PDA

View Full Version : What is the Infatuation about "Tanking"



Sixerlover
10-14-2010, 10:00 AM
I feel like we fans that post on PSD are so in love with tanking and it confuses the hell out of me. In the NBA to tank is almost impossible because everyone loses. The fans lose because the team they love is purposefully losing, the owners lose because they lose $$ from the fans that lost hope, the GM's and coaches lose because they will more than likely be fired at seasons end (look at NJ last year) and the players lose because they have 0 job security at the end of the season.

But we make it seem like it's this simple process that will turn into an eventual star being placed on the roster and things back to normal. Why?

Hawkeye15
10-14-2010, 10:08 AM
It irks some fans because teams like the Spurs should not have gotten Duncan (they clearly tanked knowing their fan base could wait a season), or Miami getting the #2 pick 3 years ago, when they played with D Leaguers to end the season. For teams in an honest rebuilding process, this pisses them off big time. The Spurs, and their fans, knew for a fact, that a healthy Robinson was coming back, and they were in the playoffs on that alone, so why not tank it and get as high of a pick as possible. The Heat, knew they had a star who would keep their fan base alive no matter the outcome of their season that year.
Now, these are specific instances of blatant tanking that do deserve to be called out, and have anger towards. But for the most part, tanking doesn't happen to the extreme most want to believe. A team, in the last 2-3 games of a season, may play an unordinary rotation, and may even be trying to jockey for draft position, or to get to a pick # where they won't lose it in a protected pick trade scenario, but for the most part, teams play hard, and try to win every game.

Sorry for the rant. The Duncan and Beasley picks were blatant tank jobs. It couldn't have been more obvious. Outside that, its blow out of proportion

DerekRE_3
10-14-2010, 10:19 AM
I feel like we fans that post on PSD are so in love with tanking and it confuses the hell out of me. In the NBA to tank is almost impossible because everyone loses. The fans lose because the team they love is purposefully losing, the owners lose because they lose $$ from the fans that lost hope, the GM's and coaches lose because they will more than likely be fired at seasons end (look at NJ last year) and the players lose because they have 0 job security at the end of the season.

But we make it seem like it's this simple process that will turn into an eventual star being placed on the roster and things back to normal. Why?

Spurs did it. A decade later I'm sure they don't regret it.

The Kings for several years refused to accept their window had closed. All this did was delay the inevitable, and gave the Kings several undesirable contracts. We weren't bad enough to get great picks so it just delayed the rebuilding process even further.

Then, we blew it up and started REALLY losing and look at that...we have Tyreke Evans now, superstar in the making. A guy who can get people in the seats. Then we lost a shitload again...and look...DeMarcus Cousins, a potential franchise big man. Now the Kings are being called the new Oklahoma City Thunder by some people.

Sixerlover
10-14-2010, 10:22 AM
Spurs did it. A decade later I'm sure they don't regret it.

That's one side of the fence. I can name 20 examples of the other side. Which do you think is normally more likely to happen?

DerekRE_3
10-14-2010, 10:26 AM
That's one side of the fence. I can name 20 examples of the other side. Which do you think is normally more likely to happen?

Well first of all, most teams just don't end up being good enough. There is only one team that wins it all, and lately the same 8 or so team have been winning it. So obviously most teams that blow it up and rebuild are going to fail. But by just trying to retool like the Kings in the mid 2000's, the Pacers, and now the Suns, they are just going to **** themselves for the future. I've seen it before. Most teams get superstars through the draft, and usually that means getting a high draft choice. Not everyone is the Lakers, who can just trade Kwame Brown and picks to get a star.

For the rest of NBA teams, it goes in cycles. You get a good team and then age, injuries, big contracts you can't afford, etc happen. Then it's time to start over. The Nuggets are having that happen right now. So are the Cavs. The Celtics and Spurs will be seeing that happen as well. Fans have to understand that your team isn't going to great every single year. Teams are going to have to blow it up and rebuild eventually. It's better that teams realize when it's time to do that sooner rather than later.

Double_R
10-14-2010, 10:28 AM
I feel like we fans that post on PSD are so in love with tanking and it confuses the hell out of me. In the NBA to tank is almost impossible because everyone loses. The fans lose because the team they love is purposefully losing, the owners lose because they lose $$ from the fans that lost hope, the GM's and coaches lose because they will more than likely be fired at seasons end (look at NJ last year) and the players lose because they have 0 job security at the end of the season.

But we make it seem like it's this simple process that will turn into an eventual star being placed on the roster and things back to normal. Why?

Contracts are guaranteed in the NBA, just ask Grant Hill.

HakeemTheDream
10-14-2010, 10:41 AM
I think that sometimes you gotta lose some to win some. I thought the Houston Rockets should have tanked even though I respect them for putting up a good fight

Hawkeye15
10-14-2010, 10:45 AM
I think that sometimes you gotta lose some to win some. I thought the Houston Rockets should have tanked even though I respect them for putting up a good fight

unlike most GM's, Morey could draft a chicken nugget and it would become a productive player. Not really worried about the Rockets and their drafting

HakeemTheDream
10-14-2010, 10:47 AM
unlike most GM's, Morey could draft a chicken nugget and it would become a productive player. Not really worried about the Rockets and their drafting

That is very true, for example I'm already a fan of Chase Budinger

n83417
10-14-2010, 10:50 AM
Teams get stuck in mediocrity. They are not good enough to make a legitimate playoff push, but not bad enough to get a franchise player in the draft.

Sometimes you have to lose to win.

The must frustrating part of tanking it is when you tank, and don't get the top pick. (Celtics getting the #5 pick, missing out on Durant)

But they had enough pieces to trade for a 5 year title run as opposed to a decade long title run.

So the most infuriating part of tanking it is probably the Draft Lottery.

Avenged
10-14-2010, 10:57 AM
I really don't agree with tanking, but if a team is going to do it, they should not be so obviously about it like some teams some posters have mentioned. I mean there comes a point in time where you have to question pride of certain players if they agree on tanking the season.. Being a Lakers fan, I just cannot imagine our star player tanking the season purposefully.

Hawkeye15
10-14-2010, 10:58 AM
Teams get stuck in mediocrity. They are not good enough to make a legitimate playoff push, but not bad enough to get a franchise player in the draft.

Sometimes you have to lose to win.

The must frustrating part of tanking it is when you tank, and don't get the top pick. (Celtics getting the #5 pick, missing out on Durant)

But they had enough pieces to trade for a 5 year title run as opposed to a decade long title run.

So the most infuriating part of tanking it is probably the Draft Lottery.

I am a Wolves fan. I doubt any fan of any other team has been screwed as much as Wolves fans in this regard.

Hawkeye15
10-14-2010, 10:59 AM
I really don't agree with tanking, but if a team is going to do it, they should not be so obviously about it like some teams some posters have mentioned. I mean there comes a point in time where you have to question pride of certain players if they agree on tanking the season.. Being a Lakers fan, I just cannot imagine our star player tanking the season purposefully.

being a Lakers fan is like being a Yankees fan though. 44 wins is considered a meltdown.

Wade>You
10-14-2010, 11:00 AM
or Miami getting the #2 pick 3 years agoNot at you, but to those fans, cry me a river. Miami picked 5th it's inaugural season and has never won the first pick in the draft while our neighbors land the 2 greatest centers of their generation and Chris Webber (<- which btw they had the least chances to win of any team). When it comes to the draft, Miami's been screwed so many times it's not even funny. Thankfully, the Heat landed the only one pick that did matter and drafted the right player.

As for the OP, tanking is part of becoming better. Yes, everyone loses - at first - but it's the one of the very few ways to land young talent(s) you can build around.

n83417
10-14-2010, 11:01 AM
I really don't agree with tanking, but if a team is going to do it, they should not be so obviously about it like some teams some posters have mentioned. I mean there comes a point in time where you have to question pride of certain players if they agree on tanking the season.. Being a Lakers fan, I just cannot imagine our star player tanking the season purposefully.

I don't agree with it either. But when you have Paul Pierce, and a cast of Good players/Role players, you are good enough for a 7/8 seed every year. That is not good enough, eventually something needs to be done, ya know? Besides, no one can prove when a team is "tanking" it is purely speculation.

Hawkeye15
10-14-2010, 11:03 AM
Not at you, but to those fans, cry me a river. Miami picked 5th it's inaugural season and has never won the first pick in the draft while our neighbors land the 2 greatest centers of their generation and Chris Webber (<- which btw they had the least chances to win of any team). When it comes to the draft, Miami's been screwed so many times it's not even funny. Thankfully, the Heat landed the only one pick that did matter and drafted the right player.

As for the OP, tanking is part of becoming better. Yes, everyone loses - at first - but it's the one of the very few ways to land young talent(s) you can build around.

it still pissed a lot of fans off of actual rebuilding teams that Miami, a championship team 2 years prior, tanked so blatantly that they got the #2 pick.

Avenged
10-14-2010, 11:06 AM
being a Lakers fan is like being a Yankees fan though. 44 wins is considered a meltdown.

A couple years ago, the Lakers had no business being in the playoffs, but they were thanks to Kobe. The roster he had around him didn't necessarily scream "playoffs" let alone 1 win away from eliminating an elite team at that time in the Suns.

Some teams and players just give it their all, and some won't under certain circumstances, I guess. That's the type of thing that separates champions from "quitters" per se.

Avenged
10-14-2010, 11:10 AM
I don't agree with it either. But when you have Paul Pierce, and a cast of Good players/Role players, you are good enough for a 7/8 seed every year. That is not good enough, eventually something needs to be done, ya know? Besides, no one can prove when a team is "tanking" it is purely speculation.

Well, teams can look for a trade or rebuild fairly like so many other teams do.

I just think tanking falls more in question with the players. They're professions paid millions to go on the court and put on a show for their fans. When they do anything less than that like "tanking", I think it's a major slap to the face to the fans, and players "heart" should be questioned.

n83417
10-14-2010, 11:15 AM
Well, teams can look for a trade or rebuild fairly like so many other teams do.

I just think tanking falls more in question with the players. They're professions paid millions to go on the court and put on a show for their fans. When they do anything less than that like "tanking", I think it's a major slap to the face to the fans, and players "heart" should be questioned.

Yeah, but tanking does not necessarily mean losing on purpose. It can be letting veteran players walk, and continuing to get younger. Youth does not win in the NBA. It is rebuilding, and losing becomes acceptable in order to get a top pick and franchise player.

And when the Celtics were "tanking", when Paul Pierce was down for 20 or so games, it was exciting. When Rondo, Tony Allen, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson and Perk were starting, it was exciting basketball. At the time, that appeared to be the future, +Kevin Durant or Oden. I can't speak on behalf of all Celtics fans, but I was excited to see what seemed to be the future. I thought PP missed more games than necessary, but who knows for sure.

Avenged
10-14-2010, 11:19 AM
Yeah, but tanking does not necessarily mean losing on purpose. It can be letting veteran players walk, and continuing to get younger. Youth does not win in the NBA. It is rebuilding, and losing becomes acceptable in order to get a top pick and franchise player.

And when the Celtics were "tanking", when Paul Pierce was down for 20 or so games, it was exciting. When Rondo, Tony Allen, Gerald Green, Al Jefferson and Perk were starting, it was exciting basketball. At the time, that appeared to be the future, +Kevin Durant or Oden.

You see, I wouldn't call that tanking though. That's more of a rebuilding process, in which every team [for the most part] goes through. Tanking to me is purposefully losing.

n83417
10-14-2010, 11:32 AM
You see, I wouldn't call that tanking though. That's more of a rebuilding process, in which every team [for the most part] goes through. Tanking to me is purposefully losing.

Yeah, but it is speculation. Especially around New England, it always comes up. And my main point was when Pierce went down, and Boston lost like 18 straight. People said Pierce had no business being down that long.

I don't agree with tanking, but I would rather my team make it clear that being a bottom playoff seed every year and getting knocked out in the first round is unacceptable. I would rather see my team improve, and try to become elite by any means necessary.

Hellcrooner
10-14-2010, 11:32 AM
thre is only ONE way to avoid tanking. ( wich by the wasy solves another problem wih is the downard of quality for having too many franchises compared to the 80s for example) and yet another one the problm of relocating and leaving a town withouth team.

Do what leagues of several sports do in the rest of the world.

Have vertical Divisions.

For example 1st nba division with 20 teams 3nd division with 20 teams 3rd division with 20 teams. 4th division with 20 teasm .

What happens then?

the bottom 3 teams of first division one year will play in the second division next year , the first three of second division will play in first division next year the bottom three of seoncd division go down to third division next year and are replaced by the top3 of third division and so on.

Obviously the draft would hav e to change.

1st round for the Second division with the teams that went up hainvg th e most balls to increase their quality for their new challenge in first division, rest of te round in inverse order .
2nd round for the ones in first division the ones that went down get the LAST three picks as a punishment
3rd round ofor the ones that just went up to second division and the ones on third division balh blah

and so on, 6 rounds.

Relegation and promotion.
No tanking AT aLL.

Kakaroach
10-14-2010, 12:10 PM
Better players, thats how simple is it. Having a top 5 pick is much more appealing than having one of the last picks in the lottery.

Sixerlover
10-14-2010, 12:26 PM
^ Obviously. But do you as a fan agree wit Jerry Sloan sitting Deron Williams out 25 of the last 30 games to have a better "shot" at Harrison Barnes? Or Sloan telling Okur + Jefferson not to play their hardest so they lose.

I think people are missing the point. I have no problem with bad teams being bad. That's life, and competitive sports. But for a team to not play to win, or for a coach to coach for a loss is terrible. And the majority of the time it doesn't work anyway. And we fans love to tell a trade talent for young players + pick so that we can suck, but never look at it from a GM's persepctive or even a players.

Just the random rant of the day :)

Sadds The Gr8
10-14-2010, 12:30 PM
because organizations and some fans would rather risk 2-4 years of having a bad team, then drafting a future star and having 7+ years with a good team. it is very risky though.

Korman12
10-14-2010, 12:42 PM
Because it's basketball. It only takes one player to make a team relevant and to bring out of the basement. And once you become relevant, the market becomes more open, and bringing in a second or third player becomes that much easier.

It's a superstar sport.

jerseybostonian
10-14-2010, 12:51 PM
Generally when a team tanks, the fans are rooting for them to tank. What I like about the lottery is that teams who want to tank can still do it, but there is no guarantee that it will work. It's a way of potentially punishing teams who ruin competitive balance, but also rewarding teams who want to get better.

Byronicle
10-14-2010, 12:59 PM
whether people like it or not

if you're team could realistically get a very high draft pick for a very good player that can guarantee a star, you all will be UP for TANKING

and ANY team would tank just for the chance to get that star player.

people just got to stop complaining in this world and if other teams don't like it, then rebuild the "morally" right way.

Peace