What's new
By:
Filters

Culture of winning or tank?

Win or tank?

  • Total voters
    87
MT Steve said:
Meh.

You said it yourself that Ainge is doing what he did with the Celtics. He rebuilt the Celtics into title contenders twice, and in neither case did he ever rely on a drafted player from the Celtics being bad.
Click to expand...
The Celtics WERE BAD, they got to 25 wins that year. They got Smart with that pick. But they could have gotten better talent too. But they were bad.
 
MT Steve said:
That isn't tanking at all. He got a ****load of young players and other teams picks.

Tanking is trying to be bad so that your OWN draft pick is terrible.
Click to expand...
Who is trying to be bad? Players and the coach aren't They're doing their best to win. It's the GM that sets them on the course.
 
Ben10 said:
Ok so In reverse what is winning couture? To me it is playing the best players you have and trying to complete. As long as the Jazz are playing hard and competitive that is what is important. Tanking is when you have better players sitting on the bench and you just roll the ball out with young guys and don’t care about the outcome. At least that’s the difference in my mind.
That’s why I think some of the bad tanking teams stay bad.
Click to expand...
You get bad, get good players, then with those players you start to win. It's been proven that you can be bad, then be really really good.
 
ONE LOVE said:
The Celtics WERE BAD, they got to 25 wins that year. They got Smart with that pick. But they could have gotten better talent too. But they were bad.
Click to expand...
I think you just don't know what tanking is honestly.

Being bad in and of itself is not tanking, dude. Blowing it up because the current roster ain't it is also not tanking.

The Celtics weren't intentionally trying to be bad for a better pick - they were rebuilding. And neither of their rebuilds even got them a star in the draft from their own picks being high.
 
I'll repost this here for convenience:

GSW were BAD for at least 4 straight years before they start winning and won the NBA Finals.

2008/09: 29 - 53 - Drafted Steph Curry
2009/10: 26 - 56
2010/11: 36 - 46 - Drafted Klay Thompson
2011/12: 23 - 43 - Drafted Harrison Barnes & Draymond Green
2012/13: 47 - 35
2013/14: 51 - 31
2014/15: 67 - 15 - Won NBA Finals
 
MT Steve said:
I think you just don't know what tanking is honestly.

Being bad in and of itself is not tanking, dude. Blowing it up because the current roster ain't it is also not tanking.

The Celtics weren't intentionally trying to be bad for a better pick - they were rebuilding. And neither of their rebuilds even got them a star in the draft from their own picks being high.
Click to expand...
Then give me an example of players and coach that intentionally tries to lose to tank then.
 
ONE LOVE said:
Then who are you saying are tanking?
Click to expand...
I'm saying tanking is when the front office deliberately puts the team on a course of losing for the purpose of having their draft pick be better.

Blowing it up because the current roster ain't it for young players and a ****load of other team's picks is not that. It makes the team worse in the short-term, but gives them a ton of assets and pathways to improve in the near future, even if you completely ignore their own draft pick being good due to them being temporarily bad.

Like, even if the Jazz didn't own their own 2023 pick, I'd still say what Ainge did was absolutely correct.
 
idiot said:
By the way, I'd argue that it's both math and randomness. Math and randomness aren't opposites. Math helps us understand the type of randomness at play, but there sure is a whole bunch of randomness involved in who ends up with Wemby or Scoot.
Click to expand...
Randomness suggests there is no order or pattern… the math says otherwise. The actual homework you did showed the teams that landed difference makers were more likely in the bottom 2-3… why is that? Is it random… or is it because their odds at landing top 4 are better? It’s not random… it’s math.

It’s not just 1 or 2… you really want to be top 5…
 
ONE LOVE said:
I'll repost this here for convenience:

GSW were BAD for at least 4 straight years before they start winning and won the NBA Finals.

2008/09: 29 - 53 - Drafted Steph Curry
2009/10: 26 - 56
2010/11: 36 - 46 - Drafted Klay Thompson
2011/12: 23 - 43 - Drafted Harrison Barnes & Draymond Green
2012/13: 47 - 35
2013/14: 51 - 31
2014/15: 67 - 15 - Won NBA Finals
Click to expand...
Do you know how upset most of the advocates of "tanking" on here would be if we drafted 7th, 11th, or 8th like the Warriors did those years?

You're using a different conception of tanking than almost everyone else here. As @MT Steve says, you're mistaking just the natural rise and fall of team timelines with "tanking" (which is doing everything possible to ensure a top 3 or at least top 5 pick).
 
MT Steve said:
You didn't have to ask the same question twice. Unlike you, I don't need things repeated multiple times to me.

Bojan is 33 years old. We're rebuilding. Ainge thinks the way Olynyk plays is better for the development of the younger players on our new roster.
Click to expand...
LOL .. if you don't think trading away Bojan (for not even a 2nd round pick) is a tanking move then I don't know what else to say bro. Good day to you.
 
ONE LOVE said:
LOL .. if you don't think trading away Bojan is a tanking move then I don't know what else to say bro. Good day to you.
Click to expand...
Even if the Jazz didn't have their own pick, I think Ainge still would have made this trade. Trading away a 33 year old who you don't think will help the new team grow well for a player who you think will just makes sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top