To me this is much ado about nothing. The Celts have won just under 35% of their games. There are 6 teams in the league below 35%. I checked the last 4 or so seasons and there were 6-8 teams below that level every year. Where's the tanking?
Excellent point. Its hard to really sell this idea of tanking when tanking is entirely numerically based and the numbers don't back it up at all.
When you push the threshold down to a 30% win pct, we still have the same number of teams under that this season (3) as last season. There were SIX teams under .300 in the 2010-2011 season during which Kyrie Irving and Derrick Williams were fairly mediocre level prospects as far as top picks go.
Tanking happens every year. It just gets more attention when there are exciting players on the board.
Even in a poor draft class, everyone sitting on that lottery stage still wants to win the ping pong ball draw. The prospect of a top draft pick is something management can sell to their owners and to the fanbase, losing games has a possible high reward, that can alter a franchise's fortune for a decade.
Now eventually a team (usually spurred by the owner) gets tired of tanking, and tries to make splashy moves to make the team win, but they still fail. That is where terrible organizations are stuck in the tank mode. Hello Cleveland, Detroit, Milwaukee, Sacramento... Failures. Tankers who are trying (or tried) to win by way of drastic measures.
I never want the celtics to be in that boat again, signing guys like Dana barros, pervis Ellison and old Wilkins so that we can win 35 games a year, and draft guys like Acie Earl.
