Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Alternatives to tanking. Please be civil

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I did a thread on the comparison to Indiana.

    Not quite accurate now with Gay traded but certainly starts the process of building like Indiana did.

    http://www.raptorsrepublic.com/forum...ike-the-Pacers
    Great post my friend. How did I miss that one before?
    "Bruno?
    Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
    He's terrible."

    -Superjudge, 7/23

    Hope you're wrong.

    Comment


    • #32
      stooley wrote: View Post
      Great post my friend. How did I miss that one before?
      I post so often I can barely keep up with it.

      I don't expect anyone else to.

      Comment


      • #33
        To define the alternatives to tanking, we should first define tanking. Tanking involves losing ... a lot.

        There are three ways to do that:
        1. Load your team up with negative 'stars' - who are played a lot of minutes, but hurt your team.
        2. Trade your best players for rookies and draft picks (and expiring contracts), who are bad now, but may improve (or expire).
        3. Ask players/coaches to intentionally lose (this is illegal).

        1. Toronto has tried tanking with the negative stars (see Bargnani, Andrea and Gay, Rudy). I think we have seen that this is effective in losing, but instills a culture of blame and negativity that is demotivating to your best players, brings out the worst in all players (compare, e.g., Bellinelli on the Raptors vs. on the Spurs), and kills coaches (who can't be allowed to bench these 'stars').

        If you follow this strategy you have to 'clean house' immediately after the draft you are targeting, and then spend a couple of years instilling a new culture from the bottom up. I think most people on here, including the 'tankers', know how soul-sucking the 'negative stars' approach is, and appreciate Masai's alternative.

        So I think we are all on for the 'healthy culture', 'everyone contributes', 'negative stars get benched or traded' approach ... in fact, we'd probably like a San Antonio-like culture and system in place, which means this tanking approach is out. That leaves ...

        2. Systematically trade your proven best players for unproven rookies and draft picks, who you hope will improve later. By definition, this makes your team worse in the short term, giving you a higher draft pick. This strategy needs to be followed before the season starts (see Utah): otherwise your best players will win too many games for you. You also need to be careful you don't draft an all-star rookie who single-handedly pulls you out of the bottom (see: Philadelphia). Note: we are already too late for this approach to really pay off.

        Trading away proven talent for unproven talent who you hope will be at best average this year but will improve later (see: Valanciunas, Jonas) is by definition risky. Proven is less risky than unproven. Unproven but too talented too fast (see: MCW) also destroys this strategy. On average, this strategy will make your team worse, unless you are either lucky, or the vast majority of teams can't evaluate talent (i.e., there is only one San Antonio). That is getting less and less true.


        So what's the alternative?
        1. Build a healthy culture: dump the 'negative stars'.
        2. Keep your proven best players, so long as they are young enough to contribute in your (e.g., 3-4 years out) window: that means keeping Amir and Demar around (if you believe they are the best players) ... unless someone makes you an offer which is 'too good to be true', in which case you take it.
        3. Trade proven talent who will not be around in your window as soon as you get a reasonable offer, i.e., Lowry, ideally for draft picks from teams you expect to be worse than you or for young players they don't appreciate or who are demotivated by playing with 'negative stars' (I'm looking at you NY).
        4. Get high character veterans who will instill a good locker room culture (unfortunately they have to play moderately well to be listened to) and whose contracts expire just before your magic window (e.g., expire 2 years out).
        5. Use the space from the expiring contracts to sign a good proven 'star' on the free agency market to push you over the edge.

        This alternative will leave you as a middling and improving team - hopefully one that picks up draft picks from the stupid and desperate - that will be at least moderately attractive to a star who wants to win, rather than be surrounded by a bunch of no-hopers (see James, LeBron in Cleveland).
        Last edited by Kuh; Mon Dec 16, 2013, 08:03 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          JawsGT wrote: View Post
          There are basically two options in my mind:

          1. Strip the roster of anyone that contributes to winning and can return financial flexibility, prospects and/or picks, in order to create a roster that can't win (i.e. to tank) so that we improve our own draft position.

          2. Anything else basically qualifies as a tweeking and/or (re)building IMO. MU would need to move Lowry, Amir and Demar and get very little in return that can contribute to winning now in order to facilitate a tank (or perhaps just 2 of 3). With Bargs and Gay gone, the only sketchy contract left on the books is Fields, and I'm sure that MU is exploring all the options to move that contract. If that happens, I think the roster from top to bottom could be considered value contracts, in terms of either monetary value or length of contract. This is what I believe MU is trying to achieve more than anything this year. I do not think a top5 draft pick is necessarily his target. I never did believe that he would intentionally tank. I always thought he would move forward trying to build HIS team without having to dwell in the basement for a few seasons. How to do that is beyond me really. I am anti-tank as a matter of principle, so I would love to see moves that improve the team now but DO NOT prohibit the ability to improve in later seasons. That flexibility is the key, but I honestly do not know what types of trades could be made now that bring in top talent. I think for this season, we are unlikely to acquire any higher end players for the here and now. But the flexibility that MU is getting out of his moves means we might be able to do that in the offseason or later.

          I would have to do a lot of research to come up with a specific plan. What players do we try to keep? What players can we target that are already in the league and acquirable to help improve the team? Can we put together a package by draft day to improve our draft position and possibly land a top5'er without relying on our own pick? This is research I also do not want to do. Why? Because regardless of what I come up with, there is perhaps a 99% chance or greater that it will sound crazy to all on RR, will never come to fruition and is ultimately a complete waste of my time. If TFTW had to suggest on the trade forums to move Bargs to NYK for Novak, Qrich, Camby and 3 draft picks, one can only imagine the types of responses he would get.

          But again, there are only two options: tank or anything else. Trading Lowry now but keeping DD and Amir on board doesn't really help the tank enough with Vasquez now here. We could still be hanging around the bottom playoff seeds after the season without Lowry, so more than that has to be done. I also fear the Darko Milicic, and although I don't have a specific plan, I can't see why trying to bring in a top tier guy to go with JV and DD is such a bad idea, or that it is impossible.
          are you sure about that? who exactly is going to back up vasquez if hes going to start with lowry gone? buycks? stone?

          Comment


          • #35
            4hunnit_degreez wrote: View Post
            CalgaryRapsfan's has sad it beautifully hahah
            Thanks.

            I posted similar messages over the summer and was labeled a "tanker" and "hater". Likely because I added one line about also being willing to listen to offers for DeRozan and Johnson. Ironic what perspective will do when the word "tank" is replaced by the word "rebuild", even when the strategy and explanation is identical.

            Comment


            • #36
              stooley wrote: View Post
              Hello, this is a call to all of those that have been drowned out by the constant tanking rhetoric on these foums.

              Personally, I am of the belief that tanking this season, and potentially the next would make the raptors a better team. But this thread is not for those beliefs!

              I am sincerely interested to hear well thought out, structured opinions on what strategy the raptors should pursue as an alternative to tanking. Please be civil.

              I'm not asking for research papers here, but I find well backed up arguments much more convincing.

              Please, for those on the "tanking side", do not hijack this thread and turn it into a flame war. Let this be a depository of information and arguments.

              Why do you not want to see the raptors tank? Will it make them worse in the long term? Will the basketball be unbearable to watch?

              How do you see the raptors moving forwards? What pieces are missing from this team that could help bring the Raptors to where YOU expect them to be?

              I am sincerely curious to hear the other side of this argument.

              Note: I am aware that no strategy is guaranteed to pan out. As a fan, I would like to pursue the one that provides the most likelihood of success.

              Finally: I made this thread because I would like to hear an argument constructed from the bottom up. I feel like many of the "anti-tankers" (I hate that term) have had to produce arguments mid-way through threads, and their arguments are then taken out of context and the whole idea gets sidetracked.
              To the original poster, I'll bite.
              1) I think we can get a good role player later in the 1st round--someone who makes a real contribution--as long as our scouting is up to snuff.
              2) MU can come out a little ahead on a several trades over the next few years like the guy who started with the paper clip and ended up with a house after a number of internet trades.
              3) Despite Bird rights and all that, I think some teams will be willing to part with quality guys in the last year of their rookie contract before they demand a hefty raise. Alternatively, you can try to overpay a RFA like Minny did when they almost snagged Batum.
              4) MU has two first rounders in 2016 to use as sweeteners in deals with teams looking to tank in future years.
              5) If we make the playoffs a couple of years in a row, TO becomes a more attractive destination for free agents.
              6) MU seems to have a knack for finding the right pieces to fit together to be greater than the sum of the parts.

              Now, I still think finding a potential all star in this draft is a far easier route to go, but the points I listed above give me some hope that we won't be a dreaded 7-11 team if we don't tank.

              Comment


              • #37
                tankers rule, anti-tankers drool SUCK IT DORKS
                @sweatpantsjer

                Comment


                • #38
                  Mediumcore wrote: View Post
                  It's a positive thread, so I'm trying to look at things through rosey glasses. Just say our D continues to go toe to toe with Indiana as they seem to always do. We've got a lot of bigs, JV, Amir, Hansborough, Patterson, Hayes to throw at Hibbert and West. D. West just kills us every game in the post, but Hayes is a really good post defender, and Amir/JV are getting better and better as the season progresses. If we can play solid perimeter D on George (now that Gay is gone) and Lance Stephenson, then we have a shot.

                  One of the great things about the Rudy Gay trade which nobody talks about is the infusion of veteran players. Hayes, Salmons are guys that have been around the league for a long time and are can teach guys like JV, DeMar and Ross a thing or two. These are the type of guys which Casey likes to coach because he can trust them with their defensive assignments on the floor. Not to mention a veteran PG like Lowry knows how to play with guys like them.
                  Come on man. I'm cool with the positivity thing but not at the sake of reality. There's enough positive things to discuss about this team without having to venture into the absurd and unrealistic.
                  Sunny ways my friends, sunny ways
                  Because its 2015

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    ceez wrote: View Post
                    tankers rule, anti-tankers drool SUCK IT DORKS
                    Haha Mr. Proton. Get it Positivity! Ha!
                    Sunny ways my friends, sunny ways
                    Because its 2015

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      ceez wrote: View Post
                      tankers rule, anti-tankers drool suck it dorks
                      lol

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        ceez wrote: View Post
                        tankers rule, anti-tankers drool SUCK IT DORKS
                        Who is "anti tank" really? Like honestly, you guys categorize us that don't want to nose dive in a flailing attempt to lose more than Utah as "anti tankers", but I think every poster on this board wants to get younger, better, and different. I swear sometimes I think you guys are just arguing with yourselves lol
                        9 time first team all-RR, First Ballot Hall of Forum

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          S.R. wrote: View Post
                          I'll re-post from the main page here, if that's alright. Hopefully it's not too redundant:

                          Ujiri is a patient guy who clearly demands a good return on every transaction. According to league sources and the players themselves (Gay post-trade), almost everyone on this roster is available for the right price. For the right price.

                          Ujiri would want picks, prospects, and flexibility first of all, but would, I think, take an offer that clearly improved the team with a more established player. Does anyone honestly think he's ruled out any opportunities that present themselves, just because he's already decided on a course of action (i.e. tank/don't tank)?

                          I'd summarize my take on his MO like this:
                          1) Keep all your options open. Don't rule out anything.
                          2) Get a good return on every deal.
                          3) Maintain flexibility while acquiring assets.
                          4) Improve the team with every transaction - whether with short-term or long-term benefits

                          To the anti-tankers, I'd say Ujiri's comments (and TL's) seem to indicate that he's willing to absorb some short-term pain for long-term gain if he thinks that's the best road forward. He wants this team to be much better than it has in the past, and if that means some more losses this season for a payoff down the road, then so be it.

                          To the pro-tankers, clearly he's not so set on scoring big in the 2014 draft that he's going to fire-sale the entire roster. He's going to be patient and see what the opportunities there are for transactions. Maybe the offers are good enough to unload several players and hit a home run in the next draft. Maybe the offers just aren't there and he moves forward with some of the current core, current 2014 picks, and an eye to future transactions.

                          Basically, I don't think that even he knows how the "rebuild" will play out. His goal is to improve this roster, dramatically. How he gets there will depend on so many variables that are outside of his control.
                          Good points. I like the phrase 'not purposefully losing'. I think keeping all options open is the way to go. I have way more faith in MU than BC in this regard. I think we will draft well even if make playoffs to the surprise of many pro-tankers.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            ceez wrote: View Post
                            tankers rule, anti-tankers drool SUCK IT DORKS
                            What happened to keeping things civil?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              KeonClark wrote: View Post
                              Who is "anti tank" really? Like honestly, you guys categorize us that don't want to nose dive in a flailing attempt to lose more than Utah as "anti tankers", but I think every poster on this board wants to get younger, better, and different. I swear sometimes I think you guys are just arguing with yourselves lol
                              he was joking
                              "Bruno?
                              Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
                              He's terrible."

                              -Superjudge, 7/23

                              Hope you're wrong.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                stooley wrote: View Post
                                he was joking
                                ShhhhhhH!

                                It is much more fun when innocent jokes are taken as snide remarks.

                                Get some popcorn and delete that post!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X