PDA

View Full Version : Would you rather have a lottery team or a playoff failure?



Chill_Will_24
08-31-2012, 06:20 PM
Simple question. A debate i was having with a misguided individual made me wonder what most fans think.

Some fans would rather watch their team in the playoffs no matter how well they do. Some fans would rather their team not rush and draft better players in hopes of higher success.

Would you rather have your team rebuild patiently and stockpile assets and talent or would you rather your team be a first round failure every year and feel proud that they at least made the playoffs?

EDIT: Not intended to take shot at any team. Just wondering what fans would rather see from their team. I would expect smart fans would rather their team be patient so they can strike gold. Casual fans might take a different stance and rather their team make the playoffs so that they can feel good about their team.

HarryPotter
08-31-2012, 06:30 PM
I think the whole tank to rebuild thing vs. mediocre treadmill is a false dichotomy. There are so many other factors, and other stages. Ideally, I'd want neither.

If you're looking at a team that's a playoff failure in a given year, you also have to look at what stage the players, and team, are in their careers to assess the future. Is it a bunch of young players who failed in the playoffs but are projected to get better as they develop (OKC)? Is a it a new team that was just put together and needs to build chemistry (like the first year Miami superfriends got together and failed)?

And why would a team want to enter the lottery and rebuild if it can just reload (like the Lakers keep doing) instead of tanking?

Going the let's tank to get a lottery pick route is a fool's mission. It works once in a blue moon if you get really lucky, like OKC rebuilding thru the draft. But you're much more likely to develop a losing culture and whichever big prospect you draft will want to leave your team. Most championship teams are not teams that won because they retained some Number 1 draft pick. The vast majority of those #1 draft picks leave their drafting team and win rings elsewhere, and that's assuming your lottery pick isn't a bust.

Chill_Will_24
08-31-2012, 06:35 PM
I think the whole tank to rebuild thing vs. mediocre treadmill is a false dichotomy. There are so many other factors, and other stages. Ideally, I'd want neither.

If you're looking at a team that's a playoff failure in a given year, you also have to look at what stage the players, and team, are in their careers to assess the future. Is it a bunch of young players who failed in the playoffs but are projected to get better as they develop (OKC)? Is a it a new team that was just put together and needs to build chemistry (like the first year Miami superfriends got together and failed)?

And why would a team want to enter the lottery and rebuild if it can just reload (like the Lakers keep doing) instead of tanking?

Going the let's tank to get a lottery pick route is a fool's mission. It works once in a blue moon if you get really lucky, like OKC rebuilding thru the draft. But you're much more likely to develop a losing culture and whichever big prospect you draft will want to leave your team. Most championship teams are not teams that won because they retained some Number 1 draft pick. The vast majority of those #1 draft picks leave their drafting team and win rings elsewhere, and that's assuming your lottery pick isn't a bust.

Ideally... but life is not ideal. I think you understood the purpose of the question Mr. Potter (in my Snape voice).

seikou8
08-31-2012, 06:49 PM
this a net vs knicks thread again but sorry i would be in playoffs no matter what i mean that is why we watch because we love basketball and want our team to win.unless your getting a sure thing in draft then maybe if not you hope your team makes the playoffs

NYKnicksAllDay
08-31-2012, 06:51 PM
this a net vs knicks thread again but sorry i would be in playoffs no matter what i mean that is why we watch because we love basketball and want our team to win.unless your getting a sure thing in draft then maybe if not you hope your team makes the

:confused: how is this Knicks vs. Nets?

Chronz
08-31-2012, 06:52 PM
Hca

seikou8
08-31-2012, 06:54 PM
:confused: how is this Knicks vs. Nets?

nets have been a lottery team last 3 years and knicks have playoff failure the last two years. i know we have had injures but still

ATX
08-31-2012, 06:58 PM
I think the whole tank to rebuild thing vs. mediocre treadmill is a false dichotomy. There are so many other factors, and other stages. Ideally, I'd want neither.

If you're looking at a team that's a playoff failure in a given year, you also have to look at what stage the players, and team, are in their careers to assess the future. Is it a bunch of young players who failed in the playoffs but are projected to get better as they develop (OKC)? Is a it a new team that was just put together and needs to build chemistry (like the first year Miami superfriends got together and failed)?

And why would a team want to enter the lottery and rebuild if it can just reload (like the Lakers keep doing) instead of tanking?

Going the let's tank to get a lottery pick route is a fool's mission. It works once in a blue moon if you get really lucky, like OKC rebuilding thru the draft. But you're much more likely to develop a losing culture and whichever big prospect you draft will want to leave your team. Most championship teams are not teams that won because they retained some Number 1 draft pick. The vast majority of those #1 draft picks leave their drafting team and win rings elsewhere, and that's assuming your lottery pick isn't a bust.

Nice post.

Both situations are unfortunate, but I'd rather my team be patient and stockpile assets than to be a first round failure every year. Titles are all that truly matter.

HarryPotter
08-31-2012, 06:58 PM
EDIT: Not intended to take shot at any team. Just wondering what fans would rather see from their team. I would expect smart fans would rather their team be patient so they can strike gold. Casual fans might take a different stance and rather their team make the playoffs so that they can feel good about their team.

That sounds like you've already made up your mind. Since you consider one set of fans "smart" and the other not.

The problem is that even if you "strike gold", you probably don't get to keep the gold. So in both scenarios, the the team loses and doesn't end up with a ring. The first scenario ends up with the team being first round fodder, the second scenario ends up with the team being a farm system for big market competitors. Neither set of fan choices are "smart."

NO drafted CP3, he's on the Clips.
Denver drafted Melo, he's on the Knicks.
Cleveland drafted Lebron, he's on the Heat.
Orlando drafted Dwight, he's on the Lakers.
Utah drafted Deron Williams, he's on the Nets.

Most big prospects ("struck gold") will want to leave the team that drafted them, because those teams were lottery teams that needed to suck to be able to draft them. So, of course, they don't want to stay on a team that was bad enough to be in the lottery. They end up going to big market teams, where they get more media exposure and endorsement money, as well as better competitive teams.

Big market teams never really have to tank or rebuild, they just reload by stealing small market team's young prospects. So any team that tanks to "strike gold", is just serving as a farm system for the big market teams. Their fans that like doing that aren't "smart" as you claim they are.

Both sets of fans in your two scenarios lose out. Look at Toronto, who's been in and out of the lottery so much, and all their big draft prospects, like Bosh, leave the moment they can. "Striking gold" sucks for them.

The stigma of creating a losing culture outweighs questionable benefits of "striking gold". The teams in the second scenario you describe of "striking gold", will only turn into the first scenario of "first round exits" until the big draft prospects leaves, and then they turn into the second scenario again (e.g., First round exit Orlando Magic after striking gold with Dwight Howard).

The only way out is to build a winning reloading culture that never has to tank to go into the lottery, and is not stuck with first round exits. It helps to attain this status by being a big market (like the Lakers).

Raps18-19 Champ
08-31-2012, 07:01 PM
Depends where in the lottery.

lookie8
08-31-2012, 07:04 PM
Truly depends on the situation and the makeup of the team

GiantsSwaGG
08-31-2012, 07:07 PM
Stupid thread

lookie8
08-31-2012, 07:13 PM
Stupid thread

It's a valid question that is brought up several times a year

Chill_Will_24
08-31-2012, 07:30 PM
Stupid thread

:laugh2: What a surprise...

Chill_Will_24
08-31-2012, 07:34 PM
That sounds like you've already made up your mind. Since you consider one set of fans "smart" and the other not.

The problem is that even if you "strike gold", you probably don't get to keep the gold. So in both scenarios, the the team loses and doesn't end up with a ring. The first scenario ends up with the team being first round fodder, the second scenario ends up with the team being a farm system for big market competitors. Neither set of fan choices are "smart."

NO drafted CP3, he's on the Clips.
Denver drafted Melo, he's on the Knicks.
Cleveland drafted Lebron, he's on the Heat.
Orlando drafted Dwight, he's on the Lakers.
Utah drafted Deron Williams, he's on the Nets.

Most big prospects ("struck gold") will want to leave the team that drafted them, because those teams were lottery teams that needed to suck to be able to draft them. So, of course, they don't want to stay on a team that was bad enough to be in the lottery. They end up going to big market teams, where they get more media exposure and endorsement money, as well as better competitive teams.

Big market teams never really have to tank or rebuild, they just reload by stealing small market team's young prospects. So any team that tanks to "strike gold", is just serving as a farm system for the big market teams. Their fans that like doing that aren't "smart" as you claim they are.

Both sets of fans in your two scenarios lose out. Look at Toronto, who's been in and out of the lottery so much, and all their big draft prospects, like Bosh, leave the moment they can. "Striking gold" sucks for them.

The stigma of creating a losing culture outweighs questionable benefits of "striking gold". The teams in the second scenario you describe of "striking gold", will only turn into the first scenario of "first round exits" until the big draft prospects leaves, and then they turn into the second scenario again (e.g., First round exit Orlando Magic after striking gold with Dwight Howard).

The only way out is to build a winning reloading culture that never has to tank to go into the lottery, and is not stuck with first round exits. It helps to attain this status by being a big market (like the Lakers).

By "strike gold" i am referring to winning. Getting as far as possible in the playoffs and hopefully winning it all.

The purpose of sports is to win! Anyone that is content with making the playoffs just to see their teams get swept has a loser's mentality.

EDUTEXANS
08-31-2012, 07:38 PM
How many times I asked this question to myself, it's a great question and it's a good thread. Personally I don't want to lose so I'd hate to tank, but if you take the Rockets as an example, three years in a row falling one spot short of the playoffs and getting the last pick in the lottery, it's brutal. So it depends on how high in the lottery you can get. But I would want my team in the playoffs every year, no matter what, but in the Rockets' I think they should tank (what they've already done trading the veterans for picks and more young guys) this year.

Jeff559
08-31-2012, 07:45 PM
For a young team on the rise, playoff experience and confidence are much more beneficial than a lottery pick. A 7 or 8 seed full of aging vets that aren't going anywhere I would take a lottery pick.

topdog
08-31-2012, 07:46 PM
It depends on what you're faced with. As a Wolves fan, I saw 8 straight years of 1st round playoff exits. At that point, something's got to change. It changed for the better for one year, but then blew up.

Having a playoff team is preferred because you get to see more regular season wins, but every team eventually has to go down to move up and the goal should always be to win a championship.

ATX
08-31-2012, 07:47 PM
By "strike gold" i am referring to winning. Getting as far as possible in the playoffs and hopefully winning it all.

The purpose of sports is to win! Anyone that is content with making the playoffs just to see their teams get swept has a loser's mentality.

I wouldn't go as far to say a losers mentality. There is always that cinderella story fans go after. Making the playoffs isn't as big of a deal in the NBA than say the NFL, but still there is always that wishful thinking which is fun, though often delusional.


How many times I asked this question to myself, it's a great question and it's a good thread. Personally I don't want to lose so I'd hate to tank, but if you take the Rockets as an example, three years in a row falling one spot short of the playoffs and getting the last pick in the lottery, it's brutal. So it depends on how high in the lottery you can get. But I would want my team in the playoffs every year, no matter what, but in the Rockets' I think they should tank (what they've already done trading the veterans for picks and more young guys) this year.

Good commentary from a fan with appropriate perspective in regards to the topic. It all depends on the situation, difficult question to answer concretely.

More-Than-Most
08-31-2012, 07:48 PM
Great thread....Great question... Being a sixer fan who was stuck in mediocrity its the top pick and its not close. In a league with super teams lottery is the best route to go so maybe you can build a team like the Thunder.

Chill_Will_24
08-31-2012, 07:56 PM
If a had the choice between getting swept by the first seeded team and getting the 5th pick.. ill take the pick every time.

blastmasta26
08-31-2012, 08:03 PM
HarryPotter (lol) brings up a good argument. Although being in the lottery can provide a team a great player to build around and facilitate rebuilding, we are seeing a huge trend of stars leaving their original teams via FA or trade demands.

But how many teams are continual first round exits and then become contenders later on? It's tougher to pull off the transition from first round contender to championship contender because the team will most likely be working with limited assets to improve the team with whereas a team that enters the lottery can draft a cornerstone player and build around them with picks and cap space.

Neither situation is that effective at building contenders, but rebuilding (if done correctly) is my preference.

Looking at some recent examples:
Heat - Won the title in '06, then became pretty much a first round playoff team until gutting the team except for Wade and bringing along LeBron and Bosh. Good example of a playoff team becoming a contender, although the #2 pick from the year Wade went down paralleled the Spurs winning the lottery when David Robinson was injured.

Mavs - Perennial playoff team until winning it all in '11, thanks to a nice collection of talent around Dirk and perhaps a bit of overachieving (or underachieving from LeBron in the Finals). A playoff team to contender case, but I'm not sure the Mavs were a playoff "failure" before then.

Celtics - Generally a first round team with Pierce, then became a lottery team for two years until making the trades that landed them KG and Ray Allen. A playoff team that didn't become a contender until it struggled and made a huge move.

Lakers - I don't know if I even can count the Lakers in this conversation with some of the trades they have been able to pull off. They have always been a post season team under Kobe, but were a failure post-Shaq and pre-Gasol.

Spurs - Also tough to classify, Duncan, Parker, and Ginobili were all draft picks but no one has ever left because of their winning culture. I'd say they don't fall into either category.

Thunder - The archetype for building through the draft with Durant, Harden, Westbrook, and Ibaka all coming from their own picks. Not a championship team yet, but certainly a contender.

Playoff to contender - Heat, Mavs, Lakers
Lottery to contender - Celtics, Thunder

Teams have reached success through both methods, but all of these teams had a drafted superstar to build around. That is where the lottery comes into play, you need a superstar if you want anything to happen and that is what teams look to rebuild for.

EDIT: Didn't realize the poll option was "first round swept team" lol, that tilts the argument much more towards lottery teams then. Because a first round sweep doesn't really create a winning culture either.

EasternStar
08-31-2012, 08:14 PM
If a team like Charlotte, I say lottery all the way Baby!

JOhnnyTHaJet
08-31-2012, 08:21 PM
If you have a chance to make your team better, tank away. It makes ZERO sense to keep losing in the playoffs year in and year out while keeping the same team.

What does losing in the first round prove? That you made it? Isnt every sport about attaining the ultimate goal?

IndyRealist
08-31-2012, 09:31 PM
The "treadmill of mediocrity" is a false notion perpetuated by owners looking to save money. Teams do not magically jump from bottom 5 to championship contenders due to draft picks. The teams that become contenders are playoff teams (or borderline playoffs) that make smart trades and free agent acquisitions. Fact: since the institution of the lottery, only three #1 picks have won championships with the teams that drafted them: Hakeem, Duncan, and Robinson.

And which teams are playoff contenders this year? Nuggets, Lakers, Celtics, Heat, Nets and Knicks are all built through trades. The Pacers did not draft 2 of their 5 starters, and only 1 non-rookie on their bench was drafted by them. Clippers have what, 2 non-rookies on their team they drafted? Out of the likely playoff teams only the Spurs and Thunder can really say that they drafted their cores, and last time I checked the Spurs still have Popovich and no one's kidnapped Sam Presti. Unless your team is VERY good at drafting, building through the draft is a crap shoot.

So why do teams tank? Cheap labor. Good veterans make a lot of money, so shipping them all out for expirings and draft picks keeps payroll low. Those teams are hoping to blindly find a decent player in the draft and use him on the cheap for four years to trick fans into coming into the arena and watching on tv. Because the point of sports isn't winning, despite what fans believe. The point of sports is to make money. The reality is that there's a minimum payroll and a luxury tax, so when push comes shove is your team at the tax or trading away salary? (This obviously excludes the Lakers/Bulls/Knicks, who are in such big markets that they make money no matter what their payroll is).

JasonJohnHorn
08-31-2012, 09:42 PM
At the end of the season the only difference between last season's Knicks and last seasons Nets, it the Nets got a higher draft pick (which they used to land Gerald Wallace).

A first-round sweep. That's hard to swallow. I'd rather not be in the playoffs than be on the playoffs and not compete.

Longhornfan1234
08-31-2012, 10:17 PM
this a netvs knicks thread again but sorry i would be in playoffs no matter what i mean that is why we watch because we love basketball and want our team to win.unless your getting a sure thing in draft then maybe if not you hope your team makes the playoffs


Insecure fan.

passittome
09-01-2012, 09:06 PM
Some fans would rather watch their team in the playoffs no matter how well they do. Some fans would rather their team not rush and draft better players in hopes of higher success.

Would you rather have your team rebuild patiently and stockpile assets and talent or would you rather your team be a first round failure every year and feel proud that they at least made the playoffs?


question seems a little skewed toward rebuilding team. "rebuild patiently and stockpile assets" that gives the lottery team advantage of having assets.Is the lottery team a losing culture? Has the lottery team had a history of drafting busts? How long has it been since the lottery team has reached the playoffs? Are they a big or small market team? Is the owner as patient as the fans? Does the first round failure team have assets? Was there a playoff drought before they got swept in the first round? Did they get swept in the first round? Was there a significant injury to the losing playoff team?

#Shumpert Up
09-01-2012, 10:04 PM
always a playoff team anything can happen

IndyRealist
09-01-2012, 10:39 PM
Playing for the lottery breeds a culture of losing. You end up having to jettison all of those players with ingrained bad habits and gain virtually nothing for those lost years.

So, you can have a model like the Spurs and commit to winning while using shrewd trades and drafting to set yourself up for the future. Or you can perpetually trade away your decent players for nothing, consistently be in the top 8 in the lottery, and go nowhere for half a decade or more (sorry Bobcats). Then when you finally do land a star player with all those lottery picks, he bolts for another team because you're "not committed to winning."

On one hand you build a loyal fanbase and an organization that free agents are attracted to, or you can have a laughingstock of a management team that perpetually loses money due to poor attendance and TV viewership, and is constantly threatened with relocation, or worse, contraction.

seikou8
09-01-2012, 10:48 PM
Insecure fan.

no i am not the op and giants fan 1 were having discuss on this in the eddy curry thread but you would know a insesure fan over post on forum right:rolleyes:

Knicks21
09-01-2012, 11:04 PM
:confused: how is this Knicks vs. Nets?

Chill Will was going at it in another thread, its nets vs knicks.

Losoway
09-01-2012, 11:16 PM
lottery team . at least you can rebuild .

i feel like being a team that constantly exits the first round . is like dating a hot chick that wont let you get to third base

Sinestro
09-01-2012, 11:50 PM
How the question was stated was pretty biased. There are positives to both scenarios. Sure you can tank and strike gold or you can tank and pick the next Darko, Thabeet or countless other lottery pick players who suck. A top pick is never guaranteed to net you a player of that value and so you could have a team suck for 5-6 years trying to get that impact player and they may always be one pick too late to get him. On top of that a small market team can't afford to tank for countless years in hope of the next Duncan or LeBron. So there is never a "correct" answer to this question

Chill_Will_24
09-01-2012, 11:50 PM
Chill Will was going at it in another thread, its nets vs knicks.

Stop being so insecure. That thread gave me the idea and i wanted to explore whether more fans share my train of thought or whether they lean the other way.

Simple question. Which situation is better?

-Getting mocked because your team hasn't made the playoffs in a long time but feeling optimistic because you have stock piled assets and talent for the future.

OR

-Seeing your team get swept in the playoffs but feeling the pride of knowing your team made the post season and gave you bragging rights over the sorry teams of the league.

Stop getting all butt hurt (i know that is difficult for Knicks fans). This is not about the Nets or the Knicks or any particular team for that matter.

passittome
09-02-2012, 02:24 PM
but in this scenario the playoff team has 0 chance. what about this past years 76ers? we KNEW they would be swept/first round exit, then d.rose goes down. we KNEW that mavs would beat gsw. we KNEW that spurs would beat grizzlies. in the playoffs anything can happen but in this thread in the playoffs the same team always loses. ie there is NO ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT for one team while there is potentially significant improvement for the other.

TheBatchelor213
09-02-2012, 03:12 PM
Playoffs all day for many reasons.

Chill_Will_24
09-02-2012, 03:28 PM
Playoffs all day for many reasons.

Such as?

passittome
09-02-2012, 03:38 PM
Such as?

76ers vs bulls 2012
grizzlies vs spurs 2011
warriors vs mavs 2007

anything can happen in the playoffs

JOhnnyTHaJet
09-02-2012, 03:41 PM
76ers vs bulls 2012
grizzlies vs spurs 2011
warriors vs mavs 2007

anything can happen in the playoffs

You didn't read the question correctly, it says would you rather be a playoff team that always gets knocked out in the 1st round or a rebuilding team.

Chill_Will_24
09-02-2012, 03:51 PM
You didn't read the question correctly, it says would you rather be a playoff team that always gets knocked out in the 1st round or a rebuilding team.

Thank you. As always you and i are on the same page.

JOhnnyTHaJet
09-02-2012, 03:57 PM
Thank you. As always you and i are on the same page.

No problem, I think the people who voted for playoff team didn't read your initial post, the answer is fairly obvious.

passittome
09-02-2012, 04:12 PM
yes the premise is set that the playoff team can never get out of the first while the lottery team has unlimited potential. it's a biased question of course it's skewed toward one answer, but in reality the 'anything can happen in the playoffs' should be taken into consideration. and answered as such.

as i'm reading it, the question is would you rather have a team that can't improve or a team that can? thats an obvious answer. but a team that makes a playoffs can improve. the chance of a one breakthrough year can be 'turning the corner' and help the team improve to a winning mindset, we belong deeper in the playoffs etc. cirumstances that are nullified with the op's question.

todu82
09-02-2012, 10:19 PM
Lottery team for me, at least that way you'd get a lottery level player in the draft.