Is tanking "cheating"? Poll added
- Thread starter JCTNKINGFAN
- Start date
sactowndog
All-Star
As important, the NFL has a hard cap that doesn’t allow you to keep your players like the NBA does.. nor does it allow teams in large markets to have payrolls that far exceed small market teams.
Put in place a hard cap and make all players free agents after 5 years and you would have much less reason to tank.
sactowndog
All-Star
Who arguing.
At the point he used Brad Miller as an example of a franchise player I stopped bothering to reply. Brad is a perfect example of why my friend in an NBA front office said if you are looking for a metric of a player who might lead a team to a championship use 3 time all-star.
Your point is essentially the same. We had two top 3 picks on that team: Chris and Bibby. We haven’t had one since.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Both of whom, interestingly enough, the Kings acquired by trade. Maybe they should try trading for their next franchise player instead of drafting one?
sactowndog
All-Star
Both of whom, interestingly enough, the Kings acquired by trade. Maybe they should try trading for their next franchise player instead of drafting one?
But they will need a #3 pick to do it or a really good GM.
sactowndog
All-Star
This poll is why I objected to the original thread and characterization in the first place.
30% of our posters think one side condones cheating and 45% think the other side is hopelessly naive. Sounds a lot like our current political environment doesn’t it.
30% of our posters think one side condones cheating and 45% think the other side is hopelessly naive. Sounds a lot like our current political environment doesn’t it.
This poll is why I objected to the original thread and characterization in the first place.
30% of our posters think one side condones cheating and 45% think the other side is hopelessly naive. Sounds a lot like our current political environment doesn’t it.
Wrong. The poll only reflects the feelings of those who have actually responded to it. 19 responses don't tell much of a story, except that a lot of our members just aren't posting right now.
The problem with this poll is that I kind of want to select all four responses.
In addition, if you add the responses that think tanking has a negative impact on the fans/team, you get 10. Those that think tanking helps total 9. Lots of different ways this can and will be interpreted. I think the most telling number, however, is the total responses. Some fans have quit interacting and I hope that doesn't last too much longer.
Sac.1989
Starter
The poll is great but really you can argue the interpretation.
3 of the responses for me are basically supporting tanking - options 1,2 and 4.
Option one doesn't feel like its cheating, the issue is fan interest - fan interest would be high if we were a lock for a top 3 pick with the young core we have if you ask me. Interest in this season has dissipated recently due to the fact that we seem to be setting ourselves up for a lower draft pick, playing vets and winning games, when for much of the season we were looking at a high pick in a draft where there are very good projected players. You can argue that people are not interacting, and attendance on Kings fans is at an all time low because we are biting our nose off to spite our face here by winning pointless games. Its been a long season, there really isnt any more development to be done, just a finish to the season, exit meeting and summer workout schedules to be set.
Option two supports tanking noting its the world we live in
Option four supports tanking noting that it is cheating but again it is the world we live in
Thats 14 pro tanking votes if you take my interpretation. Almost 3 out of 4 people if you want to average it out.
3 of the responses for me are basically supporting tanking - options 1,2 and 4.
Option one doesn't feel like its cheating, the issue is fan interest - fan interest would be high if we were a lock for a top 3 pick with the young core we have if you ask me. Interest in this season has dissipated recently due to the fact that we seem to be setting ourselves up for a lower draft pick, playing vets and winning games, when for much of the season we were looking at a high pick in a draft where there are very good projected players. You can argue that people are not interacting, and attendance on Kings fans is at an all time low because we are biting our nose off to spite our face here by winning pointless games. Its been a long season, there really isnt any more development to be done, just a finish to the season, exit meeting and summer workout schedules to be set.
Option two supports tanking noting its the world we live in
Option four supports tanking noting that it is cheating but again it is the world we live in
Thats 14 pro tanking votes if you take my interpretation. Almost 3 out of 4 people if you want to average it out.
Whch is, somewhat ironically, true about virtually all polls and statistics. And that kind of brings us full circle on our never-ending debate. At least we're not bored.
Again, it's 3 out of 4 responses, which is not very representative when your sample size is 19 out of 2,620.
Sac.1989
Starter
how many active members do we have though ? that 2620 is not traffic daily.
Definetly more quiet around here these days. Only the die hards left.
We should email everyone and have them respond to the poll. It would be good to know. My hypothesis is the numbers will maintain their correlation
kingsfan1984
Starter
Id be in favor of a hard cap. Any system that would allow a wider dispersion of the nba top talent. Should only be able to fit 1 max player per team
That's one hypothesis that will go unproven for the simple reason we mods don't have easy access to all the email addresses of every member and we do not have the ability to blanket email every member of the forum.
I think you would be surprised, however, at the number of members who do log on and read but do not comment. Adding the poll to an ongoing thread is always problemataic as those who have no interest in further discussion of the topic might not respond (on either side).
Out of curiosity, I did a manual count of how many different members have posted in this thread. There are approximately 37 (error rate +/- 2) different responders, and only 21 poll participants. And, in looking at the poll participants, 12 of those have not posted in the thread.
Just some more data to try and interpret.
Just some more data to try and interpret.
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Aha, I think we can all agree on this one - for the Kings to become a contender again, they will need some good GM work, regardless of what path they take!
LPKingsFan
All-Star
Or, better yet, get rid of the max individual salary restriction.
Out of curiosity, I did a manual count of how many different members have posted in this thread. There are approximately 37 (error rate +/- 2) different responders, and only 21 poll participants. And, in looking at the poll participants, 12 of those have not posted in the thread.
Just some more data to try and interpret.
VF, I never thought I could say it, but you've found a data analysis problem that bores even me!
VF, I never thought I could say it, but you've found a data analysis problem that bores even me!
My work here is done.
sactowndog
All-Star
jcassio
Starter
I voted, but for the record I must say that I didn’t like any of the options. Unless I’m an outlier, that could be why the participation in this thread and poll are low. Or maybe it’s just a dark subject for some people. And confusing for some others.Speaking of posters who haven’t voted
I would challenge the premise that saying "tanking is not cheating, but it hurts fan interest" counts as being pro-tank.
allrightythen
Starter
I guess I need someone to be more specific about how we are defining cheating here. Are we talking about cheating as in breaking the rules or cheating fans by sandbagging.
Answer number 2 reminds me of the PEDs argument with Barry Bonds. He was doing it, but everyone was doing and it wasn't technically against the rules so he wasn't really cheating.
Answer number 2 reminds me of the PEDs argument with Barry Bonds. He was doing it, but everyone was doing and it wasn't technically against the rules so he wasn't really cheating.
if there was straight "yes it is cheating" I would vote for it.
Since those options were adding statements "I do not care about it" and that "Kings should do it", I could not select any of them.
I should have probably abstained, but I did not, just do not count it as "another things it is not cheating".
Since those options were adding statements "I do not care about it" and that "Kings should do it", I could not select any of them.
I should have probably abstained, but I did not, just do not count it as "another things it is not cheating".
Fixed it for you.
Also, it isn't 22 for and 6 against. It's 20 who say it isn't cheating and 8 who say it is.
Sac.1989
Starter
Out of the 8, 2 dont care that it is cheating, therefore being part of the pro tanking collective. "i dont care, if you're not cheating (tanking) your not trying"
not arguing if it is cheating or not, my perspective is options 1, 2 and 4 are pro tank whilst option 3 is not.
I'm bored or I wouldn't be putting up any argument.
The poll question was "is tanking cheating?" If you take away the modifiers and leave just the one word answer, there are two "Yes" and two "No" options to reply. While you're correct in assuming three options are "pro-tank" it's not what the question asked. I'll be so glad when April 12 rolls around.
EDIT: If we look at it your way, the entire poll is skewed towards tanking (with 3 of the 4 options being "pro-tank") and therefore not only invalid but misleading.
Suicide King
Starter
I believe the question itself is looking for a black or white answer to what is really a gray question.
I would have voted for:
Somehow the system of selection needs to change but thus far that mythical solution has not yet been implemented.
I would have voted for:
Somehow the system of selection needs to change but thus far that mythical solution has not yet been implemented.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
