GarbageTime wrote:
couple things here:
1) I don't think its so much 'tanking' but rather not trying to immediately improve. That is not going out and getting vets who marginally improve the team just to win a few more games or make the playoffs. I don't think anyone wants to see the team intially not try, sit the better players etc. Its just the term tanking has changed from intentionally losing, to not trying your hardest to win. (if that makes any sense)
If this team stays the same and there is a marked improvement in the team I think thats a good thing and most people would be happy with it. If they change the team in some significant way and there is a marginal improvement, I don't think thats acceptable.
2) those changes may improve this teams D, but does it not in turn hurt the offense? does the team really end up any better off if they give up 5 less points a game, but score 5 less? For instance Bargs to PF and a defensive minded C means a total net offense loss but (theoretically) a net defensive gain. Switching Bayless and Calderon will definetely improves the D but it unquestionably hurts the offense to.
This team is only going to win if their Defense improves without hurting their offense... which more or less means a lot of the current players need to improve or end up being moved. The team needs balance, and specifically balanced players, and you don't get that by simply adding a bandaid. Thats more or less why they need this draft (and their previous drafted players to improve)... they need balanced players and a true top tier talent. Its why Bargnani needs to be dealt with and Derozan is coming due to prove himself or be dealt with aswell.