Pittsburgh Pirates: 2015-16 NBA Season Thread - Pittsburgh Pirates

Jump to content

  • 56 Pages +
  • « First
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

2015-16 NBA Season Thread Rate Topic: -----

#1101 User is offline   Winterset Resurrection 

  • We'll Be Ready for that Ass
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,633
  • Joined: 15-November 16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:25 AM

View PostDoctorJohnnyFever, on 25 March 2017 - 08:22 AM, said:

I think there is a pretty massive difference between players intentionally losing games and a front office gutting a team so it finishes near the bottom so it can land a top pick.


This is where we disagree. I don't think it's a difference at all- the intentional incompetence is just happening at a different level of the organization.


Quote

How is it any different than what happens at any trade deadline any year? The bad teams are trading their few good players for assets that make them worse in the immediate future with the hope they will make them better in the future.


That's a fair point, but at least here, a team has attempted to compete during the season, and is now trading their short-term pieces for players that can potentially make them better the following year and beyond. I think that's different than simply not allowing your best players to play.

I'm glad you brought this up, because I truly did not know the Penguins did this. Even though Lemieux clearly saved hockey in Pittsburgh, it's also tough for me to condone intentional tanking. I think it goes against the existence of sports.
"The problem in this country, is that almost no one's sense of community or country extends beyond their wallet." -GoBucs
0

#1102 User is online   DoctorJohnnyFever 

  • WiH owns me
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 40,073
  • Joined: 16-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:29 AM

View PostWinterset Resurrection, on 25 March 2017 - 08:25 AM, said:

This is where we disagree. I don't think it's a difference at all- the intentional incompetence is just happening at a different level of the organization.




That's a fair point, but at least here, a team has attempted to compete during the season, and is now trading their short-term pieces for players that can potentially make them better the following year and beyond. I think that's different than simply not allowing your best players to play.

I'm glad you brought this up, because I truly did not know the Penguins did this. Even though Lemieux clearly saved hockey in Pittsburgh, it's also tough for me to condone intentional tanking. I think it goes against the existence of sports.


Well, they did it again two decades later.
1

#1103 User is offline   Winterset Resurrection 

  • We'll Be Ready for that Ass
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,633
  • Joined: 15-November 16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:31 AM

View PostDoctorJohnnyFever, on 25 March 2017 - 08:29 AM, said:

Well, they did it again two decades later.


Really? Now I recall that team, and I thought it was just gawdawful in it's own right.

Plus, doesn't the NHL have a draft lottery now like the NBA to prevent the worst team from always getting the worst pick? I recall a story about Craig Patrick having a 4-leaf clover keychain in his pocket when the order was announced.
"The problem in this country, is that almost no one's sense of community or country extends beyond their wallet." -GoBucs
0

#1104 User is online   DoctorJohnnyFever 

  • WiH owns me
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 40,073
  • Joined: 16-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:38 AM

View PostWinterset Resurrection, on 25 March 2017 - 08:31 AM, said:

Really? Now I recall that team, and I thought it was just gawdawful in it's own right.

Plus, doesn't the NHL have a draft lottery now like the NBA to prevent the worst team from always getting the worst pick? I recall a story about Craig Patrick having a 4-leaf clover keychain in his pocket when the order was announced.


They do. But the team was gutted of every decent asset, and when they were traded, they were traded for nothing of value. Finances played a role in a lot of those guys being traded, but finances didn't make them trade guys like Jagr and Kovalev for literally nothing. Of course, Crosby wasn't the player they were tanking for. It was Ovechkin. And the key with that was if you finished with the worst record you were guaranteed no worse than the No. 2 pick, and everybody knew the No. 2 pick that year (Evgeni Malkin) was almost as good as Ovechkin, so you were going to get a franchise-changing player if you could be the worst team in the league. Losing Ovechkin, and the lockout, ended up getting the Penguins Sidney Crosby. Because the lockout meant there was no season in Crosby's draft year, so instead of going with teams records for that season in the Crosby lottery it was a combination of previous draft lottery results and their previous seasons records. Had the Penguins won the Ovechkin lottery they would have had one fewer ping pong ball in the Crosby lottery and may not have won.
1

#1105 User is offline   Winterset Resurrection 

  • We'll Be Ready for that Ass
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,633
  • Joined: 15-November 16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:49 AM

That's interesting. It's long enough ago that I had forgotten the details. Nor did I realize losing the season to a strike impacted the following draft as well. Thanks for the explanation.
"The problem in this country, is that almost no one's sense of community or country extends beyond their wallet." -GoBucs
0

#1106 User is online   DoctorJohnnyFever 

  • WiH owns me
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 40,073
  • Joined: 16-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 08:50 AM

I think tanking becomes a problem if a good team does it. Like, a team that is projected to be a playoff team at the start of a season just decides it is going to gut its team and not compete. But that's not who does it. It's teams that already know they are bad and know they do not have the personnel to compete. The 2003-04 Penguins were lousy. No matter what they did they were not going to be a playoff team. So they gutted what was left of the roster and improved their stock for the future. Same with the Oilers and Sabres when McDavid came out. Same with '83-84 Penguins. There is no benefit to finishing 24th out of 30. But if you can get a franchise-changing player that sets up your team for the next 10 years there is a pretty big benefit in finishing 30th,
0

#1107 User is offline   Winterset Resurrection 

  • We'll Be Ready for that Ass
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,633
  • Joined: 15-November 16
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 09:02 AM

View PostDoctorJohnnyFever, on 25 March 2017 - 08:50 AM, said:

I think tanking becomes a problem if a good team does it. Like, a team that is projected to be a playoff team at the start of a season just decides it is going to gut its team and not compete. But that's not who does it. It's teams that already know they are bad and know they do not have the personnel to compete. The 2003-04 Penguins were lousy. No matter what they did they were not going to be a playoff team. So they gutted what was left of the roster and improved their stock for the future. Same with the Oilers and Sabres when McDavid came out. Same with '83-84 Penguins. There is no benefit to finishing 24th out of 30. But if you can get a franchise-changing player that sets up your team for the next 10 years there is a pretty big benefit in finishing 30th,


Maybe. But the problem- at least in the NBA- is that it is a very superstar-dependent league. Without a superstar, you just do not have a serious chance.

To compound matters, there's only 1-2 per draft, and sometimes none at all. So you have teams like the 76ers literally tanking for 3 years straight, and even if they DO get lucky enough to get the #1 or #2 pick, there's still no guarantee of a superstar. And even IF they finish with the worst record, the NBA Draft Lottery is so messed up that they still only get a 25% at winning the top pick.

For example, in the 2010 draft, the Sixers had the #2 pick. But it was a year where there was no franchise-changer, and they took the concensus #2 in Evan Turner after the Wizards selected John Wall. Turner ended up being an adequate player, and there were a few All-Stars selected after him that draft, but the closest thing to a franchise connerstone was Paul George, who the Pacers didn't select until 10th.

So to me, it becomes a more serious problem when you have teams- and I think this only happens in the NBA so far- literally intentionally tanking for seasons straight.
"The problem in this country, is that almost no one's sense of community or country extends beyond their wallet." -GoBucs
0

#1108 User is online   PSU4Lyfe 

  • Veteran Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,846
  • Joined: 16-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2017 - 02:19 PM

Devin Booker scored 70 points last night
Disclaimer: This post in no way supports nor defends the signing of Rod Barajas.
0

Share this topic:


  • 56 Pages +
  • « First
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic