A new take on tanking - opponents of this need not click this thread

[special1]

Dwight went to LA then to Houston.

LeBron and Bosh went to Miami.

KD and Paul George re-upped as RFA.


Who said Location is the 'only thing'?

You did write location THREE times!

[Craiger]

You did write location THREE times!

and that therefore means location is the 'only thing'?

Have you never heard the phrase 'location, location, location'?

[special1]

and that therefore means location is the 'only thing'?

Have you never heard the phrase 'location, location, location'?

Yes sir - in real estate. BUT we're talking basketball no?

P.s

Your point is moot because Dwight was traded to LA and then signed with Houston.

[ktotheg]

The Raptors will not tank this season. However, they may start a rebuild.

There is a brutal reality to having an NBA franchise outside of major markets or cool & warm cities. Unless you have a history of winning, the stars (and mid tier players) don't come unless you throw crazy money at them.

If the Raptors get off to a slow start, Masai will begin a rebuild which would include moving anyone other than Jonas. It's unlikely that DD/Gay/Lowry would/could all be moved for meaningful assets as the only thing of value would be other trade chips or picks. I say picks because like another poster mentioned, it's about volume more than quality. Sure high first rounders are great but the more picks you accumulate, the more flexibility you have to make moves.

We have good young talent that will drive this team to the playoffs if they continue to improve and stay healthy. DD is still growing as a player and Jonas is raw relative to where he'll be in 3 years. As they develop we'll win.

This is the key... we need a winning culture for players to come so blowing it up and rebuilding is not a sufficient strategy on it's own. If the raps can make the playoffs for a few years and DD/Jonas keep improving... Masai will be able to draw better players than Landry for less money.

I for one am a fan of going for the 7th or 8th seed... we need a team that wins games... players will come.

[Karl Marx.]

What is difference between tanking and rebuilding?
If tanking is loosing games intentionally, than no one will be doing that until late in the season.
What Raptors are doing is blowing it up while entering another rebuilding process.
They gave up Bargnani for next to nothing and are looking to trade Gay, Lowry and few others for expiring contracts and picks.

As long as the team has a clear direction, I am on board with what they are trying to do.
Although I feel that fans would lose patience on the management.

[magoon]

If the Raptors get off to a slow start, Masai will begin a rebuild which would include moving anyone other than Jonas. It's unlikely that DD/Gay/Lowry would/could all be moved for meaningful assets as the only thing of value would be other trade chips or picks.

Presently, the following players have been moved for 2014 first-round picks so far this year: Kevin Garnett/Paul Pierce, Jrue Holiday, Luis Scola and Marcin Gortat. Plus the 2014 first-rounder Utah took from Golden State in order to take on the Biedrins/Jefferson salary dump.

There really shouldn't be any question that Rudy, Kyle and possibly DeMar (although DeMar is possibly the hardest to move) can all fetch first-round picks from the right trade partner (which at this point is probably either Cleveland or Milwaukee).

I for one am a fan of going for the 7th or 8th seed... we need a team that wins games... players will come.

Tell that to Milwaukee.

[golden]

Boston. San Antonio. Miami.

Boston, absolutely not. If anything it was Seattle/OKC who was executing the tank strategy, by trading Ray Allen for another pick in what was considered at the time a weak draft, outside of Oden & Durant. The year before they won it all, the Celtics lost a lot of close games, but they already had some good pieces already in place (Pierce, Rondo, Perkins, Powe, Scalabrine, Tony Allen) that would help them win a championship when Garnett and Ray Allen arrived. Not to mention Al Jefferson, who was already a 16/10 big man. That was no tank roster - just missing Garnett, mostly, who was via trade.

San Antonio: not sure how you plan in advance to have your best player get injured. Miami: everybody knows the strategy was clearing cap space for the free agency - big assist to Bryan Colangelo there.

You can disagree, but none of those were "obvious" tank jobs, IMO.

And regarding location, the point on Dwight was that he had a choice and if location was so important, then he should have re-signed with the Lakers not Houston this offseason. I think that's what you were implying, no?

The other thing people are not talking about is this whole new dynamic of players "teaming up" on their own, regardless of what the franchises want. That throws a wrench into just about any strategy and puts pressure on the organization to win immediately or trade the so-called 'superstar' potentially un-doing any type of strategy that requires patience and planning. It's an agent-driven ploy, where they are telling the players that their 'brand value' goes up tremendously if they play for a winner and the fastest way to get there is to scheme and recruit with other all-stars. Pretty much borders on tampering, if you ask me.

[Craiger]

And regarding location, the point on Dwight was that he had a choice and if location was so important, then he should have re-signed with the Lakers not Houston this offseason. I think that's what you were implying, no?

I don't understand this premise?

There are a handful of markets that are able to sign (and even trade for) the top players in the NBA vs the rest of the league. When a player leaves one of those top markets to go to another top market, that becomes evidence that market ISN'T important?

When I take a quarter out of my left pocket and put it in my right pocket does that mean I have less money?

I'll quote myself here:

Yes (get as bad as you can) is not the only way to do it - if your team is a top end NBA market. Then your team has a legitimate shot at building a contender any way you choose. Sign a big free agent, build up tradeable assets and wait for either a disgruntled star or nervous small market team whose superstar is a year away from UFA. Tank. Keep overpriced expiring deals on the books waiting for that team who is ready to rebuild.

But what about the other half of the NBA?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the list of the top 20 players by WS/48.

LeBron James-MIA
Kevin Durant-OKC
Chris Paul-LAC
Tyson Chandler - NYK
Tony Parker-SAS
James Harden-HOU
Marc Gasol-MEM
Tiago Splitter-SAS
Blake Griffin-LAC
Russell Westbrook-OKC
Dwyane Wade-MIA
Tim Duncan-SAS
Brook Lopez-BRK
Carmelo Anthony-NYK
Deron Williams-BRK
Serge Ibaka-OKC
Stephen Curry-GSW
David West-IND
George Hill-IND
Chris Bosh-MIA

11 are with the team that drafted them (Marc Gasol may be an exception, but had his rights traded for as he was not yet in the NBA)

Of the 9 remaining who weren't drafted by their team, Only 2 (David West and George Hill) are not in NY/LA/Miami/Houston/Dallas.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is a list of the top 20 players by PER (played atleast 30 minutes)

LeBron James, MIA
Kevin Durant, OKC
Chris Paul, LAC
Carmelo Anthony, NY
Brook Lopez, BKN
Tim Duncan, SA
Dwyane Wade, MIA
Russell Westbrook, OKC
Tony Parker, SA
Kobe Bryant, LAL
James Harden, HOU
Blake Griffin, LAC
Anthony Davis, NO
Anderson Varejao, CLE
Kyrie Irving, CLE
Stephen Curry, GS
Al Jefferson, UTAH (Charlotte now)
John Wall, WSH
LaMarcus Aldridge, POR
Deron Williams, BKN

14 are with the team that drafted them.

Of the 6 remaining who weren't drafted by their team, Only 1 player (Al Jefferson) is not in NY/LA/Miami/Houston/Dallas.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is the list of top 20 players by WP

Durant, Kevin
James, LeBron
Paul, Chris
Harden, James
Chandler, Tyson
Ibaka, Serge
Curry, Stephen
Noah, Joakim
Conley, Mike
Wade, Dwyane
Kirilenko, Andrei
Butler, Jimmy
Faried, Kenneth
Sefolosha, Thabo
Marion, Shawn
Calderon, Jose
Johnson, Amir
Batum, Nicolas
Iguodala, Andre
Gasol, Marc

10 are with the team that drafted them (*see Marc Gasol above)

Of the 10 remaining who weren't drafted by their team, only 3 (Amir Johnson, Andre Igoudala, Thabo Sefolosha) are not NY/LA/Miami/Houston/Dallas

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So here we have a grand total of 6 "statistical stars" who have not been drafted by their team and didn't end up in one of the NBA elite markets.

The players and their respective statistical ranking

Amir Johnson 17th
Thabo Sefolosha 14th
Iggy 19th
Al Jefferson 17th
George Hill 19th
David West 18th

NBA Awards between those 6 - David West NBA all-star x 2, Thabo Sefolosha NBA all defensive 2nd team, Iggy NBA All-star x 1, NBA all defensive 2nd team x 1

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lets do the same with 2012/13 NBA allstars (I won't list them all this time though)

Of the 25 NBA allstars (including Rondo and his replacement Lopez) 14 were drafted by their team.

Of the 11 remaining who weren't drafted by their team, only 3 (Zach Randolph, David Lee, Jrue Holiday) are not in NY/LA/Miami/Houston/Dallas.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So to fully understand the dichotomy here:

The 'elite' markets account for 25% of the league (8 of 30 teams)
The 'elite' markets account for 75% of the league's 'stars' (statistical and all-star 27 of 36) that were not drafted by their team.

*should be noted many of those names overlap in different categories (Lebron, Harden, Melo etc) so of the league's 'stars' (statistical and allstar) that were not drafted by their team, averaged per category (ie. 83% of PER stars, 77% of WS/48 stars etc), the elite markets account for 76%


Of those players not drafted or in an elite market, all except for Thabo at 14th under WP, were in the bottom quarter of their respective stats, none were (or have ever been) allstar starters, and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who would call any of them a superstar.


We need to stop pretending that all teams can realistically build/rebuild in the same fashion.

and

People are forgetting something very important when discussing 'superstar player' movement.

Superstars rarely move. This is because they are so valuable - not only as players (they help you win) but as contracts (they have great production to cost returns). So what you have is an expensive but highly valuable player. They are, simply, the most valuable commodity in the NBA.

So teams don't want to get rid of them, they want to keep them. But they can't always do that. Usually when a superstar moves its because they want to move, and very occasionally (but extremely rarely) because a team needs to move them (want to either start over or can't afford to keep them)

So where do these superstars go? Almost always to a select group of markets - LA, NY, Miami, Houston/Dallas (Texas based). (there are a handful of other markets that are probably would fit in or just below that category aswell - Phoenix, Boston, Chicago, San Fransisco (Golden State)). Why do they want to go there - they have some combination of market size (therefore greater chance of attention, and non salaried $s (ie. endorsements)), tax breaks (and therefore $s), and accomodation (weather).

When we look at all the superstar movement in the last decade or so, its almost always to those markets. Shaq - LA, Lebron - Miami, Chris Paul - LA, Dwight - LA (and now likely to either remain in LA, or Houston or Dallas), James Harden - Houston, Carmelo Anthony - NY, Deron Williams - NY, Steve Nash - LA. [We can even make a list players a tier below superstars and we'll see that they still have a tendency to end up in these markets. Not as high of a %, but a higher than average % none the less]

Now alot of this movement was due to free agency or pending free agency. Very rarely is it early or in the middle of their contract that they get moved (If I'm not mistake Kevin Garnett is one of the exceptions to the above. James Harden aswell, as he was heading into RFA). When they do move, it is almost always on their terms - and there terms are almost always a superstar market.

So why is it these markets, whether through free agency or (rarely) trade, or on a players terms or (rarely) not, get these types of players?

1) Players find these markets desireable
2) These markets can afford to pay additional dollars to get these players or multiples of these player or other top quality players aswell
3) Teams moving these players want a return for them, and these teams are able to afford to keep alot of high cost assets, so they have more to offer in return
4) Since these players come at such a high cost, the team 'buying' them wants insurance that they aren't renting them. These players will only give insurance to teams they find desireable.
5) On the rare occasion there is little or no insurance (Dwight Howard) the team was the most valuable market (or top 2, it may be the Knicks at #1) and had a high likelyhood of retaining him + the ability to spend alot and maintain a good team if they couldn't (ie. they could afford to not have insurance)

So when we talk about #1 draft picks not winning titles with their teams, or superstars not winning titles with the team that drafted them - its not because there is a free flow of elite talent in the NBA. They went to one of the elite markets. These markets completely skew how 'normal' teams in the NBA win titles or become highly competitive. There are a handful of teams that are nothing like the bottom 20 teams in the NBA.

When we want to see how an 'normal' market has become a contender or title winner its been the same - it starts in the draft. It starts with picking a star in the draft, or a very highly talented player in the draft, and these guys usually (but not always) come high in the draft. Even on the occasions when the pick(s) weren't used themselves to create a contending team - the players drafted or the draft picks became the commodity that returned a high value peice or player (Grant Hill (#3 pick) was traded for Ben Wallace, Pau Gasol (#3) for Marc Gasol, numerous picks and former high draft picks for Garnett and Allen)

So unless one believes that the Raptors can become an elite market, something it has historically shown not to be, has in fact shown to be an undesireable market (whether warranted or not) we should not expect an elite player to want to come here, atleast not at any point in the near future.

And no. Being a 'winner' or 'building a culture' has not shown to attract elite talent. At best it only attracts elite talent to winners already in elite markets vs losers in elite markets.

maybe the above will help with what I mean by the importance of location and why teams like the Lakers, or Houston, have much different paths of least resistence compared to Toronto.

[Puffer]

...They gave up Bargnani for next to nothing....

I would say that the consensus opinion, both here and amongst the pundits, is that they got far more for him than anyone thought possible. Or do you think there was a list of suitors out there willing to throw a better deal at Masai? Remember, they had been shopping him since midway through last season.

[Craiger]

I would say that the consensus opinion, both here and amongst the pundits, is that they got far more for him than anyone thought possible. Or do you think there was a list of suitors out there willing to throw a better deal at Masai? Remember, they had been shopping him since midway through last season.

Doesn't mean it wasn't nothing though

[Puffer]

Doesn't mean it wasn't nothing though

Can't argue with that...it was just infinitely more than anyone expected.

[Xixak]

I don't understand this premise?

There are a handful of markets that are able to sign (and even trade for) the top players in the NBA vs the rest of the league. When a player leaves one of those top markets to go to another top market, that becomes evidence that market ISN'T important?

When I take a quarter out of my left pocket and put it in my right pocket does that mean I have less money?

I'll quote myself here:



and



maybe the above will help with what I mean by the importance of location and why teams like the Lakers, or Houston, have much different paths of least resistence compared to Toronto.

Not that I'm opposed to tanking, but those lists that you posted contain a lot of bias.

First of all, most of the best players in the NBA are going to be in the first 7-8 years of their career, at which point they likely have not had a chance to change teams unless they got traded. So saying that most of these players are with the team that drafted them, doesn't really mean very much. I think the correct term here would be confirmation bias.

I think the only fair thing to say about tanking is that most of the elite talent is brought into the NBA that way (ie. most of the top players are high picks). But when you look at actual NBA championship winners, I can't think of any teams recently that outright tanked to build the team that got them their ring. I mean maybe you could say the Heat tanked for Wade, but I'm not sure they really tanked. They lost Zo in 02-03 and kept most of their best players from the 01-02 team on the roster (that team wasn't very good either). And obviously the Spurs got Duncan because injuries to their two best players ended up being a blessing in disguise.

[Craiger]

Not that I'm opposed to tanking, but those lists that you posted contain a lot of bias.

First of all, most of the best players in the NBA are going to be in the first 7-8 years of their career, at which point they likely have not had a chance to change teams unless they got traded. So saying that most of these players are with the team that drafted them, doesn't really mean very much. I think the correct term here would be confirmation bias.

I think the only fair thing to say about tanking is that most of the elite talent is brought into the NBA that way (ie. most of the top players are high picks). But when you look at actual NBA championship winners, I can't think of any teams recently that outright tanked to build the team that got them their ring. I mean maybe you could say the Heat tanked for Wade, but I'm not sure they really tanked. They lost Zo in 02-03 and kept most of their best players from the 01-02 team on the roster (that team wasn't very good either). And obviously the Spurs got Duncan because injuries to their two best players ended up being a blessing in disguise.

Your so called bias is my overwhelming evidence of reality. If people can't see that list and realize that markets are clearly unequal, there is no convincing them that an inequality even exists.

I used 3 different metrics to get list. I used the allstar team selections (ie a combo of who fans and coaches see as 'stars'). I narrowed the list to anyone who could be realistically called a 'star' by some sort of measurement selected by someone or something neutral to the debate.

I looked exclusively at player movement (or lack there of). A very simple 'fact'. ie. player X ended up in location Y.

I have no idea how you feel that could be 'bias'.

The list was about 'star' players who have changed teams and where they went... it was showing the discrepency between markets (ie. where players end up when they do change teams). Players who have not yet, or not had an opportunity to, change teams aren't relative to the point (aside from the showing its by far the most likely way to get 'star talent' if a team is not in a supermarket)

You can attempt to discredit the work by putting a false label on it... but its not going to change the reality of the economics of the NBA.

[p00ka]

Boston. San Antonio. Miami.

Not 1 of those teams sold off their best players to tank for draft picks. Which one of them do you propose the Raps could emulate?

[Axel]

Boston, absolutely not. If anything it was Seattle/OKC who was executing the tank strategy, by trading Ray Allen for another pick in what was considered at the time a weak draft, outside of Oden & Durant. The year before they won it all, the Celtics lost a lot of close games, but they already had some good pieces already in place (Pierce, Rondo, Perkins, Powe, Scalabrine, Tony Allen) that would help them win a championship when Garnett and Ray Allen arrived. Not to mention Al Jefferson, who was already a 16/10 big man. That was no tank roster - just missing Garnett, mostly, who was via trade.

haha, you lose all credibility when you list Scalabrine as a "good piece"