its too late to tank. thanks to going 7-3 in our last 10. we are too far ahead of teams like the clippers, nets, bucks, and pistons. those are the teams we could've leapfrogged for lotto balls before going 7-3. thats not even counting the lotto powerhouses like kings, wolves, wizards, raptors, cavs. if we start tanking now, best we could do is probably 10th pick. if we try for the playoffs and miss we might land 14th pick again. not a big difference there considering it a really weak draft. we would've needed to be top 7 to get a difference maker. since there is no real help coming from the draft, i'd rather just try to make the playoffs. i know this is the opposite of what i've been saying all season, since i don't see the point of another first round exit, but the team has gone past the point of no return. the worst ending to the season is no playoffs and a late pick.
I've been against the notion of "tanking" for a high draft pick (i.e. franchise player) for a long time.... As it's already been pointed out, the idea, if you're looking for a high draft pick (lottery pick, preferably one of the top five picks), then the plan should have began with the first tip of the first game of the season...... The NBA instituted its draft lottery precisely to stop teams from doing what some of us are suggesting (primarily because of what the Rockets did back in the 1983-84 season, intentionally losing most of their last 20 or so games in order to get a high draft pick (which turned into Hakeem Olajuwon)..... ...a high draft pick is calculated by a franchise as a move that will pay dividends in the near future and beyond. The Rockets have been in more of a "win now" mode (even with the massive roster upheaval of the past two or three seasons)—the priority has always been on winning as many games, and winning as often, as the team can manage, no matter the circumstances. You don't "tank" a season for a middle first round pick, which is all the Rockets could be certain of obtaining anyway. Yao Ming has been gone for most of the season now, so it's fairly easy to forget that the Rockets fully intended to have him available, and would be playing for much more than ping-pong balls in a perfect world... Whether or not that was an avoidable mistake, given Yao's injury history, is beside the point now. The choice to forego "rebuilding" was made as soon as Yao's surgery was deemed a success, and that choice officially cast the die for this season, at least. If there is anything happening with the team now that I can honestly determine, it's that the front office is preparing itself for eventually finding the "franchise" player it needs through trade. Darryl Morey was closely tied to the Boston Celtics back in 2007, when a perfect storm of trades and free agent acquisitions literally transformed that team overnight into a power. And that happened because the Celtics had picks and players available for Kevin Garnett. Much the same thing seems to be happening here, at least in terms of the Rockets approach to vaulting back into championship contention. I don't believe, even with all the machinations an wheelings and dealings suggested and perhaps in play, that it's ever in any team's best interests to lose, intentionally or otherwise. The best turnaround any franchise can hope for begins with winning. And you win with what you have as often as you can. Mediocrity is perilous and perpetual in this sport. And the Rockets are currently skirting that coastline, with no reasonable horizon in sight. Sometimes, as Rudy Tomjonovich said to Leslie Alexander before his last season here, a team has to get a whole lot worse before it can get better. But the point is to make that decision as soon as possible. Just like the decision to ride with Yao was made. The Rockets are where they are. Stuck in the middle of a turbulent sea with no land in sight. The best thing to do, at this point, is to implement a "tanking" strategy whenever the league resumes play ofter the impending lockout, if no franchise players can be obtained via trade before then. Rough ride ahead, no matter how you look at it.....
You make several good points. The reason I'm against tanking is because there is such a low probability of getting the star player that is needed. First, you have to suck more than any other team (which I think is kinda hard to do). Then if that is succeed, you only have a 25% chance of getting a number 1 pick and a coin toss for a number 2. If you manage to do that, then there is still a chance of having a lottery bust. After you finally get a franchise player, then you have to rebuild your supporting cast. Tanking is a 5-7 year process if everything goes right, in order to achieve contention status. But again, rebuilding a supporting cast is much easier than finding a star, at least with a good GM (which we have).
Challenger II – UK The pride of the UK – the FV4034 Challenger 2, it is the main battle tank (MBT) of British Army and Oman. It is advertises as the world’s most reliable main battle tank. During the 2003 Invasion of Iraq the Challenger 2 tanks operating in the Gulf suffered no total losses to enemy fire. Notable features and specifications: It can survive 14 hits from rocket propelled grenades and from one MILAN anti tank missile. A unit of Challenger II £4,217,000 or ~$7,921,000 It weighs 62.5 tonnes It has a length 8.3 meters, 11.50 m with gun forward Its width 3.5 meters It is operated by 4 crews (commander, gunner, loader/operator, and driver) It can attain a speed of 59 km/h /Thread
We don't have pick in the top 3 to benefit from losing more games this season. A significant number of stars have been drafted outside that range. I realize that finishing with a 10-11 pick instead of a 14 doesn't seem like much. After all, it's only three spots later, right? And last year, we took the same guy at 14 that we would have taken at ten. What does it matter? Well, let's compare it to a basketball game. A guy doesn't hustle to the ball and gives up a rebound, or doesn't close out hard on his man and gives up an easy three, or takes a bad shot early in the shot clock. What harm can one crappy play cause? In a lot of cases, it doesn't. Your team would have won or lost regardless. But in a close game, that play that seemed so meaningless at the time might have made the difference. Last year, Morey indicated that we had a deal in place with Philly for the #2 pick before they pulled out at the last minute. Would having the 10th pick to trade instead of the 14 have made a difference? We'll never know. One win in the 2006 season got cost us Brandon Roy. One win in 2003 got the bulls Hinrich instead of D-Wade. The list goes on and on. The bottom line is that in two years nobody is going to know or care that the Rockets won 42 games this season rather than 39. Why would we harm our chances at drafting or trading for a difference-maker for no benefit?
Two years are two years wasted of your life. Also, as other people already pointed out we're too good to tank with the current team. Do you bench Scola and Martin and tell them you're giving away the season? Do you waste a season of their prime simply because you want to pick at number 10 instead of number 14? If you compare the risk/reward of tanking or not tanking in most cases tanking actually sets your franchise back a lot, which is why people always say it'll take 7 years for your rebuilding project to finish, and that's assuming you managed to get a superstar in the making like OKC.
My friend, I think you misunderstood my post. I'm not suggesting that we should sit Martin and Scola next season and try to out-do the Cavs for record futility. I think we'll be solidly in the playoffs next season and with a little luck, we might even make it out of the first round. I'm saying that in light of the fact that our chances of making the playoffs are this season are terrible and our chances of making it out of the first round are even worse, playing Martin, Scola, and Lowry 40 minutes a game is not in our long-term interest. If we limit them to 20 minutes a game and play the kids, will we lose more games? You bet. In addition to giving our young guys more in-game reps to develop and lowering the risk of injury to our starters, we'll also get a better draft pick this year, which may or may not be a difference maker. My point is that we pay a real cost for winning more games with no offsetting benefit. If we win 42 games instead of 39, that doesn't get us anything.
Screw tanking. Rick is a real coach. Real coaches believe in coaching and developing TALENT. Rather than 'tanking' for some. Teams that 'tank' for TALENT cant COACH.
Adelman is one of the winning-est coaches ever, he has never tanked a team, never has, never will. He'll never let this team tank under his watch so forget about it this year. If we ever tank, it should next year, and w/out Adelman.
