| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LakerLand247
Star Player
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Posts: 4809
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 24 wrote: |
Those are still the expectations. Do you honestly think Mitch thought this was a title team is year? |
I think Mitch was trying to win somethings else this year...
...the NBA Lottery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23913
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Lakers are starting to catch some breaks now. I'm just wondering if they're now on pace to fall in that hopeless spot in between getting a high draft pick and getting a playoff spot and end up getting neither. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lakers_Jester
Star Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2012
Posts: 5366
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Is the title of this thread vault worthy? Imo, yes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lakers_Jester
Star Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2012
Posts: 5366
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Saying the lakers should tank for a high draft pick is like getting the flu through the flu shot to avoid getting hit harder by the flu later?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Thugnomoe
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 14660
Location: unfortunately not Los Angeles anymore
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tanking and getting a top 5 pick. like cutting off your leg.. getting a bionic leg along with the parking spot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KeepItRealOrElse
Retired Number
Joined: 11 Oct 2012
Posts: 32767
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lakers_Jester wrote: | | Saying the lakers should tank for a high draft pick is like getting the flu through the flu shot to avoid getting hit harder by the flu later?? |
to avoid dying from the flu later. perfect!
we can close this thread now. tank on!!!!    |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Purp 32
Star Player
Joined: 12 Jul 2014
Posts: 2154
Location: Inglewood, CA
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The way I see it is that if B Scott can actually get this team playing well and maybe sneak into a playoff spot then it makes the Lakers way more attractive for quality free agents. I'm not opposed to tanking either if things start looking dismal, but the draft is so unpredictable. We could bottom out and end up with a bust. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker_Town
Retired Number
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 25604
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Can you swim with only one leg? If so, do you end up going in circles or something? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harlemlakerfan
Star Player
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2716
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| KBH wrote: | | This is one of the dumbest thread titles of the year. And we've had some doozies. |
So then why are you responding to it? Be gone! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harlemlakerfan
Star Player
Joined: 19 Mar 2014
Posts: 2716
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
First off! The title of this tread was not made to be some great analogy. It was made to show you just how stupid the theory was about tanking. There are zero guarantees with tanking, but some of you seem to think so.
All of this San Antonio and Duncan talk is stupid. Let's remember, that same year, Boston was tanking for Duncan and had 2 lottery picks and got nothing!
Control what you can control and that is winning as many games as possible, seeing where your team is at and make the necessary moves in the off season. Not gamble on some kid that may never turn into even a marginal player. If you happen to end up in the lottery, fine, pick the best player IF you end up there.
The title of this thread is not what's stupid. Losing games, alienating fans, losing money on ticket sales, all of this for just a CHANCE to draft a kid that MAY turn out to be a star is what's stupid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harlemlakerfan wrote: | First off! The title of this tread was not made to be some great analogy. It was made to show you just how stupid the theory was about tanking. There are zero guarantees with tanking, but some of you seem to think so.
All of this San Antonio and Duncan talk is stupid. Let's remember, that same year, Boston was tanking for Duncan and had 2 lottery picks and got nothing!
Control what you can control and that is winning as many games as possible, seeing where your team is at and make the necessary moves in the off season. Not gamble on some kid that may never turn into even a marginal player. If you happen to end up in the lottery, fine, pick the best player IF you end up there.
The title of this thread is not what's stupid. Losing games, alienating fans, losing money on ticket sales, all of this for just a CHANCE to draft a kid that MAY turn out to be a star is what's stupid! |
Lakers actually rarely miss with a top lottery pick. Of course the jury's out on Randle. The difference between the 1996 Boston team and this Lakers front office is the latter didn't suck at drafting top 10 picks. That makes a big difference.
When we were 0-7, I'm pretty sure the team was alienating fans.
Again, I'm not advocating a 76ers style tank, nor would I expect players to execute same (they have their next contracts and reputations to maintain). But what we see is a carefully orchestrated stealth tank by the FO, where they brought players who on the surface look like they may help the team but are in reality, helping usher the stealth tank. (Boozer is one of the examples, puts up decent stats but overall is not a good player due to his defense). If the team truly wanted to go for a playoff seed, they would have spent the nearly $25m in cap space on better players. But the team wanted placeholder talent so they could hopefully get their 2015 pick AND maintain cap flexibility for next season. Everything has been punted.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thedude1977
Star Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harlemlakerfan wrote: | First off! The title of this tread was not made to be some great analogy. It was made to show you just how stupid the theory was about tanking. There are zero guarantees with tanking, but some of you seem to think so.
All of this San Antonio and Duncan talk is stupid. Let's remember, that same year, Boston was tanking for Duncan and had 2 lottery picks and got nothing!
Control what you can control and that is winning as many games as possible, seeing where your team is at and make the necessary moves in the off season. Not gamble on some kid that may never turn into even a marginal player. If you happen to end up in the lottery, fine, pick the best player IF you end up there.
The title of this thread is not what's stupid. Losing games, alienating fans, losing money on ticket sales, all of this for just a CHANCE to draft a kid that MAY turn out to be a star is what's stupid! |
The title doesn't make the point you want it to because it is a bad analogy, but also because the point you're trying to make isn't very strong. Of course there's no guarantees tanking will work out in the long run -- just as there are no guarantees trying to win will work out in the long run. However, the odds of this specific team as it is constructed or could feasibly be constructed through trades making the playoffs, let alone winning a championship, are obviously poor. Even though you disdain tanking philosophically, it does make sense as a strategy.
The only argument you have made that isn't based on your emotional reaction to the word tanking applies equally to actively trying to win -- losing games (unavoidable with our roster), alienating fans (because of the lost games), losing money on ticket sales (even though that won't happen either way), all of this just for a CHANCE to trade for a player in the off season that MAY turn out to help the team contend. The difference is that a rookie from the draft that works out costs very little and we can still make trades in the off-season.
You're right about one thing, though. The team does need to control what it can, and that thing is how many - and consequently, how few - games they win. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
70sdude
Star Player
Joined: 05 Feb 2009
Posts: 4567
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I wouldn't like the odds to re-grow that chopped-off leg, but tanking has at least a chance towards making progress to replacing - or improving upon - original talent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakers4life78
Star Player
Joined: 09 Apr 2012
Posts: 1959
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
This team isn't going anywhere, their ceiling is 30 wins and most of these guys are interchangeable spare garbage parts. Our only potential impact future player is out for the year with a broken leg.
A top 5 pick gives us a potential blue chip player to go with Randle. The Lakers will likely be better next season, so why give Phoenix a better draft pick this year.
This isn't last year where tanking gives you a few extra ping pong balls, the difference now is a top 5 pick versus nothing at all.
_________________
17 time World Champions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kobeling
Sixth Man
Joined: 20 Nov 2014
Posts: 47
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rtype wrote: | | FreakofNature wrote: | | Kobeling wrote: | | rtype wrote: | the easiest way to prevent tanking is to do what european soccer leagues have, 1st & 2nd divisions, so every year the best 2nd div team gets promoted to 1st div, & the last 1st div team get relegated to 2nd div. Therefore theres incentive not to tank to prevent relegation to 2nd div.
Has the NBA considered this? |
Please tell me more about this "soccer" thing. |
For example....In the 1st division you have 20 teams. In the 2nd division you have 20 teams. The two bottom teams in the 1st division get demoted to the 2nd division. The two top teams in the 2nd division get promoted to the 1st division. |
correct therefore whichever teams are in 1st division, truly deserves to be there as opposed to being a soccer team which never achieves anything & tanking "on purpose".
Im sure there will be many cities and new teams willing to create a "NBA 2nd division" which deserve to have a shot at the championships. |
So the lakers are a 2nd category team. But how are they supposed to play soccer on NBA arenas?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
frenchbullcho
Star Player
Joined: 21 Apr 2011
Posts: 5122
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KBH wrote: | | K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | | DocK36 wrote: | | Blake Griffin also cracked his knee cap and was out for the year during his rookie season, how did he turned out? If it wasn't for him, no way in hell would CP3 resign with the Clippers. |
Yeah... and for all the hype and hoopla Griffin got coming out of the draft.... the Clippers still haven't won crap.... the pro-tankers on this board are crickets and don't have the logic/intelligence to understand the team concept... besides thinking... it's fun to throw games away. |
| K0BEE 2.0 wrote: | Not to drag any feet... but Imagine how much flexibility we would have if we did end up with the 1st pick.... I can see a team like the Pelicans offering Anthony Davis for the 1st round pick and the rights to Okafor.....
I would diff do Davis for Okafor..... that is why we need to lose all of our games. |
Please stop. Please. |
Always riding the fence KOBEE 2.0. I really want to hear another excuse about this now. ^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charisma
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 Aug 2014
Posts: 703
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thy shall not tank, at least not this early in the season. You'll never know what kind of bad luck other teams a la OKC may catch.
There are 30 teams and only 1 can win the championship each year. As a fan I want to watch competitive, fun basketball games now. I live in the moment! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeShowSince84
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lol, I disagree with this post topic |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakeShowSince84
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| we have a good chance at a top 5 pick if we win 15-24 games...any wins over 24....no top 5 pick....book it |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144474
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Harlemlakerfan wrote: | First off! The title of this tread was not made to be some great analogy. It was made to show you just how stupid the theory was about tanking. There are zero guarantees with tanking, but some of you seem to think so.
All of this San Antonio and Duncan talk is stupid. Let's remember, that same year, Boston was tanking for Duncan and had 2 lottery picks and got nothing!
Control what you can control and that is winning as many games as possible, seeing where your team is at and make the necessary moves in the off season. Not gamble on some kid that may never turn into even a marginal player. If you happen to end up in the lottery, fine, pick the best player IF you end up there.
The title of this thread is not what's stupid. Losing games, alienating fans, losing money on ticket sales, all of this for just a CHANCE to draft a kid that MAY turn out to be a star is what's stupid! |
So what guarantees do we have if we don't tank?
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JamezAmp
Star Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 1788
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Tank yes, basketball hell with no draft pick no |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why not "gamble" with a top 5 pick (lakers historically nail top 10 picks) AND have a max contract plus? That's how you rebuild quickly
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23913
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mini Mamba wrote: | I think purposefully tanking is bad karma. Look at what the 76ers have gotten for their "brilliant" strategy. Embiid and Noel are talented but have both had major injuries.
We on the other hand played hard last season and ended up with the #7 pick. It wasn't as high as many people would have liked but we were rewarded by having Randle fall to us.
If we play hard this season and the right way I believe that things will work out for us again in the end. |
Randle got a major injury too didnt he? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Treble Clef
Franchise Player
Joined: 20 Nov 2012
Posts: 23913
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rtype wrote: | the easiest way to prevent tanking is to do what european soccer leagues have, 1st & 2nd divisions, so every year the best 2nd div team gets promoted to 1st div, & the last 1st div team get relegated to 2nd div. Therefore theres incentive not to tank to prevent relegation to 2nd div.
Has the NBA considered this? |
I equate it to playing poker. When you get a bad hand in poker, do you go all in and risk losing everything? Or do you fold your hand so you still have some assets and are in play for the next hand that might be better? I have yet to see any good explanation of why it is bad for the league if bad teams focus on the future rather than the present.
As the Lakers stand right now, they could get a top 5 pick next year and pair him with Randle and a max level free agent and be all set. Under your soccer example, they'd be scrambling to trade Randle and their 2017 and 2019 #1 picks for guys like Brook Lopez and Rajon Rondo so they could win enough games to stay in the division but probably still miss the playoffs and also lose their draft pick to the Suns. They would have completely killed their future just to be a .500 team for one season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KBH
Franchise Player
Joined: 13 Sep 2008
Posts: 12171
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2014 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Treble Clef wrote: | | rtype wrote: | the easiest way to prevent tanking is to do what european soccer leagues have, 1st & 2nd divisions, so every year the best 2nd div team gets promoted to 1st div, & the last 1st div team get relegated to 2nd div. Therefore theres incentive not to tank to prevent relegation to 2nd div.
Has the NBA considered this? |
I equate it to playing poker. When you get a bad hand in poker, do you go all in and risk losing everything? Or do you fold your hand so you still have some assets and are in play for the next hand that might be better? I have yet to see any good explanation of why it is bad for the league if bad teams focus on the future rather than the present.
As the Lakers stand right now, they could get a top 5 pick next year and pair him with Randle and a max level free agent and be all set. Under your soccer example, they'd be scrambling to trade Randle and their 2017 and 2019 #1 picks for guys like Brook Lopez and Rajon Rondo so they could win enough games to stay in the division but probably still miss the playoffs and also lose their draft pick to the Suns. They would have completely killed their future just to be a .500 team for one season. |
Yeah, but do we have good parking? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
