Jason Ross on "loser mentality"

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#1
Jason Ross‏Verified account @JasonRoss1140 5h5 hours ago

J.Ross: Stop With The Loser Mentality Already

----------------------------------------------------------------

Words come into our vernacular and sometimes never leave. Like most things, this can be good and it can be bad. One term that drives me crazy is “tanking”. This is something that has been attached to the NBA and many aren’t letting it go. Please let it go. I believe it is meant to describe losing on purpose to help get a better draft pick. That premise seems simple to it’s core but it is an awful thought and flawed take in my opinion. First off, how do we separate a bad season, or lack of talent from tanking. Just because you are losing games does not mean you are tanking. Secondly, if you are losing it doesn’t mean the best idea is to keep losing so you can get a better pick. Does that work? Is that the answer? I say no.

http://khtk.com/j-ross-stop-loser-mentality-already/

Article worth reading IMHO, even though I know it will not sit well with some around here.
 
#2
I agree with him.

Sick to death of Lins and rooting for tanking and unsubtle suggestions that they should throw games. It’s not cute.

Kings will land just where they belong. They do one thing consistantly. Lose games. Whoever finishes worse than the Kings will probably do so because they’re worse.
 

kingsboi

Hall of Famer
#3
the first step for a small market franchise is to find themselves a franchise player and they have the perfect opportunity to do so should they get lucky in the lottery come May. If not, try again in 2020.
 
#5
VF, I know you don't like all the negativity on the board but what's the point in posting this article? It's just the same old argument we've had going on this board for a while now and you're bringing it back up. If you don't want negativity then don't fan the flames.

Jason Ross has no clue what he's talking about in that article.

There's two sides. The people who go with the proven fact that picking higher in the order gives you better odds of getting the best player and the people who don't think it's important because some #1 picks have been busts and some lower picks have been all stars. One side uses factual statistics that prove this and the other side counters with the fallacy that it doesn't matter where you pick because some bad players have been picked #1 and some good players have been picked lower. Jason Ross follows that fallacy and chooses to ignore facts.

The people who follow that fallacy seem to tune out the word "odds" and replace it with an absolute. So when I say the odds of landing an all star are at the highest when you pick #1, they hear "the #1 pick is always an all star". So in their mind, because Anthony Bennett was picked #1 and Draymond Green was picked in the 2nd round, that means that picking #1 isn't an absolute. Therefore, it doesn't matter where you pick. It's not only logically incorrect, but it's statistically incorrect as well.

Jason Ross' entire article is an argument that having higher odds isn't necessarily a good thing. Uh yeah it is Jason. It doesn't mean you're going to win every time, it just means you're going to win most the time.
 
#6
I think it's important to acknowledge it happens and some teams are doing it so that they can try to come up with a system that discourages it.

Fair or not I think it would be good (fun) to have a post-season single or 2 of 3 game tournament for draft order. Why not? It would reward teams that try all season, stop the stupid sell offs of talent and tanking that starts post-all star break and reward young teams that are actually trying.
 
#7
He's adopting this #1 or bust mentality when tanking these days is all about improving your lottery odds and position.

He put his list of best players in recent drafts and where they were picked and uses that as an argument against tanking. Considering most of them were still Top 5, the comparison falls on its face. Guess what Jason, the Kings could still very well play themselves out of picking second, or fifth, or even seventh.

And the Sixers have two franchise players, are above .500 and will be contenders in a few years barring something extreme. That's a damn sight better than the Kings who haven't shown they'll be off the treadmill of 30 wins anytime soon. It's strange seeing the local radio personalities of this loser franchise be so uppity and proud and pretend they're somehow above this.
 

gunks

Hall of Famer
#8
Something anti-linners miss, or choose not to acknowledge, is that this upcoming draft is very atypical with the sheer amount of talent at the top.

Multiple people in the biz have gone on record saying that the top 5 in this draft could all have gone #1 in the past draft.

I know a lot of Kings fans are jaded with our lotto luck (forever dropping out of the top 3) and draft choices (bust after bust), but if we get a top 5 pick this year, it's highly likely that we're coming away with a future allstar.

With so many other teams at the bottom, lins really matter this year. They suck, but they matter. This isn't gambling our record for a slim shot at #1. We can lock up a top 5 pick with our record and guarantee a #1 pick quality prospect.

Not that I'm gonna change any minds. And honestly, the wins give me reason for optimism too. Joerger can coach and the kids can play. Whatever will be, will be.
 

Mr. S£im Citrus

Doryphore of KingsFans.com
Staff member
#9
Something anti-linners miss, or choose not to acknowledge, is that this upcoming draft is very atypical with the sheer amount of talent at the top...
....

... If Giles comes back and looks like his former self, he's a top five player, and maybe the number one pick in the draft. The way the draft is shaping up, the top five is getting crowded, which means this could end up being a very deep draft with potential starters and future stars...
... If [Dwayne Bacon] is able to consistently shoot the 3 ball, I could see him being taken in the late 1st. However, since this is an incredibly deep class, he could slip to the 2nd.
What team will give up a first round pick for a rental of Gay without commitment? No one. Especially since this draft is being labeled as one of the "deeper" drafts...
... As far as the (and close your eyes now because I'm going to drop that horrible "f" word fans here hate) future is concerned, we're in 9939393838x better shape than any time in recent memory. We were going to have 0 picks in this deep draft, now we have 2 top 7 picks. We have a lottery pick from last year who's showing a ton of promise...
the truth hurts but it's the reality we live in at the moment. Botched draft pick after botched draft pick have and will hold this franchise back moving forward. The best way to kick start this in a positive manner is retaining the draft pick in this draft class, since it's so deep and filled with lots of impressive prospects.
sitting Cousins out 24 games into the season? hmm...if the Kings are looking to take this approach more often as the season prolongs, I'm all for it...that means keeping the draft pick in a strong and "deep" draft and with that I hope to see one or two of the rookies play in this one...
We're gonna have a good selection regardless. This is a deep draft. We could lose all the the remaining games anyway, and still get screwed by the ping pong balls. It wouldn't be the first time.
... Don't forget the Lakers will have another likely top 5 pick coming in a deep draft...
I think a lot of people who haven't kept up with any draft prospects this year are really missing out. I think there's at least 5 potential franchise players alone... If everyone in this thread was asked to name the 14 lotto players, there's a good chance that none of our lists would be the same. That's how crazy good and deep this draft is going to be.
First, you list is pretty accurate in general. One could argue the order, but that usually depends on the team picking and what their looking for. As to the question, what would be the best course of action for the Kings, my answer would be to find a way to keep the pick, and if not, then acquire as high a pick as possible. Doing the second might be difficult in a year where were about to have the deepest draft in 20 years.
Those comments were all made last season.
 

Capt. Factorial

trifolium contra tempestatem subrigere certum est
Staff member
#10
Those comments were all made last season.
There is a distinction, however, between a deep draft, and the number of franchise players in a draft. This year's draft actually does not look as deep as last year's - the last half of the first round seems relatively barren this year - and I don't think anybody has been characterizing the drafts in the same way. Last year, we were able to trade #10 for #15 and #20 and feel good about it because there were a large number of good players, a lot of them with relatively similar value. This year, if your draft pick falls out of the the top-7 it's not entirely clear what you do. Top-7 seems like a hard-to-miss scenario. After that, you can take Bridges #1, or you can take Bridges #2, or you can cross that bridge when you come to it.

But, yes, the outlook for drafts before they happen is usually seen through rose-colored glasses.
 
#11
....












Those comments were all made last season.
You act like this happens every year. It doesn't. 2013 and 2016 were correctly pegged as the weak drafts that they were. 2017 was in fact a strong, deep draft and it doesn't change anything about what 2018 is supposed to be. I wouldn't be surprised to see all those predictions about 2017 to come true. The reason 2018 is being hyped is because of it's top, but after that it's pretty average. That's two different animals.
 
#15
He's adopting this #1 or bust mentality when tanking these days is all about improving your lottery odds and position.

He put his list of best players in recent drafts and where they were picked and uses that as an argument against tanking. Considering most of them were still Top 5, the comparison falls on its face. Guess what Jason, the Kings could still very well play themselves out of picking second, or fifth, or even seventh.

And the Sixers have two franchise players, are above .500 and will be contenders in a few years barring something extreme. That's a damn sight better than the Kings who haven't shown they'll be off the treadmill of 30 wins anytime soon. It's strange seeing the local radio personalities of this loser franchise be so uppity and proud and pretend they're somehow above this.
His comments on the Sixers are laughable.

They had to go through seasons in which they won 10 games, 18 and 19 as well. Is it worth it? What are they even now? They are a better team but where are they going?

They're going to the playoffs Jason Ross. Probably for a handful of years to come.
 
#18
VF, I know you don't like all the negativity on the board but what's the point in posting this article? It's just the same old argument we've had going on this board for a while now and you're bringing it back up. If you don't want negativity then don't fan the flames.

Jason Ross has no clue what he's talking about in that article.

There's two sides. The people who go with the proven fact that picking higher in the order gives you better odds of getting the best player and the people who don't think it's important because some #1 picks have been busts and some lower picks have been all stars. One side uses factual statistics that prove this and the other side counters with the fallacy that it doesn't matter where you pick because some bad players have been picked #1 and some good players have been picked lower. Jason Ross follows that fallacy and chooses to ignore facts.

The people who follow that fallacy seem to tune out the word "odds" and replace it with an absolute. So when I say the odds of landing an all star are at the highest when you pick #1, they hear "the #1 pick is always an all star". So in their mind, because Anthony Bennett was picked #1 and Draymond Green was picked in the 2nd round, that means that picking #1 isn't an absolute. Therefore, it doesn't matter where you pick. It's not only logically incorrect, but it's statistically incorrect as well.

Jason Ross' entire article is an argument that having higher odds isn't necessarily a good thing. Uh yeah it is Jason. It doesn't mean you're going to win every time, it just means you're going to win most the time.
I promise there are more than two sides, but like many issues hashed and rehashed here lately, I see no point.
 
#19
This article is not surprising coming from Jason Ross. Grant came on today saying that even if we fall out of the top 5, he's ok with it. The kings are on the right track. Sounds like the narrative over at KHTK has been set.

We kings fans have a lot of experience in this crap.
The kings will win more than they should in the second half. Maybe we'll close out the season on some sort of win streak. They'll play themselves into the 7th or 8th spot. The fans will get excited because grant is telling them that the wins are setting the table for next year. (Hahahaha whatever)
End result will be we missed out on a top 5 talent. We continue to win 26-32 and miss the playoffs. Vlade fires himself. Rinse and repeat. It's just all so dam predictable........
 
Last edited:
#21
??? I've already said multiple times that last year's class was better. However, this year's top 5 is stronger than last year's top 5.
I think last year's class was better too. I'm intrigued about a few prospects this year though, 2 out of my top 5 play for mich st. I like Doncic as well but I'm not over the moon like some. Bagley looks rough around the edges to me almost like a bigger MKG. T. Young doesn't move the needle for me personally he has huge bust potential if he goes high. Whoever we pick has to be able to mesh with Fox and quite frankly be able to keep up that's why I Like JJJ he would rim run with WCS and splash from the outside. Just my .2.
 
#22
This article is not surprising coming from Jason Ross. Grant came on today saying that even if we fall out of the top 5, he's ok with it. The kings are on the right track. Sounds like the narrative over at KHTK has been set.

We kings fans have a lot of experience in this crap.
The kings will win more than they should in the second half. Maybe we'll close out the season on some sort of win streak. They'll play themselves into the 7th or 8th spot. The fans will get excited because grant is telling them that the wins are setting the table for next year. (Hahahaha whatever)
End result will be we missed out on a top 5 talent. We continue to win 26-32 and miss the playoffs. Vlade fires himself. Rinse and repeat. It's just all so dam predictable........
We had a top 5 pick last year. We've had 4 in the last 9 drafts. I think the issues are more nuanced than getting the wrong draft spot.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#23
VF, I know you don't like all the negativity on the board but what's the point in posting this article? It's just the same old argument we've had going on this board for a while now and you're bringing it back up. If you don't want negativity then don't fan the flames.

Jason Ross has no clue what he's talking about in that article.

There's two sides. The people who go with the proven fact that picking higher in the order gives you better odds of getting the best player and the people who don't think it's important because some #1 picks have been busts and some lower picks have been all stars. One side uses factual statistics that prove this and the other side counters with the fallacy that it doesn't matter where you pick because some bad players have been picked #1 and some good players have been picked lower. Jason Ross follows that fallacy and chooses to ignore facts.

The people who follow that fallacy seem to tune out the word "odds" and replace it with an absolute. So when I say the odds of landing an all star are at the highest when you pick #1, they hear "the #1 pick is always an all star". So in their mind, because Anthony Bennett was picked #1 and Draymond Green was picked in the 2nd round, that means that picking #1 isn't an absolute. Therefore, it doesn't matter where you pick. It's not only logically incorrect, but it's statistically incorrect as well.

Jason Ross' entire article is an argument that having higher odds isn't necessarily a good thing. Uh yeah it is Jason. It doesn't mean you're going to win every time, it just means you're going to win most the time.
You may not agree with the article, but that doesn't mean it's not worthy of sharing.

Fan the flames? The endless posts about tanking, etc. aren't fanning the flames? It's all a matter of perspective. Are you sure you're not just objecting because it doesn't align with your outlook?

Simply presenting an article for review and discussion (provided it's a legitimate article from a legitimate source) is kind of what it's all about, isn't it?

I stand very firmly by my decision to share it, just as I stand very firmly in supporting your right to disagree with it. :)
 

gunks

Hall of Famer
#24
It's always a bad time to be a garbage team.
Indeed! I hype up lins, but that doesn't mean I don't miss the good old days of playoffs and not even paying attention to the draft. Foggy as those memories might be.

This is the first season where I've been all in on lins from the start, and it feels damn dirty! Whenever I make my pro lin posts, it's not so much with the intention of changing minds, as it is a guilt ridden explanation of my bizarro fandom.

Win vs lin.... we all just want our team to be good again.

As divisive as this board has gotten this season, I gotta say that those of us who've stuck around are the most die hard fans around! Win or lin.

Next season can't come soon enough. I miss all of us being on the same page, rooting for our Kings. In the meantime, I'm just gonna root for the kids, and if we lose? Well... Thats just a crappy bonus.
 
#25
Indeed! I hype up lins, but that doesn't mean I don't miss the good old days of playoffs and not even paying attention to the draft. Foggy as those memories might be.

This is the first season where I've been all in on lins from the start, and it feels damn dirty! Whenever I make my pro lin posts, it's not so much with the intention of changing minds, as it is a guilt ridden explanation of my bizarro fandom.

Win vs lin.... we all just want our team to be good again.

As divisive as this board has gotten this season, I gotta say that those of us who've stuck around are the most die hard fans around! Win or lin.

Next season can't come soon enough. I miss all of us being on the same page, rooting for our Kings. In the meantime, I'm just gonna root for the kids, and if we lose? Well... Thats just a crappy bonus.
As the season has progressed I will admit losing a game has little effect on me. I am now numb to losses. Watching the Kings young Players improve on almost a nightly basis has become my "wins" for this season. I watch certain key matchups and take my enjoyment from them. In the Houston game it was the Harden vs Bogie and CP3 vs Fox inner game that held my interest.

I want the Kings to get a good draft pick but the wins against the Cav's, GSW and OKC were pretty sweet!
 
#26
You may not agree with the article, but that doesn't mean it's not worthy of sharing.

Fan the flames? The endless posts about tanking, etc. aren't fanning the flames? It's all a matter of perspective. Are you sure you're not just objecting because it doesn't align with your outlook?

Simply presenting an article for review and discussion (provided it's a legitimate article from a legitimate source) is kind of what it's all about, isn't it?

I stand very firmly by my decision to share it, just as I stand very firmly in supporting your right to disagree with it. :)
I stand firmly by your decision to share it as well. It's just confusing from my standpoint because you are one of the more vocal posters around here about how the negativity is hurting the board and by sharing this article, you knew that it was going to bring people like me out of the woodwork :p

As far as me objecting to the article because it doesn't align with my outlook...that's not true. I'm objecting to the article because it defies logic, common sense and statistical fact. It's not a matter of taking sides. There is no gray area here. It's like disagreeing with the laws of physics. You can do it, but you would be wrong. Jason Ross is wrong. It's not a matter of opinion in this particular case. There is a lot we can agree and disagree with about this sport but Jason Ross' article isn't an opinion piece. It's a guy disagreeing with math.
 
#27
the system is the issue. change it like this: add a rule so that the last team has a smaller chance in the lottery than the other lottery teams. also add a rule that if you are the last team 2 years in a row then you are exempt from rule 1 in the 3rd year and the next team up is the lower lottery chance team.
 
#28
You may not agree with the article, but that doesn't mean it's not worthy of sharing.

Fan the flames? The endless posts about tanking, etc. aren't fanning the flames? It's all a matter of perspective. Are you sure you're not just objecting because it doesn't align with your outlook?

Simply presenting an article for review and discussion (provided it's a legitimate article from a legitimate source) is kind of what it's all about, isn't it?

I stand very firmly by my decision to share it, just as I stand very firmly in supporting your right to disagree with it. :)

Not directed at you VF21, just quoted you to draw attention to the negative stuff ppl talk about...

From my viewpoint the "tank or not tank" is neither positive or negative, its just a TOPIC. Its basketball talk thats highly relevant to the kings. Its basically a discussion on just what way to point the boat. I enjoy readig the thoughts on both side of the aisle personally.
 
#29
Jason doesn't say tanking doesn't work. He says it doesn't 100% guarantee you a championship.
Well no poopoo Poolock.

There are a slew of problems with his analysis, especially the single variable one at the beginning, but that's fine b/c it's not a scientific article.

Tanking is not really "losing on purpose", because the people who actually play aren't doing that. It's more like, making it more likely to lose by resting vets, making trades, and playing rookies. THAT is tanking and there is nothing evil about it.
Also if tanking didn't work the rules wouldn't be changing next year.

One thing I'm incredibly happy about is that this is the LAST time we have to do this for a long time.
 
#30
Jason doesn't say tanking doesn't work. He says it doesn't 100% guarantee you a championship.
Well no poopoo Poolock.

There are a slew of problems with his analysis, especially the single variable one at the beginning, but that's fine b/c it's not a scientific article.

Tanking is not really "losing on purpose", because the people who actually play aren't doing that. It's more like, making it more likely to lose by resting vets, making trades, and playing rookies. THAT is tanking and there is nothing evil about it.
Also if tanking didn't work the rules wouldn't be changing next year.

One thing I'm incredibly happy about is that this is the LAST time we have to do this for a long time.
I agree that the players aren't losing on purpose. But if fans can see that an organization is tanking then you can be sure players can too. I don't think the players are oblivious to the tanking strategy, and I'm sure there are some who are bothered by the idea that guys who could help them win are sitting on the sideline so the team has a better statistical chance at drafting a rookie who might replace them. It's a fine line to walk.