Tanking is the easy part! I myself can tank with the best of them!! DRAFTING is the hard part!! If you have the first pick, YOU get first dibbs to choose the best player out of ALL available players coming out of college. If the 6th pick ends up being the best player from his respective class that means that there were five teams that totally blew their chance on getting him!! Regardless of where you draft, you have to at minumum get his value for that pick!! You can't pick in the top five and get the 12th best player in the draft!! THAT'S is where teams get exposed after tanking, by not picking the right player! FYI ... Tanking is not fun to watch! Or play if you ask Flash Gordon! Go Rockets!!! ....... ....... .......
We have been the worst team in the league for 2 years and neither year did we get a Superstar player at 2 and 3..... Tanking doesn't work, if your front office is drafting AAU kids and not NBA ready ones... DD
I mean...I'm on record saying that there's no guarantee that Jalen and Jabari will be superstars, but I also don't have a magic crystal ball that says they won't be. In my opinion it is a bit early to be so sure of anything.
Well most superstars come into the league ready - I guess there are those that take more time.....you are correct. DD
Tatum 13.9ppg 5rpg 1.6apg 1spg 30mpg Good efficiency but hardly any indicator he's a sure shot superstar pick rookie year Giannis 6.8ppg 4.4rpg 1.9apg on worse efficiency than Tatum. Big project who blew up physically Embiid didn't even play a single game his first 2 years. Was a 22 year old rookie Curry looked lower tier all star bound as a rookie Anthony Davis had the defense but hardly standout stats Joker 10 and 7 and only 2.4apg Going way back. KG 10 and 6. Kobe 7,2, 1. TMac 7,4,1.5 For every one of those all timers, you've got NBA ready guys who came in hot from college and will be forgotten eventually. Glenn Robinson. Mashburn. Tyreke. DC. LJ. Damon Stoudamire,Stack, etc etc. Nice careers, but i bet you jump the gun and choose their year 1 and 2 vs the guys who ended up MVP level after starting young with underdeveloped bodies and game, but loads of potential. Trae Young stats look insane HOF level at quick glance, and then you see just high usage and weak efficiency in a stat inflated era and you just wanna say no thanks and pass on him. Even so, i think when you're talking about the best coming in and being dominant, then you're just talking about most of the top 25-50 all time greats. Rare ones. Your average all star every era didn't just come in dominating.
it changes because if you believe this is tru you not gonn tank nba rankings fluctuate every year...if its fluid in later years how come the things are set in stone at age of 18? oth people, especially people on tanking teams are low iq bb wise so you trust them to decide in 10 years who will be the best?LOL best players are molded and created, they are as much as developed as hand picked if you know what you do you can 'create' superstar with any pick at your hand
1 this doesnt mean you need to tank 2 you missed on self-perpetuating bias included in this reasoning ie 3 fake belief in top picks causes people to give top picks more opportunities, playing time second chances etc etc 4 so of course more opportunities and chances given results in top picks producing more superstars than SRPs 5 besides your list of superstars is very subjective LOL to me jimmy butler pick no 30, influences winning more than embiid so it will give us 4 vs 3 ratio of superstars being from top vs non top picks so its almost 50% vs 50% this just goes to prove the dumbalytics is just a cult and it has nothing to do with the math but more with dogmas and false sacred traditions!
If we had picked #1 either of the last couple years people would be saying tanking worked because they were smitten with Paolo or broke ass Cade. Tanking has put us in a (more) optimal scenario. Taking a flier on KPJ, Green, Smith, Sengun, Eason all the result of us wanting to bottom out and go young. Not to mention the Brooklyn future and our cap space.
tanking never works...whatever people say about it...no need to tank because the higher the pick doesn't mean you get the better player... even kids know this... only naive people still believe the higher the pick the beter the player you get... the best part, even in case if it did get you a better player, it still wouldn't be working because youd lose tenfold in putrid tanking culture than what you hope to recover in higher picks LOL pro tank people are braindead!
The higher pick means you get a shot at the consensus higher rated players. Not that they will turn out. It’s why our strategy (intentional or not) of snagging a high potential player in the teens to hedge a bit is so helpful. We are gonna be fine but if Green or Smith blow up than we are really going to launch.
I have no problems with the last 4 top picks. The issue has been there haven’t really been any generational players in these drafts. We just have to wait and see how Sengun, Green, Jabari, and Tari develop. The big positive I see is that all 4 of them can play on the court together and they don’t clash.
The problem with your logic is that whether the tank worked or not cant be determined for some years to come.
If you’re not an LA, NY, or Miami based team, you build a contender through the draft. That’s just facts. Nuggets: Jokic, Murray, MPJ Warriors: Steph, Klay, Draymond Suns: Booker, Ayton, Bridges Grizzlies: Ja, JJJ, Bane Hawks: Trae, Hunter, Collins/Okongwu Raptors: Barnes, Siakam, Anunoby Wolves: Edwards, Towns Bucks: Giannis 76ers: Embiid Every single one of these cores/players are homegrown talents. None were acquired through trades. Tanking works. Front offices need to do their homework when drafting at their slots, and not just pick the consensus guy on people’s mock boards.
like i always say... life doesnt happen in a vacuum.... everybody always tries to make everything 'idiot proof' by deducing the absolute sure fire best way to do something.... ya gotta tank for a superstar... ya gotta fire tons of 3s to compete... bigs are a defensive detriment... its a copycat league - and anybody who has success is going to be mimicked... its all a short cut to actually thinking.... should we tank? gee... idk, what are the prospects? are prospects 1-3 heads and shoulders above - or is it only about the #1 pick and a much smaller window? Whats the rest of your roster look like? we gotta shoot 30+ 3s a game? do we have shooters? There are always a multitude of considerations to take into account...
Yah my thinking exactly. Assuming we still wouldn't have signed any big free agents. What rookies could you have drafted in place of Jabari and green ?(assuming you didn't tank and had a better record ) now I am sure people people people will say someone like Barnes but how much better would he be or the rockets be at this point? I would much rather swing for the fences then keep trying to hit singles and bunting.
If Green amd jabari become all stars at their 7th year, it invalidates this story but provides zero help or comfort with our current situation. Forming the right question is better than coming up with an answer.
My only disagreement would be with "the Spurs are the original tanking team when they tanked for Duncan." We tanked for both Ralph Sampson and Olajuwon. Tanking has been around forever. Otherwise, yes, the article seems biased or just poorly written. But what do I know? I'm just a fan.
