there's no such thing as "tanking" if you're saying that means to lose on purpose, to give up. the nets didn't tank, they just suck. tell the nets players they were tanking and they would be furious at you. you can't actually tell coaches and players to lose, on purpose, because that would be a humiliation to the sport and would piss everyone off. if it was made public that teams were intentionally lost, it would be huge news and everyone would destroy them for it. people in sports hate ppl who lose on purpose because it makes a joke of the game. you see how much crap lebron got for supposedly giving up and that was with little evidence. imagine how ppl would react if it was actually confirmed. so if by tanking you actually mean REBUILDING, ie. trading all the vets for young players, then you should realize that it's already begun to happen.
Ha Ha you are sopt on about Daryl Moron. But since 2008 T.Evans, Love, Westbrook, Cousins are potental superstars too. Curry, Gordon and Lopez arent too bad either.
For the record, I wasn't arguing a point so much as answering a question/request by JCDenton. However, in carrying out that request, I uncovered some pretty big picture information: A team's success isn't indicated by how many top 10, top 5, or to a lesser degree how many #1 draft picks a team has. It seems like people get entirely too wrapped up in how many lottery players a team has or will have and quickly associate that with winning percentage. But this is strong evidence that supports otherwise. Prove it. I read a lot from posters that don't believe Houston can 'attract' superstars. But that's extremely difficult to prove, isn't it? Anything I've seen on the matter is only speculation. We may not know of any superstars that have come out and said, "I wanna play for Houston." But that is far different from saying that no superstars want to play in Houston. So making this a foundation for the argument pro-tanking seems like a very poor decision. Until proven otherwise, Houston has the same chance of landing a superstsar player as any other team, whether it be trading for him or signing him as a free agent. This is actually a good strategy to take from a business perspective as it maintains a paying-fanbase, as well. And I believe this is what DM has been saying his strategy has been, to try to trade for a superstar while trying to develop one until we're able to trade for one. I agree that in order to become a true title contender that the Rockets will likely need to break the team up, but not to the point in which they are simply horrible. Instead, it would be broken up for a trade for a superstar. Again, I'm getting this feeling that you believe that the ONLY way to become a contender is to be "simply really horrible" to get a high draft pick. But I haven't seen any strong supporting evidence to back that up, historically or otherwise. It's not a for-sure thing, requires luck and is a painful process. Yeah, that can be said for both tanking and for retooling/active-rebuilding (which is what we're doing). The chances of a championship are low no matter which path you take. Luck will always play into a team's chances at winning it all. Though active-rebuilding is painful, it is a more sound business plan, leads to more wins in the interim and is therefore less painful for the owner and for the fans. That is a very cool post. I didn't know there were so many teams that traded up in the draft, and so consistently every year. But yeah, looking back on it, it makes sense. At any rate, it proves that we don't need to tank to get that high draft pick if that's what we're after. All we need is a middle-high pick (ours or otherwise) and then we should be able to trade up into the top 3, as has happened over the last 12 years. In fact, this proves that suffering through a terrible season IS NOT NECESSARY. Shrewd management is about the only necessary requirement for getting that franchise player.
The first two parts go into detail that it requires a certain caliber of player to win a title. It's why i always label good to superstar players at 1st tier, 2nd tier, or 3rd tier. Here are their links: http://www.nbadraft.net/mcchesney001.html http://www.nbadraft.net/mcchesney002.html
With all these injuries, we probably do need to tank. or....we can just add the two problems together. Imagine Yao on this.... Spoiler
The Rockets will need to go 33-9 to win 50 games, which is probably the minimum necessary to make the playoffs. Even if they could squeak in with 48 victories, that means closing out the season on a 31-11 run. It's time to trade the veterans, play the youngsters, and start counting ping pong balls. Every meaningless victory only hurts our draft position.
The players on this roster won't tank. They play hard every game. It's time to trade and upgrade our team, preferably with a big-man, but I cannot see these guys tanking.
No matter how many times this myth is refuted, it still gets mentioned. Tanking does not mean deliberately losing games, tanking means trading your veterans (usually for picks) and playing the youngsters.
Rockets are moving along at a good pace. In 2 weeks, they have moved 2 spots to the 12th draft pick from the 14th pick. They are 0.5 a game behind from tieing the 9th seed with Philadelphia, Charlotte, and Golden State.
I'm actually all for "Developing our young players" right now. But absolutely no thought went behind this thread. 1 star.
i hear what ure sayin' man. hard times to be a rocket fan right now. truth to be told even if big yao wasn't injured we wouldn't be going anywhere either. i think the collapse began when ariza was traded. courtney lee is great but he is no starter material like ariza is. now tanking? ... I cant say bro. I just want Carmelo. Its Carmelo or bust.
