Yes, another pro tanking thread. Lets look at recent NBA history for some facts.

[lightspeed5]

being a middle of the pack team is NBA purgatory. We need to suck and suck bad.

Teams that end up being contenders usually spend at least a season or two in the middle of the pack.

but they started from the bottom....

Heat after shaq left were horrid... pick #2

OKC after ray allen left was horrid

the top 2 contenders were terrible for at least a season or 2

The Lakers count as a team that was dominant in the early 2000s, then sank to mediocre for three years before becoming top contenders again from '08 to '11. 

They've sunk back to mediocre, but chances are they'll find a way to get back up nearer the top before too long.

Excellent point!!!!!

We can just follow that plan!!

1. Have one of the best 7 players of all-time......

HEY, wait a second here!! I SEE HOW THEY DID IT NOW!!!!

Are you calling Kobe Bryant one of the seven best players of all time?

hes up there

Pretty good for a 13th pick in the draft.

kobe refused to play for anyone but the lakers

[BballTim]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.
 

[lightspeed5]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

theres more than  1 superstar and multiple stars in this draft.

would you rather almost make the playoffs and end up with scrap heap in the most loaded draft ever, or tank the season and get a sweet young stud to pair up with rondo for the next decade

[chambers]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

[vjcsmoke]

LOL, I'm sure Jordan will do his best to find the next Kwame Brown. ^_^

=====Bobcats 1st round picks
2004 #2 Emeka Okafor (from Los Angeles)[a]
2005 #5 Raymond Felton, #13 Sean May
2006 #3 Adam Morrison
2007 #8 Brandan Wright, #22 Jared Dudley
2008 #9 DJ Augustin, #20 Alexis Ajinca
2009 #12 Gerald Henderson
2011 #9 Kemba Walker, #19 Tobias Harris
2012 #2 Michael Kid-Gilchrist

You be the judge of those drafts!  If Ainge had that kind of draft position and that was his haul, he would have been fired a LONG time ago!

6. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, sometimes, there is a year with MANY potential superduper stars at the top of the draft, and all indications are that this coming year is one of them.

The most superduper stars I've ever seen in one draft is four (that's if you count Chris Bosh and Carmelo Anthony as superduper stars) in the legendary 2003 draft.

People are getting carried away and predicting that there are upwards of six or seven franchise type talents in the 2014 draft.  With all due respect to these  high school kids, I think that's incredibly unlikely.

To do the "tank job" right, we would have to be one of the three worst teams in the league.  I don't think we have the "talent" for that.

We might not have to be quite that bad. We could have Michael Jordan and Joe Dumars drafting ahead of us.

[Celtics18]

LOL, I'm sure Jordan will do his best to find the next Kwame Brown. ^_^

=====Bobcats 1st round picks
2004 #2 Emeka Okafor (from Los Angeles)[a]
2005 #5 Raymond Felton, #13 Sean May
2006 #3 Adam Morrison
2007 #8 Brandan Wright, #22 Jared Dudley
2008 #9 DJ Augustin, #20 Alexis Ajinca
2009 #12 Gerald Henderson
2011 #9 Kemba Walker, #19 Tobias Harris
2012 #2 Michael Kid-Gilchrist

You be the judge of those drafts!  If Ainge had that kind of draft position and that was his haul, he would have been fired a LONG time ago!

6. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, sometimes, there is a year with MANY potential superduper stars at the top of the draft, and all indications are that this coming year is one of them.

The most superduper stars I've ever seen in one draft is four (that's if you count Chris Bosh and Carmelo Anthony as superduper stars) in the legendary 2003 draft.

People are getting carried away and predicting that there are upwards of six or seven franchise type talents in the 2014 draft.  With all due respect to these  high school kids, I think that's incredibly unlikely.

To do the "tank job" right, we would have to be one of the three worst teams in the league.  I don't think we have the "talent" for that.

We might not have to be quite that bad. We could have Michael Jordan and Joe Dumars drafting ahead of us.

If you take a look at the guys drafted after those picks, he didn't actually do a terrible job on most of those.  Morrison is the one pick that jumps out as a real bust.

[BballTim]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

  History proves that if you have a top 10 pick on your team that you drafted then you're likely to be a contender or an also-ran or a bottom-feeder. Nothing more. It's true that drafting a Shaq/TD/LeBron will make you a contender, it's also true that players like that don't come around very often and the chances of drafting one of them are slim.

[lightspeed5]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

  History proves that if you have a top 10 pick on your team that you drafted then you're likely to be a contender or an also-ran or a bottom-feeder. Nothing more. It's true that drafting a Shaq/TD/LeBron will make you a contender, it's also true that players like that don't come around very often and the chances of drafting one of them are slim.

exactly, deep drafts happen once per decade, which is why we tank for the 2014 deep draft.

[Celtics18]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

  History proves that if you have a top 10 pick on your team that you drafted then you're likely to be a contender or an also-ran or a bottom-feeder. Nothing more. It's true that drafting a Shaq/TD/LeBron will make you a contender, it's also true that players like that don't come around very often and the chances of drafting one of them are slim.

exactly, deep drafts happen once per decade, which is why we tank for the 2014 deep draft.

I haven't bought the hype yet.  It generally takes at least four or five years after a given draft before you can adequately assess how good a certain draft class it is, not the year before that draft happens. 

Also, if the draft is indeed as crazy once-in-a-lifetime deep as many of you are claiming that it's guaranteed to be, then  Danny should be able to get someone really good at 15 or 16. 

[JJones1090]

Didn't read the whole thread, but I'm gonna charge in here head full of steam, American style.

We aren't in contention to win it all, but we are winners. Winners don't lose on purpose. DA has acquired assets for the future. Rondo can take his time coming back, and we can give the young guys good development minutes. But do not trade pieces specifically to lose, and do not give less than 100% effort at any given time. Pierce and Garnett (god bless them both) were no longer long-term assets, and their trading was in a much different context than tanking to receive a lottery pick.

To tank purposefully is to breed a losing culture and introduce a sickness into the organization. Some guys on the team genuinely get it. Sullinger is a man who will keep our cultural momentum alive. Green will play his heart out...can I say that? An organization of class, grit, heart, pride and determination will not stoop to tanking.

I do not care what arguments you throw out there to make a case for tanking. I'd rather see 100% effort and keep our excellent players than do something like tank...don't try to change my mind. You won't. And I don't have to. Because I'm an American. I'm dug in.


I'd rather win (now) than wiggins (then).

[lightspeed5]

Didn't read the whole thread, but I'm gonna charge in here head full of steam, American style.

We aren't in contention to win it all, but we are winners. Winners don't lose on purpose. DA has acquired assets for the future. Rondo can take his time coming back, and we can give the young guys good development minutes. But do not trade pieces specifically to lose, and do not give less than 100% effort at any given time. Pierce and Garnett (god bless them both) were no longer long-term assets, and their trading was in a much different context than tanking to receive a lottery pick.

To tank purposefully is to breed a losing culture and introduce a sickness into the organization. Some guys on the team genuinely get it. Sullinger is a man who will keep our cultural momentum alive. Green will play his heart out...can I say that? An organization of class, grit, heart, pride and determination will not stoop to tanking.

I do not care what arguments you throw out there to make a case for tanking. I'd rather see 100% effort and keep our excellent players than do something like tank...don't try to change my mind. You won't. And I don't have to. Because I'm an American. I'm dug in.


I'd rather win (now) than wiggins (then).

we will never win now without a superstar to pair up with rondo.

"Winners don't lose on purpose." celtics lost on purpose to tank for durant... we won that year because the draft pick was high enough to trade for shuttlesworth

[lightspeed5]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

  History proves that if you have a top 10 pick on your team that you drafted then you're likely to be a contender or an also-ran or a bottom-feeder. Nothing more. It's true that drafting a Shaq/TD/LeBron will make you a contender, it's also true that players like that don't come around very often and the chances of drafting one of them are slim.

exactly, deep drafts happen once per decade, which is why we tank for the 2014 deep draft.

I haven't bought the hype yet.  It generally takes at least four or five years after a given draft before you can adequately assess how good a certain draft class it is, not the year before that draft happens. 

Also, if the draft is indeed as crazy once-in-a-lifetime deep as many of you are claiming that it's guaranteed to be, then  Danny should be able to get someone really good at 15 or 16.

whats your obsession with wanting to make the playoffs with gerald wallace and humpries on this team?

we dont even have a team assembled, we got a kid that rondo got in a fight with (whos paid 10 mill last season to be DNP-CD by the nets), another guy who got tangled up with KG and 3 years past his prime, 2 kids who chucks up shots for a living, and 2 players coming off major surgery. its not a team, its a collection of assets. the peices were not assembled or made to fit together, theyre simply here because they have value and we're starting on a clean slate.

[D.o.s.]

Like I said, go back and name me some teams other than Detroit that won a title without their own lottery pick.

  You're claiming that most title teams have a top 10 pick on their team that they drafted. So do most nba teams, including most lottery teams. So if you have a high draft pick (that you made) on your team you're much more likely to be in the lottery than the finals. It's a fact that very few people would dispute.

I'm not claiming anything. History proves it. And for some reason you're taking it out of context because you want to argue for arguments sake.
The argument isn't just about a top 10 pick, its about drafting a stud with that pick. For the 5th time I'll agree that you aren't guaranteed anything with every top 5 or 10 pick.
Just as important as drafting a true franchise stud is surrounding him with the right talent- niw that may be through the draft or via free agency but history proves that having that franchise level/top 10 NBA talent on your team already gives extra incentive to attract top tier free agents. This may be due to Bird Rights when these franchise players come up for free agency or it may be the management that is controlling the teams destiny has proven or shown their ability to put a contender on the floor. Those are probably two of the key factors, but without drafting your own elite/top 5-10 NBA player your contending/ title percentages are significantly lower than otherwise.
Again, history proves this.

  History proves that if you have a top 10 pick on your team that you drafted then you're likely to be a contender or an also-ran or a bottom-feeder. Nothing more. It's true that drafting a Shaq/TD/LeBron will make you a contender, it's also true that players like that don't come around very often and the chances of drafting one of them are slim.

exactly, deep drafts happen once per decade, which is why we tank for the 2014 deep draft.

I haven't bought the hype yet.  It generally takes at least four or five years after a given draft before you can adequately assess how good a certain draft class it is, not the year before that draft happens. 

Also, if the draft is indeed as crazy once-in-a-lifetime deep as many of you are claiming that it's guaranteed to be, then  Danny should be able to get someone really good at 15 or 16.

Imagine, if you will, that this year's draft had started with pick #7, and that there were six players picked ahead (read: measurably better choices than) Otto Porter, Ben McLemore, Oladipo, and the rest.

That is what next year is rounding out to look like.

Also, while it takes years to see whether or not players live up to their potential, it's not like these guys are unknowns--LeBron was on the cover of Sports Illustrated at 16 for a reason, and NBA draft scouts aren't stupid, particularly when it comes to the cream of the crop North American talent.

[JJones1090]

Didn't read the whole thread, but I'm gonna charge in here head full of steam, American style.

We aren't in contention to win it all, but we are winners. Winners don't lose on purpose. DA has acquired assets for the future. Rondo can take his time coming back, and we can give the young guys good development minutes. But do not trade pieces specifically to lose, and do not give less than 100% effort at any given time. Pierce and Garnett (god bless them both) were no longer long-term assets, and their trading was in a much different context than tanking to receive a lottery pick.

To tank purposefully is to breed a losing culture and introduce a sickness into the organization. Some guys on the team genuinely get it. Sullinger is a man who will keep our cultural momentum alive. Green will play his heart out...can I say that? An organization of class, grit, heart, pride and determination will not stoop to tanking.

I do not care what arguments you throw out there to make a case for tanking. I'd rather see 100% effort and keep our excellent players than do something like tank...don't try to change my mind. You won't. And I don't have to. Because I'm an American. I'm dug in.


I'd rather win (now) than wiggins (then).

we will never win now without a superstar to pair up with rondo.

"Winners don't lose on purpose." celtics lost on purpose to tank for durant... we won that year because the draft pick was high enough to trade for shuttlesworth

I mean I would rather win as many games as we can now with the team we've got than *attempt* to acquire a *maybe* superstar. Let's face it. There's a good chance we don't get the super lotto pick we all dream of and even a chance that our man will be a no-show in the NBA even if we get it.

If we organically get an excellent draft pick I am fine with that. On principle, I am not fine with setting a precedent of less than maximum effort at all times.

I suppose for me the only way I am ok with "tanking" is if we keep all our assets that are viewed as part of the Celtics' future unless we get greater value (picks + talent) in return. All talent on the finalized roster must play with absolute, 100% intensity. If we suck, we suck...it is what it is. But giving our pieces away or playing down for a gamble at a rookie...please.

If a man doesn't have a code or principles, then a man isn't worth his salt. We probably aren't making playoffs anyway this year. But we've got a wealth of draft picks and we'll be back regardless. Tanking or no tanking, I see us back in the running by 2018 at the latest.

[lightspeed5]

Didn't read the whole thread, but I'm gonna charge in here head full of steam, American style.

We aren't in contention to win it all, but we are winners. Winners don't lose on purpose. DA has acquired assets for the future. Rondo can take his time coming back, and we can give the young guys good development minutes. But do not trade pieces specifically to lose, and do not give less than 100% effort at any given time. Pierce and Garnett (god bless them both) were no longer long-term assets, and their trading was in a much different context than tanking to receive a lottery pick.

To tank purposefully is to breed a losing culture and introduce a sickness into the organization. Some guys on the team genuinely get it. Sullinger is a man who will keep our cultural momentum alive. Green will play his heart out...can I say that? An organization of class, grit, heart, pride and determination will not stoop to tanking.

I do not care what arguments you throw out there to make a case for tanking. I'd rather see 100% effort and keep our excellent players than do something like tank...don't try to change my mind. You won't. And I don't have to. Because I'm an American. I'm dug in.


I'd rather win (now) than wiggins (then).

we will never win now without a superstar to pair up with rondo.

"Winners don't lose on purpose." celtics lost on purpose to tank for durant... we won that year because the draft pick was high enough to trade for shuttlesworth

I mean I would rather win as many games as we can now with the team we've got than *attempt* to acquire a *maybe* superstar. Let's face it. There's a good chance we don't get the super lotto pick we all dream of and even a chance that our man will be a no-show in the NBA even if we get it.

If we organically get an excellent draft pick I am fine with that. On principle, I am not fine with setting a precedent of less than maximum effort at all times.

I suppose for me the only way I am ok with "tanking" is if we keep all our assets that are viewed as part of the Celtics' future unless we get greater value (picks + talent) in return. All talent on the finalized roster must play with absolute, 100% intensity. If we suck, we suck...it is what it is. But giving our pieces away or playing down for a gamble at a rookie...please.

If a man doesn't have a code or principles, then a man isn't worth his salt. We probably aren't making playoffs anyway this year. But we've got a wealth of draft picks and we'll be back regardless. Tanking or no tanking, I see us back in the running by 2018 at the latest.

"There's a good chance we don't get the super lotto pick"

right now we're one of the worst 6-8 teams in the league. only worse teams are philly, orlando, suns, maybe kings, raptors and bobcats. we were a .500 team with kg and pierce last year. were winning 25 games without them

washington was great with john wall back, pelicans have loaded up and look much better, raptors have jonas v. and the bobcats have al jefferson. k

we have a good chance of having a high pick.