about that and getting lucky with those ping pong balls. Cavs with LBJ the spurs twice with Duncan and Wemby. If I recall, I don’t think they were supposed to even get close to the first pic in both situations. Tell me if I’m wrong though. We need to 1. Get lucky with the ping pong balls or get lucky and pick the right guy. I do believe we are lucky to be bad in a draft year as good as this. Even outside the top 3 or 4 I think there are 2-3 all stars to be had.

My point is there is no right or wrong time frame for a rebuild other than being patient. In doing so you ensure building a complete team. Just don’t cut corners weather that takes 5 years or 10.
Click to expand...
If a tank does take 10 years, that's A LOT of patience required of the fanbase, easily crossing the line from asking patience to flagrant incompetence and outright fan abuse. Any GM or front office group that subjects a team's fanbase to this level of suffering deserves all the shiite they get in return, including getting their asses fired long before the 10 years are up. It's hard to imagine there's any kind of return that would justify 10 years of intentional losing.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
If a tank does take 10 years, that's A LOT of patience required of the fanbase, easily crossing the line from asking patience to flagrant incompetence and outright fan abuse. Any GM or front office group that subjects a team's fanbase to this level of suffering deserves all the shiite they get in return, including getting their asses fired long before the 10 years are up. It's hard to imagine there's any kind of return that would justify 10 years of intentional losing.
Click to expand...
Not really. Do you think a rebuild is just tanking?
 
Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Not really. Do you think a rebuild is just tanking?
Click to expand...

Whoops, sorry, I didn't catch that your context was rebuilding more broadly. No, a rebuild is more than tanking, whereas tanking is one possible rebuild strategy. I think we'd agree on that.

Even then, requiring 10 years for a rebuild is evidence of gross mismanagement. If you can't figure out how to rebuild a struggling team in significantly less than 10 years, you have no business running a team.
 
According to some, tanking has hunders of shades. According to others, tanking and rebuilding (in a totally friendly and kind way!) are two different things. I think there is a disconnect in terminology somewhere there.

What the Jazz are doing isnt blatant tanking since we just havent skinned the roster nearly as much as we could have. But apparently those who dont see the shades of tanking arent really thinking we are rebuilding (in a totally friendly and kind way!).

I'm confused. Where is the line in the water for some of our aggressive "anti-tankers"? Are rebuilding teams allowed to trade away players and be careful with key players health? Are tankers allowed to retain good players? What are the rules here?
 
New Pro-Jazz Conspiracy Theory:

Now that Luka is in LA the league wants Cooper in Utah to setup a new white one white rivalry between him and Luka.
 
HermanG said:
According to some, tanking has hunders of shades. According to others, tanking and rebuilding (in a totally friendly and kind way!) are two different things. I think there is a disconnect in terminology somewhere there.

What the Jazz are doing isnt blatant tanking since we just havent skinned the roster nearly as much as we could have. But apparently those who dont see the shades of tanking arent really thinking we are rebuilding (in a totally friendly and kind way!).

I'm confused. Where is the line in the water for some of our aggressive "anti-tankers"? Are rebuilding teams allowed to trade away players and be careful with key players health? Are tankers allowed to retain good players? What are the rules here?
Click to expand...
I think its pretty simple. Are the jazz bottom 3 in the league because they cant be the 8th worst team in the league? Or are they bottom 3 because they want to be bottom 3?
I think they are bottom 3 because they want to be bottom 3 because they are tanking. I also think its pretty obvious. We will see Lauri and Kessler missing games soon but will have never seen the "injury" actually happen. Because we are tanking.
 
Schrödinger's Gerbil said:
Whoops, sorry, I didn't catch that your context was rebuilding more broadly. No, a rebuild is more than tanking, whereas tanking is one possible rebuild strategy. I think we'd agree on that.

Even then, requiring 10 years for a rebuild is evidence of gross mismanagement. If you can't figure out how to rebuild a struggling team in significantly less than 10 years, you have no business running a team.
Click to expand...
Took the jazz 10 years to rebuild from the time the jazz moved to Utah and took 4 more years after drafting Stockton and Malone, and considering they were drafted 13th and 16th in back to back drafts that’s bad as lucky as it gets. If not for that, God knows how long they’d be rebuilding from that point it took about eight years to reach the finals.

The Spurs drafted Wemby two years ago almost and they’re about to have their second losing season adding the right players isn’t an exact science. There’s a lot of luck based in the whole equation of rebuilding and building a winner. It happens when it happens. It doesn’t mean it’s a crappy organization, crappy organizations, sure, but as long as an organization is moving forward the build goes well.

There’s 3 stages in a rebuild.

1. Tear down
2. Build up
3. Learn to win.

There’s no quantifying length of time that is considered for a good rebuild, depending on luck and other situations defines how long a rebuild takes, which requires a lot of patience which is why a lot of rebuilds fail because there is no patience.
 
Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Took the jazz 10 years to rebuild from the time the jazz moved to Utah and took 4 more years after drafting Stockton and Malone, and considering they were drafted 13th and 16th in back to back drafts that’s bad as lucky as it gets. If not for that, God knows how long they’d be rebuilding from that point it took about eight years to reach the finals.

The Spurs drafted Wemby two years ago almost and they’re about to have their second losing season adding the right players isn’t an exact science. There’s a lot of luck based in the whole equation of rebuilding and building a winner. It happens when it happens. It doesn’t mean it’s a crappy organization, crappy organizations, sure, but as long as an organization is moving forward the build goes well.

There’s 3 stages in a rebuild.

1. Tear down
2. Build up
3. Learn to win.

There’s no quantifying length of time that is considered for a good rebuild, depending on luck and other situations defines how long a rebuild takes, which requires a lot of patience which is why a lot of rebuilds fail because there is no patience.
Click to expand...
Twice the jazz the jazz had short rebuilds, once because they were impatient. They lost their stars and went out and signed two big money free agents and the other time they fell into Mitchell and Gobert but they didn’t allow time to build a complete team that could have great success in the playoffs. A proper rebuild takes as long as it takes. You must give ample time to build a complete team.
 
idiot said:
I'm becoming more and more convinced that @Handlogten's Heros is not who he claims he is .....

True story (that maybe I told before): when I first started noticing @Handlogten's Heros, I was such an idiot that thought he was perhaps David Locke. Took me a while to persuade myself that he wasn't.
Click to expand...
Who knows???
 
Thee Idiotic Minivan K said:
Took the jazz 10 years to rebuild from the time the jazz moved to Utah and took 4 more years after drafting Stockton and Malone, and considering they were drafted 13th and 16th in back to back drafts that’s bad as lucky as it gets. If not for that, God knows how long they’d be rebuilding from that point it took about eight years to reach the finals.

The Spurs drafted Wemby two years ago almost and they’re about to have their second losing season adding the right players isn’t an exact science. There’s a lot of luck based in the whole equation of rebuilding and building a winner. It happens when it happens. It doesn’t mean it’s a crappy organization, crappy organizations, sure, but as long as an organization is moving forward the build goes well.

There’s 3 stages in a rebuild.

1. Tear down
2. Build up
3. Learn to win.

There’s no quantifying length of time that is considered for a good rebuild, depending on luck and other situations defines how long a rebuild takes, which requires a lot of patience which is why a lot of rebuilds fail because there is no patience.
Click to expand...
This post contains no insults and is sentenced and constructed so well that I suspect they have replaced you with an AI.
 
HermanG said:
I'm confused. Where is the line in the water for some of our aggressive "anti-tankers"? Are rebuilding teams allowed to trade away players and be careful with key players health? Are tankers allowed to retain good players? What are the rules here?
Click to expand...
Tanking is trying lose as much as needed to secure a top pick. The Jazz are clearly tanking. They were tanking the last two seasons as well, but only from the trade deadline on.

If you're trying to get a top pick through losing, you're tanking. Naturally you can be good at it, bad at it or mediocre at it. You can also try and balance other goals at the same time - which might or might not hurt the tanking essence.

Some teams just happen to be absolutely brutally bad and have no hope of improving and end up tanking without much of a choice in the matter. Others actively choose to tank and make multiple decisions to achieve that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top