Knicks · Imagine tanking (page 4)

jrodmc wrote:Premise: Hinkie advocated gleefully and baldfacedly tanking games as a part of the process? Fact? Yes or No?

Yes, fact.

Premise: The Sixers suhuck Donkeykong for years and no one anywhere in or around Philly thinks they were trying to win games. The fanbase (of which I'm one Knicks fan in the middle of 4000 Philly-area coworkers) all agree and swallowed the whole jug of tank-aid as they happily looked forward to draft day. Each and every year.

Fact.

The argument isn't that other approaches work or do not work. Explain why tanking is a valid proposal for the Knicks.

Why would I do that? I'm not proposing they should.

Or why it's even worth being a fan of.

If the Sixers wind up being the better team than the Knicks over the life of what are now the respective young cores of the teams, I doubt any Sixers fans' satisfaction will be compromised by "the process", nor do I think any Knicks fan will take any solace in the fact that they "tried."

You continually say the Knicks are a lottery team. So, in essence, you've already tanked as a fan.

That makes no sense. I think the Knicks are who they are. There's nothing intentional or strategic about it.

knicks1248 wrote:Lee, Noah, Lance, and KOQ's value HAS DIMINISH in the last couple of losing seasons, and it's imperative to get those vets going so they become trade assets.

Noah's contract, his drug suspension, his injury history and his play are four far greater factors (in that order) in his value than the Knicks team record.

I don't buy your premise and I'm pretty certain you have no evidence of it. NBA teams scout, they don't check the standings. Teams are indifferent to where talent comes from. They'd be more than happy to poach talent from a bad team.

Losing 60 games wont help anyone, not mills, not JH, and definitely not the players. There is a 85% chance of us drafting another role player even if we tank

And AGAIN, no one is proposing they tank.

Trading or releasing Melo (the centerpiece of four losing seasons in a row) is not tanking, it's rebuilding.

add that to the diminishing facts, and the young kp and willy walking out on you.

As someone who values precedent, I can't get too worried about KP. A rookie taking a qualifying offer as opposed to a max extension is literally unprecedented. To be concerned about that is hysterical, in the crazy, not humorous sense.

Plus he has two more years and then he's an RFA. Hernangomez is locked up for three more years. What happens in 2017-18 will be pretty ancient history by that stage.

So the benefit of tanking gives you a very small chance of getting a young star, and a very big chance of all the above

And AGAIN, who are you guys talking to and about with this tanking stuff?

GustavBahler wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:So when THJ was signed, I thought you had the perfect opportunity to drop some knowledge. But nothing. Crickets.

Again, if doesn't matter to you that you made that up, it won't matter to you that you're wrong. People who make things up don't care if they're right or wrong.

Nothing false about the fact that these exchanges never have to do with hoops. I love a good debate, but your coming at me with minutia. Its boring, and I would appreciate it if you would wait until you want to talk about something more interesting.

Again, you're the only one it really seems to bother. You made your point, let it go.

I'm not hoops, but you keep posting about me.

The Knicks tanking or not is hoops, and no one here has argued they should. You need to work on getting that hoops argument right in your head.

You're absolutely right. You're not hoops, you are anything but hoops on this board. I will try one last time, if the only thing you want to talk about is inconsequential BS like this, then find someone else to talk to, or I will continue to make it about you. Since you seem incapable of talking about anything interesting.

By all means next big signing, just stay mute, so much easier that way, right?

If you'd like to continue to do the very thing you're whining about, please do.

I just replied to two people who incorrectly believe anyone here is advocating tanking. Obviously you're not helping anyone correct this mistake. You should think about intervening so others don't keep making this same error.

The NBA is aggressively pursuing draft lottery reform that could be voted into legislation and instituted by the 2019 draft, league sources told ESPN.

Commissioner Adam Silver is a strong advocate to deincentivize tanking by implementing lower odds on the NBA's worst teams to gain the top picks in the draft, league sources said.

The proposed measures would also increase the chances of better teams making a jump into the draft lottery. The NBA's 14 non-playoff teams compromise the league's annual draft lottery system.

The NBA competition committee, comprised of several general managers and coaches, is expected to vote next week on sending a formal recommendation to the board of governors for final passage, league sources said.

The other proposal of not allowing a team who won the lottery to pick any higher then 4 if they have the worst record again eliminating any chance at back to back #1 picks is interesting but I don't think that would have a major impact either.

newyorknewyork wrote:Reading the article. The proposal would even out the odds of teams with the worst to 5th worst record in the NBA to acquire the #1 pick. I don't see how this deincentives tanking though. Teams will seek to be a top 5 worst team in the league still with hire odds of winning the lottery.

The other proposal of not allowing a team who won the lottery to pick any higher then 4 if they have the worst record again eliminating any chance at back to back #1 picks is interesting but I don't think that would have a major impact either.

Meh! I don't think it's a big enough problem to start legislating any further. Sure the Sixers took it to an extreme but most of the league does things with more integrity. If you're team is falling apart I see nothing wrong with the system as it is. NO TEAM has a guarantee that they will land a great player and then go on to win a Title. Still waiting for that Sixers Title.

Knickoftime wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Lee, Noah, Lance, and KOQ's value HAS DIMINISH in the last couple of losing seasons, and it's imperative to get those vets going so they become trade assets.

Noah's contract, his drug suspension, his injury history and his play are four far greater factors (in that order) in his value than the Knicks team record.

I don't buy your premise and I'm pretty certain you have no evidence of it. NBA teams scout, they don't check the standings. Teams are indifferent to where talent comes from. They'd be more than happy to poach talent from a bad team.

Losing 60 games wont help anyone, not mills, not JH, and definitely not the players. There is a 85% chance of us drafting another role player even if we tank

And AGAIN, no one is proposing they tank.

Trading or releasing Melo (the centerpiece of four losing seasons in a row) is not tanking, it's rebuilding.

add that to the diminishing facts, and the young kp and willy walking out on you.

As someone who values precedent, I can't get too worried about KP. A rookie taking a qualifying offer as opposed to a max extension is literally unprecedented. To be concerned about that is hysterical, in the crazy, not humorous sense.

Plus he has two more years and then he's an RFA. Hernangomez is locked up for three more years. What happens in 2017-18 will be pretty ancient history by that stage.

So the benefit of tanking gives you a very small chance of getting a young star, and a very big chance of all the above

And AGAIN, who are you guys talking to and about with this tanking stuff?

Some good points. Disagree that releasing Melo would help rebuilding. Since you are a guy who values precedent, which franchise in recent history has gained anything by releasing their best player (who is healthy) with nothing in return?

HofstraBBall wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:Lee, Noah, Lance, and KOQ's value HAS DIMINISH in the last couple of losing seasons, and it's imperative to get those vets going so they become trade assets.

Noah's contract, his drug suspension, his injury history and his play are four far greater factors (in that order) in his value than the Knicks team record.

I don't buy your premise and I'm pretty certain you have no evidence of it. NBA teams scout, they don't check the standings. Teams are indifferent to where talent comes from. They'd be more than happy to poach talent from a bad team.

Losing 60 games wont help anyone, not mills, not JH, and definitely not the players. There is a 85% chance of us drafting another role player even if we tank

And AGAIN, no one is proposing they tank.

Trading or releasing Melo (the centerpiece of four losing seasons in a row) is not tanking, it's rebuilding.

add that to the diminishing facts, and the young kp and willy walking out on you.

As someone who values precedent, I can't get too worried about KP. A rookie taking a qualifying offer as opposed to a max extension is literally unprecedented. To be concerned about that is hysterical, in the crazy, not humorous sense.

Plus he has two more years and then he's an RFA. Hernangomez is locked up for three more years. What happens in 2017-18 will be pretty ancient history by that stage.

So the benefit of tanking gives you a very small chance of getting a young star, and a very big chance of all the above

And AGAIN, who are you guys talking to and about with this tanking stuff?

Some good points. Disagree that releasing Melo would help rebuilding. Since you are a guy who values precedent, which franchise in recent history has gained anything by releasing their best player (who is healthy) with nothing in return?

Admittedly it is difficult to come up with one.

That said NTCs are very rare making the Knicks options with melo relatively unprecedented.

The question I can't answer is what does melo do for the Knicks?

His game doesn't seem conducive to developing youth. His demeanor doesn't seemed geared to adopting a true mentor role. His production hasn't helped much the last 4 seasons.

So what's the value added of his presence at this stage?

newyorknewyork wrote:Reading the article. The proposal would even out the odds of teams with the worst to 5th worst record in the NBA to acquire the #1 pick. I don't see how this deincentives tanking though. Teams will seek to be a top 5 worst team in the league still with hire odds of winning the lottery.

The other proposal of not allowing a team who won the lottery to pick any higher then 4 if they have the worst record again eliminating any chance at back to back #1 picks is interesting but I don't think that would have a major impact either.

I don't mind adjusting it so that the worst team could pick no worst than fifth or sixth but I'm totally on board with making it more luck driven than it is now. Remember in the Ewing draft the team with the worst record (the Warriors) ended up with the worse lottery pick. However they ended up with HOFer Chris Mullin.

Of course you may have more incentive for teams to bypass getting that last playoff spot for a chance in the lottery. Maybe you also make some provision where the last two teams to get into the lottery can pick no higher than five or six? That way there's no big advantage to having the worst record in the league nor a great incentive to purposely miss the playoffs to get into the lottery.

Welpee wrote:

newyorknewyork wrote:Reading the article. The proposal would even out the odds of teams with the worst to 5th worst record in the NBA to acquire the #1 pick. I don't see how this deincentives tanking though. Teams will seek to be a top 5 worst team in the league still with hire odds of winning the lottery.

The other proposal of not allowing a team who won the lottery to pick any higher then 4 if they have the worst record again eliminating any chance at back to back #1 picks is interesting but I don't think that would have a major impact either.

Personally I like the original lottery system from the Ewing draft. Everybody who didn't make the playoffs has an equal shot at the number one.

I don't mind adjusting it so that the worst team could pick no worst than fifth or sixth but I'm totally on board with making it more luck driven than it is now. Remember in the Ewing draft the team with the worst record (the Warriors) ended up with the worse lottery pick. However they ended up with HOFer Chris Mullin.

Of course you may have more incentive for teams to bypass getting that last playoff spot for a chance in the lottery. Maybe you also make some provision where the last two teams to get into the lottery can pick no higher than five or six? That way there's no big advantage to having the worst record in the league nor a great incentive to purposely miss the playoffs to get into the lottery.

Nothing scientific, but I get the feeling we would do better in the draft with any new system. Just on luck alone. How many teams have dropped in the draft 2 years in a row? Hopefully we wont find out this season.

Edit: See NY suggested the picks in multiple years. I like that idea. Tired of seing teams like Philly clean up.

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

arkrud wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

Yes, there are many ways to lose. As long as the players believe its more about their growth, than more draft picks, its a better option than flushing the roster.

Yes, it would be tough assemble a contender from just FAs, and it would also be tough do it mostly through the draft. What happened in Philly was more of a fluke than anything. It about finding the right balance.

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

GustavBahler wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

Yes, there are many ways to lose. As long as the players believe its more about their growth, than more draft picks, its a better option than flushing the roster.

Yes, it would be tough assemble a contender from just FAs, and it would also be tough do it mostly through the draft. What happened in Philly was more of a fluke than anything. It about finding the right balance.

Welpee wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

Yes, there are many ways to lose. As long as the players believe its more about their growth, than more draft picks, its a better option than flushing the roster.

Yes, it would be tough assemble a contender from just FAs, and it would also be tough do it mostly through the draft. What happened in Philly was more of a fluke than anything. It about finding the right balance.

I agree that a hybrid approach sounds the most reasonable. But why do you think Philly was more of a fluke? I think their plan was to be as bad as possible and stockpile high lottery players. And I think they were totally fine with Noel and Embiid missing entire seasons and aid the "process."

Look at all the first round picks who got hurt, couldnt play. They werent there to help the team get better, so Philly kept winding up with high draft picks.

How many times in NBA history has that many consecutive top draft picks on one team, miss as many games as theirs did? Thats why I say its a fluke.

GustavBahler wrote:

Welpee wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

Yes, there are many ways to lose. As long as the players believe its more about their growth, than more draft picks, its a better option than flushing the roster.

Yes, it would be tough assemble a contender from just FAs, and it would also be tough do it mostly through the draft. What happened in Philly was more of a fluke than anything. It about finding the right balance.

I agree that a hybrid approach sounds the most reasonable. But why do you think Philly was more of a fluke? I think their plan was to be as bad as possible and stockpile high lottery players. And I think they were totally fine with Noel and Embiid missing entire seasons and aid the "process."

Look at all the first round picks who got hurt, couldnt play. They werent there to help the team get better, so Philly kept winding up with high draft picks.

How many times in NBA history has that many consecutive top draft picks on one team, miss as many games as theirs did? Thats why I say its a fluke.

With small sample sizes the variance is huge.
It can be any kind of luck or misfortune for specific team and still being not the worst case.
Sticking to the system and method is the only way to ride off the variance.
You may say Spurs, Warriors, Cavs, etc. get lucky but in fact they just keep sticking to the system they selected to run and they still do.
No doubt its boring, no doubt its upsetting to the fans who cannot get it. But the results speak for themselves.
Knicks were contenders only when they were system team in 70th.
Systems are changing, game is changing, but the principals of consistent fundamental approach to team building never changed.

Welpee wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

arkrud wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

knicks1248 wrote:with all the tanking phili has done and all the young talent they have , Im going to go out on a limb and predict they will be in the lottery again this season, and will finally come to their senses and trade that pick along with one of their talented losers, FOR THE BEST AVAILABLE STAR VET

I would want to wait and see who will be the cream of the crop of next summer before the Knicks made that call. Im not opposed to it, if the right player came along, but I sure wouldnt want to see the Knicks handcuff themselves to that plan.

You just give your young core an environment to grow with big minutes and many shot attempts and then there is no need for tanking.
After you get and grow a stud(s) who start caring the team into competitiveness you start looking at FA and trades to build around them(him).
I would call this process "crop selection" not tanking.
With cap system it is not possible to assemble the team from established stars.
The hybrid system is required.
And when organization is totally fac..ed by starpunching the "crop selection" is the only realistic path back from the dead.

Yes, there are many ways to lose. As long as the players believe its more about their growth, than more draft picks, its a better option than flushing the roster.

Yes, it would be tough assemble a contender from just FAs, and it would also be tough do it mostly through the draft. What happened in Philly was more of a fluke than anything. It about finding the right balance.

I agree that a hybrid approach sounds the most reasonable. But why do you think Philly was more of a fluke? I think their plan was to be as bad as possible and stockpile high lottery players. And I think they were totally fine with Noel and Embiid missing entire seasons and aid the "process."

Philly was unique in their tanking. They failed because they didn't attempt to build a team at all. Just collected assets. They drafted 3 centers with lotto picks in 3 consecutive years. Should have repackaged Noel or Embild pick at the draft for other needs. Should have repackaged Okafor pick at the draft for other needs. Then did what Houston did and use some of the assets of future picks over the years to add a impact player. Then maybe with that trade and those multiple prospects they have collected they would be able to land a quality FA probably in the Harrison Barnes mode or something like that.

Until this get ironed out. The team will probably continue to struggle defensively and will continue to lose games.