Why tanking does not work - article

[Capt. Factorial]

Kobe should be in the traded for not the drafted. The Lakers weren't in position to draft him via their record. It was basically trading a late first rounder (Vlade) for him.

You have a better argument counting Dirk as drafted since he was traded for another draft pick just a few slots away.

As I said:

Note that the list of draftees does include 5 championships for Kobe, who was technically a draft day trade. Even without Kobe, 54% of all T3PCTs were acquired in the draft.

It doesn't make any difference in the later analyses because Kobe was NOT a top-five draft pick. In fact, as I noted, the Kobe-led Lakers teams were the solitary exception to the rule that teams in the past 30 years who have won championships have directly (22 cases) or with one trade (3 cases) acquired at least one of their "big three" players via their own top-5 pick.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

It a serious distinction in methodology for gathering stats. Numbers are great but you have to precise in gathering the numbers that actually represent what you want to measure otherwise stats are useless at best and down right misleading at worse.

Then I guess it's a good thing that I have explicitly measured what I intended to measure. Let me just lay it all out: "For the purpose of this analysis, players who were acquired in the draft and subsequently signed contract extensions or free agent contracts with their drafting team shall, while continuously playing for their drafting team and no other, be considered to have been acquired through the draft." That is how I am measuring it, and I've laid out my rationale above.

You have now noted, four times, that you would have liked me to have measured something different, but it doesn't appear that anybody else is sympathizing with your objection.

 

[HndsmCelt]

Then I guess it's a good thing that I have explicitly measured what I intended to measure. Let me just lay it all out: "For the purpose of this analysis, players who were acquired in the draft and subsequently signed contract extensions or free agent contracts with their drafting team shall, while continuously playing for their drafting team and no other, be considered to have been acquired through the draft." That is how I am measuring it, and I've laid out my rationale above.

You have now noted, four times, that you would have liked me to have measured something different, but it doesn't appear that anybody else is sympathizing with your objection.

Just because no one else cares about your methodology errors don't expect me to put on a lemming suit. I refrained from the discussion in the tanking thread for several reasons chief among which is my prejudice that pre-lottery talk frequently sounds like kids discussing how good an unreleased movie IS due to the trailers they saw on TV. Truth lots of fans love young promising talent and when your team sucks it is easy to look forward to the draft. Been there done that got the T-shirt. As a long time fan/poster I have frequently acknowledged that the draft CAN make a difference in a bad team... but there is reason the well run franchises don't go back over and over while a predictable crop of cellar dwellers do. So I will leave you with a question I asked at the end of last season: How many more trips do we need? Is this the last year we HAVE to loose so we can then win? Two more? Three? We have spent more than 7 freeking years praying that virtual ping pongs would deliver us from suckatude; so will this magic draft finally pay off?

 

[Dime Dropper]

Just because no one else cares about your methodology errors don't expect me to put on a lemming suit. I refrained from the discussion in the tanking thread for several reasons chief among which is my prejudice that pre-lottery talk frequently sounds like kids discussing how good an unreleased movie IS due to the trailers they saw on TV. Truth lots of fans love young promising talent and when your team sucks it is easy to look forward to the draft. Been there done that got the T-shirt. As a long time fan/poster I have frequently acknowledged that the draft CAN make a difference in a bad team... but there is reason the well run franchises don't go back over and over while a predictable crop of cellar dwellers do. So I will leave you with a question I asked at the end of last season: How many more trips do we need? Is this the last year we HAVE to loose so we can then win? Two more? Three? We have spent more than 7 freeking years praying that virtual ping pongs would deliver us from suckatude; so will this magic draft finally pay off?

You seem to be under the impression that people want to stay in the lottery. The point is if you do it correctly, you really only need to be there two or three years; less if you strike gold and get LeBron (obviously not common). No ones arguing what we've done is good - we had a terrible FO and ownership which restricted us. I mean, I don't know what else you want. It's been pointed out numerous times that it's an effective way for terrible teams to become competitive - you just need a FO that knows what it's doing. Out of curiousity, who are the well known franchises that don't go back and fourth? I can think of SA (who got there by tanking) and the Lakers, who are almost certainly going to tank at some point in the next few years.

It's not about how many more trips we need, because that's not the argument. Your arguing about the competency of our FO which simply put, none of us know. You're arguing something other than the necessity to tank. If we did it right from the start we'd likely be competing for a PO spot right now with a young team. As of now we're in a terrible position - we don't have to tank because losing is going to happen whether you like it or not. No ones going to give us a star for our junk. At least this draft is loaded and yes, it could be the one that gets us out of the lottery so long as the FO makes the right moves in the months following the draft. Whether they can do that, I'm not sure. The Landry signing was not an encouraging one as far as that goes, in my opinion.

 

[Glenn]

Just because no one else cares about your methodology errors don't expect me to put on a lemming suit. I refrained from the discussion in the tanking thread for several reasons chief among which is my prejudice that pre-lottery talk frequently sounds like kids discussing how good an unreleased movie IS due to the trailers they saw on TV. Truth lots of fans love young promising talent and when your team sucks it is easy to look forward to the draft. Been there done that got the T-shirt. As a long time fan/poster I have frequently acknowledged that the draft CAN make a difference in a bad team... but there is reason the well run franchises don't go back over and over while a predictable crop of cellar dwellers do. So I will leave you with a question I asked at the end of last season: How many more trips do we need? Is this the last year we HAVE to loose so we can then win? Two more? Three? We have spent more than 7 freeking years praying that virtual ping pongs would deliver us from suckatude; so will this magic draft finally pay off?

This SHOULD be the last year. We have Cuz and Ben and I expect the day will come where Ben can average 20 ppg if not more. He also should become a great defender. Throw in a star from this year's draft and you have three stars. Everyone else on the team is inconsequential as long as they play a role and play it well. Our only problem is a few toxic contracts on people we need to shed and we can't do much more than wait. I don't expect any team with three stars to lose at the rate we have become accustomed to. If we don't make a substantial jump, management is doing something wrong and I am looking straight at PDA.

 

[Section 101]

They were KEPT through contract so the Loto ceases to be a factor once the new contract takes effect end of story.

By that standard as soon as they sign their first contract they are no longer a draft pick. In fact soon as they are drafted they are no longer a draft pick. The point is they were acquired in the teams draft position and have remained with the team.

 

[Dreadnought]

I understand everyone's frustration that we still have a bad team, especially when all of that glamour that was put on of us either winning a championship or curing cancer that was brought on by Vivek and Malone, but that can't be possible. I am a firm believer that we need this draft, especially a top 5 pick in it.

We sucked for a decade because of poor management. You can't turn that all around with a new coach and new owner. You need high picks. Picks not wasted on Thomas Robinson and Jimmer.

Even with our previous bounty of Tyreke and DMC, do you really think that stacks up against Durant and Westbrook?

 

[Glenn]

You seem to be under the impression that people want to stay in the lottery. The point is if you do it correctly, you really only need to be there two or three years; less if you strike gold and get LeBron (obviously not common). No ones arguing what we've done is good - we had a terrible FO and ownership which restricted us. I mean, I don't know what else you want. It's been pointed out numerous times that it's an effective way for terrible teams to become competitive - you just need a FO that knows what it's doing. Out of curiousity, who are the well known franchises that don't go back and fourth? I can think of SA (who got there by tanking) and the Lakers, who are almost certainly going to tank at some point in the next few years.

It's not about how many more trips we need, because that's not the argument. Your arguing about the competency of our FO which simply put, none of us know. You're arguing something other than the necessity to tank. If we did it right from the start we'd likely be competing for a PO spot right now with a young team. As of now we're in a terrible position - we don't have to tank because losing is going to happen whether you like it or not. No ones going to give us a star for our junk. At least this draft is loaded and yes, it could be the one that gets us out of the lottery so long as the FO makes the right moves in the months following the draft. Whether they can do that, I'm not sure. The Landry signing was not an encouraging one as far as that goes, in my opinion.

Examples of the Petrie/Maloof era: Tyreke Evans - ROY who was let go by the present ownership for something that so far has not thrilled. Jimmer - has not demonstrated he even belongs in the NBA. TRob - is now on his third team and is coming off the bench. TRob wasn't even worked out by the team before picking him. Jimmer was picked to sell tickets and with the hopes he could shoot and I really don't know what happened with Tyreke but these three guys show the skill level of our FO during some of our recent suckatude years. There was not a careful thought to drafting players who fit well in the NBA.

As Dime Dropper is saying, tanking only works if the FO is competent. Even if we weren't deliberately tanking, we didn't adequately take advantage of our high draft picks. As no FA would come to our team, we were severely limited in how the team could improve. As the three major ways of improving your team are signing FAs, draft, and trade, we were left with the trade to improve. If you think about it, a trade is simply shifting bodies of equal skill level. It is an inefficient way of acquiring the all important star. It is great for tweaking but we are far to awful to think that tweaking via trades is going to make a huge difference. You need stars.

 

[Dreadnought]

Examples of the Petrie/Maloof era: Tyreke Evans - ROY who was let go by the present ownership for something that so far has not thrilled. Jimmer - has not demonstrated he even belongs in the NBA. TRob - is now on his third team and is coming off the bench. TRob wasn't even worked out by the team before picking him. Jimmer was picked to sell tickets and with the hopes he could shoot and I really don't know what happened with Tyreke but these three guys show the skill level of our FO during some of our recent suckatude years. There was not a careful thought to drafting players who fit well in the NBA.

As Dime Dropper is saying, tanking only works if the FO is competent. Even if we weren't deliberately tanking, we didn't adequately take advantage of our high draft picks. As no FA would come to our team, we were severely limited in how the team could improve. As the three major ways of improving your team are signing FAs, draft, and trade, we were left with the trade to improve. If you think about it, a trade is simply shifting bodies of equal skill level. It is an inefficient way of acquiring the all important star. It is great for tweaking but we are far to awful to think that tweaking via trades is going to make a huge difference. You need stars.

This 100%. We have to be bad for another year(s) just because you have to fix all of the problems. Would it have helped if we had picked Klay Thompson over Jimmer? Lillard over TRob? Even Steph Curry over Tyreke? Absolutely. But we struck out and now we have to start from square 1 whether we like it or not.

Everyone should know what they were getting themselves into rooting for a small town team. We can't overnight this like a big city can.

Be happy we at least have DMC. Definitely a nice cog in the machine.

 

[Section 101]

Examples of the Petrie/Maloof era: Tyreke Evans - ROY who was let go by the present ownership for something that so far has not thrilled. Jimmer - has not demonstrated he even belongs in the NBA. TRob - is now on his third team and is coming off the bench. TRob wasn't even worked out by the team before picking him. Jimmer was picked to sell tickets and with the hopes he could shoot and I really don't know what happened with Tyreke but these three guys show the skill level of our FO during some of our recent suckatude years. There was not a careful thought to drafting players who fit well in the NBA.

As Dime Dropper is saying, tanking only works if the FO is competent. Even if we weren't deliberately tanking, we didn't adequately take advantage of our high draft picks. As no FA would come to our team, we were severely limited in how the team could improve. As the three major ways of improving your team are signing FAs, draft, and trade, we were left with the trade to improve. If you think about it, a trade is simply shifting bodies of equal skill level. It is an inefficient way of acquiring the all important star. It is great for tweaking but we are far to awful to think that tweaking via trades is going to make a huge difference. You need stars.

It's not like Evans is tearing it up in NO. In fact, he's played worse than GV.

 

[Dreadnought]

It's not like Evans is tearing it up in NO. In fact, he's played worse than GV.

Agreed. I understand our attachment to our players, but we can't be upset about letting Tyreke go (especially at that price). He still has a window of time to become an All-Star, but right now it looks like that ship as sailed. With players of that mold, I even prefer Lance Stephenson more.

 

[Glenn]

It's not like Evans is tearing it up in NO. In fact, he's played worse than GV.

I was pointing out how Tyreke, TRob and, Jimmer were poor additions to our team under the Maloof/Petrie era. Is that what you are getting at? Your notes are sometimes too cryptic to understand.

 

[Dreadnought]

I was pointing out how Tyreke, TRob and, Jimmer were poor additions to our team under the Maloof/Petrie era. Is that what you are getting at? Your notes are sometimes too cryptic to understand.

I gathered he was supporting you.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

Just because no one else cares about your methodology errors don't expect me to put on a lemming suit.

There is a difference between "not doing things the way HndsmCelt wants" and "methodology error". (Also, lemmings don't commit mass suicide by throwing themselves off cliffs. It's an urban legend.)

I refrained from the discussion in the tanking thread for several reasons chief among which is my prejudice that pre-lottery talk frequently sounds like kids discussing how good an unreleased movie IS due to the trailers they saw on TV. Truth lots of fans love young promising talent and when your team sucks it is easy to look forward to the draft. Been there done that got the T-shirt. As a long time fan/poster I have frequently acknowledged that the draft CAN make a difference in a bad team... but there is reason the well run franchises don't go back over and over while a predictable crop of cellar dwellers do. So I will leave you with a question I asked at the end of last season: How many more trips do we need? Is this the last year we HAVE to loose so we can then win? Two more? Three? We have spent more than 7 freeking years praying that virtual ping pongs would deliver us from suckatude; so will this magic draft finally pay off?

I think perhaps the problem here is that you're treating this too emotionally instead of thinking about as what it is - an analysis. I didn't recommend that we tank the season (something you clearly do not want us to do), I merely pointed out that the original Berri article saying that tanking (or, more precisely, "having at least one pretty bad season", as it removes intentionality) doesn't work is flawed. Tanking doesn't always work, that's true. But it appears to have been a key component in building 25 of the last 30 championship teams.

If you would like some solace, we already have a top-5 pick in Cousins who would definitely be one of our "big three". Perhaps we can get to a championship level without ever being in the lottery again on the strength of Cousins. However, right now this team does not look equipped to win 30 games, and no matter what strategies we try, we will likely be in the high lottery again come June. What optimism one might take away from my analysis is that, in contradiction to Berri's piece which suggested (in a poorly-reasoned way, in my opinion) that teams which are bad will necessarily stay bad (Berri says: "Kings fans, you're doomed forever!"), my analysis suggests that 25 of the last 30 champions came at some point in their recent past out of the cellar depths of the standings and that the draft pick(s) they got while down there were major contributors to their subsequent success. In other words, teams DO turn it around. 25 of the last 30 champs have.

Maybe the Kings turn it around this year and eventually ride Cousins to glory. Maybe the Kings get a high lotto pick again this year, and eventually ride Cousins, McLemore, and Wiggins/Parker/??? to glory. Maybe the Kings kick around in the lottery forever. I don't know. But it sure looks like a high draft pick is more likely to improve the team than a free-agent signing.

 

[HndsmCelt]

By that standard as soon as they sign their first contract they are no longer a draft pick. In fact soon as they are drafted they are no longer a draft pick. The point is they were acquired in the teams draft position and have remained with the team.

Well by that line of reasoning since almost all players START as a draft pick why not consider all those players to be draftees since they started that way... you cook up even bigger bad numbers that way!

 

[Padrino]

Just because no one else cares about your methodology errors don't expect me to put on a lemming suit. I refrained from the discussion in the tanking thread for several reasons chief among which is my prejudice that pre-lottery talk frequently sounds like kids discussing how good an unreleased movie IS due to the trailers they saw on TV. Truth lots of fans love young promising talent and when your team sucks it is easy to look forward to the draft. Been there done that got the T-shirt. As a long time fan/poster I have frequently acknowledged that the draft CAN make a difference in a bad team... but there is reason the well run franchises don't go back over and over while a predictable crop of cellar dwellers do. So I will leave you with a question I asked at the end of last season: How many more trips do we need? Is this the last year we HAVE to loose so we can then win? Two more? Three? We have spent more than 7 freeking years praying that virtual ping pongs would deliver us from suckatude; so will this magic draft finally pay off?

you should direct those questions to the new front office, rather than Capt. Factorial. across the last few seasons, i had maintained that the kings shouldn't be looking to the draft to catapult them back to the playoffs. their #4 pick in 2009 and their #5 pick in 2010 were more than sufficient, in my opinion, had the previous regime properly invested in the development of tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, and had the previous regime surrounded them with capable, defensive-minded veterans. with cousins, we're already seeing what a principled coach and a committed ownership group can do to speed up the growth process of a star-level talent...

obviously, we'll never know how evans would have responded under the same circumstances, but it's hard to imagine a two-way power guard with his skillset failing under a true player's coach like michael malone. the point is, when you draft well and then allow that talent to walk out the door, there aren't a lot of viable options with which to replace that talent, particularly if you're a losing team in an undesirable market. now, unlike the last few seasons, i'm leading the "tank" chorus, because i do not see free agency or the trade block as viable means of replacing or surpassing evans' talent. the previous regime blew it, and the new regime was too nervous to pull the trigger on a contract for evans. i disagreed mightily with the decision to cut him loose, but it was the new regime's decision to make, and now they're living with it...

there's not much left on this roster to work with. up to half of the roster probably doesn't even figure to be in the team's longterm plans, and a cousins/mclemore pairing simply isn't enough to guarantee a winning future for this franchise. but a cousins/parker/mclemore trio has the potential to dominate the nba for the next decade, if given the opportunity to do so. it's not complicated; it's just the big picture...

 

[Dreadnought]

you should direct those questions to the new front office, rather than Capt. Factorial. across the last few seasons, i had maintained that the kings shouldn't be looking to the draft to catapult them back to the playoffs. their #4 pick in 2009 and their #5 pick in 2010 were more than sufficient, in my opinion, had the previous regime properly invested in the development of tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, and had the previous regime surrounded them with capable, defensive-minded veterans. with cousins, we're already seeing what a principled coach and a committed ownership group can do to speed up the growth process of a star-level talent...

obviously, we'll never know how evans would have responded under the same circumstances, but it's hard to imagine a two-way power guard with his skillset failing under a true player's coach like michael malone. the point is, when you draft well and then allow that talent to walk out the door, there aren't a lot of viable options with which to replace that talent, particularly if you're a losing team in an undesirable market. now, unlike the last few seasons, i'm leading the "tank" chorus, because i do not see free agency or the trade block as viable means of replacing or surpassing evans' talent. the previous regime blew it, and the new regime was too nervous to pull the trigger on a contract for evans. i disagreed mightily with the decision to cut him loose, but it was the new regime's decision to make, and now they're living with it...

there's not much left on this roster to work with. up to half of the roster probably doesn't even figure to be in the team's longterm plans, and a cousins/mclemore pairing simply isn't enough to guarantee a winning future for this franchise. but a cousins/parker/mclemore trio has the potential to dominate the nba for the next decade, if given the opportunity to do so. it's not complicated; it's just the big picture...

Well said. To add on, our odds at actually signing a decent player will likely be contingent on what kind of core we draft/trade for also. We need a solid team to attract people. Even Vlade wouldn't have signed with this current mess of a team.

 

[Glenn]

you should direct those questions to the new front office, rather than Capt. Factorial. across the last few seasons, i had maintained that the kings shouldn't be looking to the draft to catapult them back to the playoffs. their #4 pick in 2009 and their #5 pick in 2010 were more than sufficient, in my opinion, had the previous regime properly invested in the development of tyreke evans and demarcus cousins, and had the previous regime surrounded them with capable, defensive-minded veterans. with cousins, we're already seeing what a principled coach and a committed ownership group can do to speed up the growth process of a star-level talent...

obviously, we'll never know how evans would have responded under the same circumstances, but it's hard to imagine a two-way power guard with his skillset failing under a true player's coach like michael malone. the point is, when you draft well and then allow that talent to walk out the door, there aren't a lot of viable options with which to replace that talent, particularly if you're a losing team in an undesirable market. now, unlike the last few seasons, i'm leading the "tank" chorus, because i do not see free agency or the trade block as viable means of replacing or surpassing evans' talent. the previous regime blew it, and the new regime was too nervous to pull the trigger on a contract for evans. i disagreed mightily with the decision to cut him loose, but it was the new regime's decision to make, and now they're living with it...

there's not much left on this roster to work with. up to half of the roster probably doesn't even figure to be in the team's longterm plans, and a cousins/mclemore pairing simply isn't enough to guarantee a winning future for this franchise. but a cousins/parker/mclemore trio has the potential to dominate the nba for the next decade, if given the opportunity to do so. it's not complicated; it's just the big picture...

Good note. My contention is that the new ownership planned to tank this year and replace Tyreke with a new stud. Tyreke was an awkward fit. Part of the tank was to not resign Tyreke. Getting Ben was necessary for it to have a chance to work. That may not make sense for people who define "tank" in a different manner.

 

[nickmcclure]

I tend to agree. Look at Cleveland. They've yet to win anything except a nice hour-long excuse from Lebron James on why he was going to dump them and head south.

This is a terrible argument.

The Cavs went to the Finals and were a contender every year.
They watched a star player form. He won ROY and MVP.

Are you basing your entire theory that tanking doesn't work cause the number one pick doesn't automatically win the title the next year?

I'm absolutely against tanking based on principle, (overpaid professional athletes owe it to the fans to compete) but to say tanking doesn't ever work is absolutely ridiculous.
2008 Seattle Sonics < OKC Thunder.
/thread.

 

[Bricklayer]

Whoa...whoa...are we actually arguing now that drafting Lebron James is a BAD thing and argument against tanking??? Yikes.

Let's see, 5 straight playoff appearances. 2 50 win seasons. 2 60 win seasons. 2 Conf Finals Appearances. 1 Finals. Appearance. 7 yrs of the player (we got 6+ out of Webber), a 6x All Star, ROY and 2x MVP.

But yes, tanking there was a failure. So says this article. Because conveniently you see LeBron didn't start winning 60 games for them until his 6th year there. Now if he'd done it by his FIFTH year, well then maybe we'd have something to talk about.

 

[Cold]

NBA is a talent league. Superstars win titles.

Kings need one. Cousins ain't it. His best role is a 2nd/3rd option all-star.

 

[Bricklayer]

NBA is a talent league. Superstars win titles.

Kings need one. Cousins ain't it. His best role is a 2nd/3rd option all-star.

Cousins is the single most talented center in the NBA. By a fairly wide margin actually. Being a Warriors fan distorts your perspective because Cuz has some sort of issue with Bogut at the moment.

 

[Cold]

Cousins is the single most talented center in the NBA. By a fairly wide margin actually. Being a Warriors fan distorts your perspective because Cuz has some sort of issue with Bogut at the moment.

He is talented offensively. He needs to get much better defensively. In the NBA, if your star is weak defensively, ideally you want that weakness at a guard spot. As the position gets bigger, you want stronger defense. Unless you have Lebron and Wade terrorizing the perimeter, you really need a strong defensive anchor in the middle to be an elite team. That's my opinion. I haven't seen DMC improve his defense.

 

[Bricklayer]

He is talented offensively. He needs to get much better defensively. In the NBA, if your star is weak defensively, ideally you want that weakness at a guard spot. As the position gets bigger, you want stronger defense. Unless you have Lebron and Wade terrorizing the perimeter, you really need a strong defensive anchor in the middle to be an elite team. That's my opinion. I haven't seen DMC improve his defense.

then you haven't been looking. His defense is absolutely RADICALLY improved this year. He actually looks like a real NBA defender out there. He's showing, challenging without fouling, rotating. It hasn't been a subtle change at all. It jumps out.

And yet its not elite. Nor will it be. He will never be a major shotblocker. Its the hole in the resume and will inevitably necessitate that he be paired with a shotblocker up front as his PF/running mate.

That also has nothing to do with whether or not he's a first option. He's the 7th leading scorer in the NBA right now. He's the third leading scorer per minute. If you are stuck having to find an even greater offensive force to be your first option you are in some deep doo doo.

Now get him a Paul George to be his #2/wingman and let the fun begin. Hope was Reke would turn out to be that guy. We went with Marcus Thornton instead. SMH.

 

[Cold]

then you haven't been looking. His defense is absolutely RADICALLY improved this year. He actually looks like a real NBA defender out there. He's showing, challenging without fouling, rotating. It hasn't been a subtle change at all. It jumps out.

And yet its not elite. Nor will it be. He will never be a major shotblocker. Its the hole in the resume and will inevitably necessitate that he be paired with a shotblocker up front as his PF/running mate.

That also has nothing to do with whether or not he's a first option. He's the 7th leading scorer in the NBA right now. He's the third leading scorer per minute. If you are stuck having to find an even greater offensive force to be your first option you are in some deep doo doo.

Now get him a Paul George to be his #2/wingman and let the fun begin. Hope was Reke would turn out to be that guy. We went with Marcus Thornton instead. SMH.

I'm sticking to my gut. I just can't see this team being elite with Cousins being the 1st option on offense, nor the best player on the team.

I'm looking at ESPN's player rankings (as bogus as it is), if we take anyone in that top 15 and pair him with Cousins, pretty much everyone of them (perhaps except Blake Griffin) would be the number 1 option ahead of Cousins. So I don't think it was a stretch for me to say DMC ideally should be the 2nd option.

 

[Bricklayer]

List them if you would, and I'll explain to you why you are wrong.

When you have a great offensive center he's always the #1 option barring a HOF on the team. It changes everything. Even if you have another great scorer you run it through the center first, because a great offensive center bends defenses like nothing else.

 

[bajaden]

Since were talking about tanking, and thus, indirectly the draft, I thought I'd mention that there are two college games on today, both on ESPN that bear watching, if your into pre-judging a possible future pick. Kentucky is playing Michigan St. at 4:30 PM pacific, and is followed by Duke vrs Kansas at 6:30 PM pacific. These two games alone feature Andrew Wiggins, projected by many as the 1st pick in the draft. Joel Embiid, a 7 ft shotblocker, and projected top ten, Wayne Selden, a 6'6" SG projected in the first round, Perry Ellis, another possible first rounder, Adreian Payne, the 6'10" PF/C who is projected in the first round, Gary Harris, a sharp shooting 6'4" combo guard and a first rounder, Julius Randle, the highly rated 6'10" PF who many think could go first, Willie Cauley Stein, the 7 foot shotblocker a mid first rounder, Andrew Harrison, the 6'5" PG and a first rounder, James Young, a 6'6.5" SF that the scouts have been raving about, and a first rounder, Rodney Hood, a 6'8" SF, a first rounder, Jabari Parker, a 6'8" SF who is also in the running for the first pick in the draft, Rasheed Sulaimon, a 6'4", very athletic SG who should go in the middle of the first round, and Quinn Cook, the very talented 6'2" Pg from Duke.

All these players are playing in these two games. Not often that you get that much talent to watch at one time. I watched the Duke game on friday, and Jabari Parker was as advertized. 23 minutes, 22 points, on 8 of 10 shooting overall while going 3 for 3 from beyond the circle. he added 6 boards, 2 assists, and 1 blocked shot. His running mate, Hood had a very similar game. Either of them would automaticly be the best SF on our team if we had them, especially Parker. He's a terrific talent. So put that in your tank pipe and smoke it.

 

[Cold]

List them if you would, and I'll explain to you why you are wrong.

When you have a great offensive center he's always the #1 option barring a HOF on the team. It changes everything. Even if you have another great scorer you run it through the center first, because a great offensive center bends defenses like nothing else.

Here is their list:

Lebron
Durant
Cp3
Harden
Westbrook
Curry
Dwight
Rose
Kyrie
Marc Gasol
Love
Parker
P George
Blake Griffin
Melo

16-20:
Duncan
Aldridge
Wade
Hortford
Deron

 

[Cold]

Since were talking about tanking, and thus, indirectly the draft, I thought I'd mention that there are two college games on today, both on ESPN that bear watching, if your into pre-judging a possible future pick. Kentucky is playing Michigan St. at 4:30 PM pacific, and is followed by Duke vrs Kansas at 6:30 PM pacific. These two games alone feature Andrew Wiggins, projected by many as the 1st pick in the draft. Joel Embiid, a 7 ft shotblocker, and projected top ten, Wayne Selden, a 6'6" SG projected in the first round, Perry Ellis, another possible first rounder, Adreian Payne, the 6'10" PF/C who is projected in the first round, Gary Harris, a sharp shooting 6'4" combo guard and a first rounder, Julius Randle, the highly rated 6'10" PF who many think could go first, Willie Cauley Stein, the 7 foot shotblocker a mid first rounder, Andrew Harrison, the 6'5" PG and a first rounder, James Young, a 6'6.5" SF that the scouts have been raving about, and a first rounder, Rodney Hood, a 6'8" SF, a first rounder, Jabari Parker, a 6'8" SF who is also in the running for the first pick in the draft, Rasheed Sulaimon, a 6'4", very athletic SG who should go in the middle of the first round, and Quinn Cook, the very talented 6'2" Pg from Duke.

All these players are playing in these two games. Not often that you get that much talent to watch at one time. I watched the Duke game on friday, and Jabari Parker was as advertized. 23 minutes, 22 points, on 8 of 10 shooting overall while going 3 for 3 from beyond the circle. he added 6 boards, 2 assists, and 1 blocked shot. His running mate, Hood had a very similar game. Either of them would automaticly be the best SF on our team if we had them, especially Parker. He's a terrific talent. So put that in your tank pipe and smoke it.

Insane talent in just 2 games. I'll be watching both. All 4 teams play great defense so somebody's got to look bad and see his stock drop.

 

[Dime Dropper]

Yeah, tonight will be like Christmas come early for me.