Is tanking "cheating"? Poll added

[whozit]

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.

You might also have people like me, who didn't like any of the options so didn't vote. If by your opinion, 75% of the questions are pro-tank having 75% of the answers choosing one of those three options shouldn't be surprising or revealing.

 

[mac]

My answer sort of lies in between a fair, and moves with the schedule. Scenario: It's post-all star break, we don't have a shot at the playoffs. I would play young guys with a mix of vets, but I wouldn't be trotting out Jack Cooley - Bruno lineups. Vets should not be getting 30mins, and we win or lose with this. As time goes on, if we are no where near the tanking race, then don't tank. If you're within 2-3 games of a meaningfully higher pick with 12 games to go, then fine, let the tanking begin.

In other words, it is cheating, and you shouldn't do it. It's bad for the team and bad for fans. But you hit a point with a few games left, you've given the guys enough burn and see good progress, then maybe you should cheat for the sake of a better pick.

 

[Sac.1989]

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.

It's is lol but I embrace it.

we can just change it to do you support tanking as a means of building a championship caliber team - yes/no

at the end of the day I don't buy the fact that more answers geared towards pro tank should lead to more votes pro tank. People aren't stupid, we aren't trying to deceive them. If you are ain't tank you will fish out the only answer that applies.

we have a pro tank board VF just admit it

dont be ashamed we've been losers for over a decade. This is what we are

 

[VF21]

It's is lol but I embrace it.

we can just change it to do you support tanking as a means of building a championship caliber team - yes/no

at the end of the day I don't buy the fact that more answers geared towards pro tank should lead to more votes pro tank. People aren't stupid, we aren't trying to deceive them. If you are ain't tank you will fish out the only answer that applies.

we have a pro tank board VF just admit it

dont be ashamed we've been losers for over a decade. This is what we are

Yeah, whatever.

I have now permanently lost interest. I'm not going to continue arguing about something that, quite frankly, makes me want to throw up. My only joy is that it becomes moot April 12 when our season is over and it all boils down to the computer picking the number combinations for the lottery.

 

[Sac.1989]

Yeah, whatever.

I have now permanently lost interest. I'm not going to continue arguing about something that, quite frankly, makes me want to throw up. My only joy is that it becomes moot April 12 when our season is over and it all boils down to the computer picking the number combinations for the lottery.

The computer will screw us VF, when hasn't it ? Hence the need for the most ping pong balls and tanking as a mitigation exercise

 

[edwardyoung111]

Jack Cooley (interviewed by Kayte ashe was leaving the arena shortly after midnight):

Kayte: "How do you respond when fans say that your appearance in tonight's game was a sure sign that the Kings were in full tank mode"

Jack: "I am offended when people refer to me as a tank. I prefer the term "big boned".

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

^^^^ Okay... that one is actually kinda funny.

"I'll allow it!"

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

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.

I beg to differ: only two of those options are actually "pro-tank." If you had a poll, asking whether smoking should be illegal, and one of the options is, "No, smoking shouldn't be illegal, but it's nasty, and you shouldn't do it", people who pick that option are not "pro-smoking."

 

[kingsfan1984]

I beg to differ: only two of those options are actually "pro-tank." If you had a poll, asking whether smoking should be illegal, and one of the options is, "No, smoking shouldn't be illegal, but it's nasty, and you shouldn't do it", people who pick that option are not "pro-smoking."

I dont think you can judge clearly that voter of 1 are for/against tanking. It may hurt fan interest, but that doeant mean the voter wouldnt still tank thinking its worth the short term pain for long term gain...so id say you cant say people selecting 1 ate pro or con tank.

The question prbably should read
"No, its not cheating, but Kings still shouldn't tank"

 

[Sac.1989]

Fan interest is a subjective issue. Hard to measure.

Attendence at Memphis games hasn't gone down looking at their average for season splits even though they are clearly tanking.

If your Memphis, bringing in the same revenue by putting an inferior product on the floor it's not something to really worry about.

Fans vote with their dollars and end of the day nothing has changed for them

 

[kingsfan1984]

Fan interest is a subjective issue. Hard to measure.

Attendence at Memphis games hasn't gone down looking at their average for season splits even though they are clearly tanking.

If your Memphis, bringing in the same revenue by putting an inferior product on the floor it's not something to really worry about.

Fans vote with their dollars and end of the day nothing has changed for them

Outside of looking at attendance and game viewership, its not going to be very useful me trying to guess at overall fan interest. For instance, im more likely to watch a game if i know ill get to see Cooley, Sampson Bruno Hayes N or other unkown players. If we win against a playoff team its hilarious. Cooley bouncing Green around getting Green to cheap shot him is fun. Sampson swatting players from behind and shutting down lebron was great to see. Watching the young "core" begin to look like a decent team is enjoyable. Do we win? Doesn't matter that much to me at this point. The drama is fun. Now watching Temple and ZBo go off every few games and watching one of these top picks melt through our fingers, stealing my future enjoyment is not fun for me and wasnt enjoyable.
Every fan is different, like uou said, and trying to guess at other fan interest is doomed to fail

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I dont think you can judge clearly that voter of 1 are for/against tanking. It may hurt fan interest, but that doeant mean the voter wouldnt still tank thinking its worth the short term pain for long term gain...so id say you cant say people selecting 1 ate pro or con tank.

The problem that I have with this argument is that it is rooted in (what I consider to be) the false premise that someone, who may agree that tanking isn't 'technically' cheating, but may object to it on matters of principle, would then turn around and abandon their principles, if tanking ended up working out in favor of their team.

The question prbably should read
"No, its not cheating, but Kings still shouldn't tank"

Agreed, but it's too late to change it, now.

 

[VF21]

I beg to differ: only two of those options are actually "pro-tank." If you had a poll, asking whether smoking should be illegal, and one of the options is, "No, smoking shouldn't be illegal, but it's nasty, and you shouldn't do it", people who pick that option are not "pro-smoking."