It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 5:25 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
FavreFan wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Anyway, more important than "Is _____ tanking" is that we can all acknowledge that tanking is a disgrace to the sport and in a just world would be severely penalized by the leagues.


If people really believe this then the Bulls franchise would be far more reviled than they happen to be.

We celebrate the hell out of those 6 rings and not one person has ever made mention of the tank job that went into achieving it. Until now of course.

That’s because they didn’t tank.


Not one person here has been able to explain how it was that they didn't. I just provided evidence. As I always do. You can continue to make it a theoretical discussion about the "evils" of tanking if you like. I've already debunked it with actual evidence. They tanked.


Last edited by Liberal Lion on Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Liberal Lion wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Anyway, more important than "Is _____ tanking" is that we can all acknowledge that tanking is a disgrace to the sport and in a just world would be severely penalized by the leagues.


If people really believe this then the Bulls franchise would be far more reviled than they happen to be.

We celebrate the hell out of those 6 rings and not one person has ever made mention of the tank job that went into achieving it. Until now of course.

That’s because they didn’t tank.


Not one person here has been able to explain how it was that they didn't. I just provided evidence. As I always do. You can continue to make it a theoretical discussion about the "evils" of tanking if you like. I already have debunked it with actual evidence. They tanked.

Rick provided you exactly why it isn't tanking. That you choose to dismiss his explanation doesn't make it any less valid.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
Let's say that two weeks ago on the day of the trade deadline the Bears are offered the first round pick of the NY Jets in exchange for Nick Foles. If the Bears accept that trade, are they now tanking?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
FavreFan wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Anyway, more important than "Is _____ tanking" is that we can all acknowledge that tanking is a disgrace to the sport and in a just world would be severely penalized by the leagues.


If people really believe this then the Bulls franchise would be far more reviled than they happen to be.

We celebrate the hell out of those 6 rings and not one person has ever made mention of the tank job that went into achieving it. Until now of course.

That’s because they didn’t tank.


Not one person here has been able to explain how it was that they didn't. I just provided evidence. As I always do. You can continue to make it a theoretical discussion about the "evils" of tanking if you like. I already have debunked it with actual evidence. They tanked.

Rick provided you exactly why it isn't tanking. That you choose to dismiss his explanation doesn't make it any less valid.


Nah he provided more theories about what constitutes tanking. Again not interested in that. How was this not tanking?

Since you are so convinced that it wasn't?


Last edited by Liberal Lion on Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
How isn't this tanking?
Tanking involves intentionally losing for 1, but most likely more than 1 season in order to be good some point in the future.

That's a weird definition you have cultivated in an attempt to isolate Theo as the tanker in chief

Tanking: Not trying to win as much as possible because it helps your draft position

Its that simple. If the Bulls reason for trading Theus inuded any reasoning about the draft, it was tanking.

I don't think this is true at all. Rick's definition is a lot closer to the traditional idea of tanking. Trading a veteran who isn't part of your long term plans during a lost season isn't tanking. It's team building. Benching a healthy veteran for the sole purpose of losing a game is tanking.

The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:33 pm
Posts: 12078
pizza_Place: Vito and Nick's
They were trapped in mediocrity; they didn't tank.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
tommy wrote:
They were trapped in mediocrity; they didn't tank.


This is precisely why it happened to be tanking.

They benched and later Traded Theus in order to drastically improve their draft position. Thats tanking.


Last edited by Liberal Lion on Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
No, it's not. It's the widely accepted and logical definition.

If you're trying to win every game you are not tanking
So pretty much every NBA team is tanking then every year.

rogers park bryan wrote:
If you don't mind losing because it improves your draft position, its tanking. And most often it's just a one year thing targeting a certain player.
So, it's impossible to have a trade that isn't one side tanking then unless it's perfectly balanced?

If both teams believe it will help them win in the short term then it's not tanking

If amy part of the process involves the benefits of "improving draft position", its tanking

This is very simple stuff

It's not simple. It's absurd. By your definition the Raiders were tanking when they traded Khalil Mack, even though it clearly helped their long term outlook and they were still trying to win games the following year.

It's not absurd, its correct.

The Raiders were still trying to win so itsnit tanking.

You guys are way over complicating this

If you at any point "domt mind losing because it improves draft position" you're tanking.

It's why the NBA lottery exists and why every time an nfl team starts 0-3 the Tank for (insert top college qb) hashtags get going


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible
This is why your definition is way too broad. The only teams with no reason to consider draft position are the ones who think they have a good chance at winning the championship.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
Brick wrote:
Let's say that two weeks ago on the day of the trade deadline the Bears are offered the first round pick of the NY Jets in exchange for Nick Foles. If the Bears accept that trade, are they now tanking?


Let's not actually. Let's stay on the topic of the 1984 Bulls. How was this not tanking?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
If you at any point "domt mind losing because it improves draft position" you're tanking.
So, roughly half the league is tanking every year in every sport then. :lol:

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
Liberal Lion wrote:
Brick wrote:
Let's say that two weeks ago on the day of the trade deadline the Bears are offered the first round pick of the NY Jets in exchange for Nick Foles. If the Bears accept that trade, are they now tanking?


Let's not actually. Let's stay on the topic of the 1984 Bulls. How was this not tanking?
They entered the season trying to win. They ended up figuring out that they just weren't that good and got value for a player instead of wasting his talents on a team going nowhere.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
You're wrong. With tanking teams aren't even making an attempt to try and win. It has nothing to do with whether it spans 1 or 2 seasons.

The Bulls first benched then traded their best player for absolutely nothing that season. They were in contention for a playoff spot at the time they traded him.

They received nothing in return. Steve Johnson was a bum and everyone knew that he was a bum. The Bulls gave up on the season early on so that they could improve their draft position. Thats tanking.
The Bulls entered that season trying to win, discovered that wasn't going to happen, and made a trade to correct that for future seasons..

Did it have anything to do with improving draft position? If yes, then tanking.

:lol: :lol:

This is ridiculous.

You're ridiculous, it's the absolute truth

You're either trying to win or you're tanking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible
This is why your definition is way too broad. The only teams with no reason to consider draft position are the ones who think they have a good chance at winning the championship.


Now you aren't making sense. Typically teams (regardless of sport) that are in position to make the playoffs make moves which will help them make the playoffs. They don't bench All Star players and trade them for stiffs. The Bulls did in 1984. Thats why its a no doubt tank job.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
If you at any point "domt mind losing because it improves draft position" you're tanking.
So, roughly half the league is tanking every year in every sport then. :lol:

Yes, are you kidding? There's articles constantly how ots ruining sports

You're either trying to win or you're tanking. That's it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
How isn't this tanking?
Tanking involves intentionally losing for 1, but most likely more than 1 season in order to be good some point in the future.

That's a weird definition you have cultivated in an attempt to isolate Theo as the tanker in chief

Tanking: Not trying to win as much as possible because it helps your draft position

Its that simple. If the Bulls reason for trading Theus inuded any reasoning about the draft, it was tanking.

I don't think this is true at all. Rick's definition is a lot closer to the traditional idea of tanking. Trading a veteran who isn't part of your long term plans during a lost season isn't tanking. It's team building. Benching a healthy veteran for the sole purpose of losing a game is tanking.

The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible

I disagree. Draft position is considered in every single transaction a team makes. GMs are always thinking about short and long term.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible
This is why your definition is way too broad. The only teams with no reason to consider draft position are the ones who think they have a good chance at winning the championship.

You can consider draft position while still attempting to win.

If you're not trying to win and you're trying to improve draft position above winning, you are tanking.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
How isn't this tanking?
Tanking involves intentionally losing for 1, but most likely more than 1 season in order to be good some point in the future.

That's a weird definition you have cultivated in an attempt to isolate Theo as the tanker in chief

Tanking: Not trying to win as much as possible because it helps your draft position

Its that simple. If the Bulls reason for trading Theus inuded any reasoning about the draft, it was tanking.

I don't think this is true at all. Rick's definition is a lot closer to the traditional idea of tanking. Trading a veteran who isn't part of your long term plans during a lost season isn't tanking. It's team building. Benching a healthy veteran for the sole purpose of losing a game is tanking.

The traditional definition of tanking is losing games (or making moves to ensure you lose games) to get a higher draft pick.

I will agree you can make trades that make the team worse short term and better long term without it being tanking but only if:

Draft position is not considered
You're still trying to win as many games as possible

I disagree. Draft position is considered in every single transaction a team makes. GMs are always thinking about short and long term.

Agreed but they can still be trying to win

Once future wins are prioritized over current wins, you're tanking


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
Brick wrote:
Let's say that two weeks ago on the day of the trade deadline the Bears are offered the first round pick of the NY Jets in exchange for Nick Foles. If the Bears accept that trade, are they now tanking?


Let's not actually. Let's stay on the topic of the 1984 Bulls. How was this not tanking?
They entered the season trying to win. They ended up figuring out that they just weren't that good and got value for a player instead of wasting his talents on a team going nowhere.


Steve Johnson was never considered valuable by anyone. You claimed that this wasn't tanking and have yet to provide an explanation as to why it wasn't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
Liberal Lion wrote:
Now you aren't making sense. Typically teams (regardless of sport) that are in position to make the playoffs make moves which will help them make the playoffs. They don't bench All Star players and trade them for stiffs. The Bulls did in 1984. Thats why its a no doubt tank job.
The Bulls seemingly decided they weren't good enough to compete with the better teams in the league. Was that the right decision or not?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
rogers park bryan wrote:
Once future wins are prioritized over current wins, you're tanking


Yep.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
You can consider draft position while still attempting to win.

If you're not trying to win and you're trying to improve draft position above winning, you are tanking.
How can you consider draft position while still attempting to win when they two results are the complete opposite?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 1:33 pm
Posts: 12078
pizza_Place: Vito and Nick's
Liberal Lion wrote:
tommy wrote:
They were trapped in mediocrity; they didn't tank.


This is precisely why it happened to be tanking.

They benched and later Traded Theus in order to drastically improve their draft position. Thats tanking.

Oh, ok. I can see your point.

But the other guys wore out. David Greenwood was a star who just stopped producing. And Woolridge and Daily just started sucking, too. The guys who were supposed to be good weren't.

Who was talking about Steve Johnson? That fatass sucked balls.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
Liberal Lion wrote:
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
Brick wrote:
Let's say that two weeks ago on the day of the trade deadline the Bears are offered the first round pick of the NY Jets in exchange for Nick Foles. If the Bears accept that trade, are they now tanking?


Let's not actually. Let's stay on the topic of the 1984 Bulls. How was this not tanking?
They entered the season trying to win. They ended up figuring out that they just weren't that good and got value for a player instead of wasting his talents on a team going nowhere.


Steve Johnson was never considered valuable by anyone. You claimed that this wasn't tanking and have yet to provide an explanation as to why it wasn't.
The value was in the 3 extra draft picks they got.

I guess the big question though is how good was Reggie Theus if you are correct that the Bulls got nothing in return for him?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2020 7:52 pm
Posts: 421
pizza_Place: Sanfratellos
Brick wrote:
Liberal Lion wrote:
Now you aren't making sense. Typically teams (regardless of sport) that are in position to make the playoffs make moves which will help them make the playoffs. They don't bench All Star players and trade them for stiffs. The Bulls did in 1984. Thats why its a no doubt tank job.
The Bulls seemingly decided they weren't good enough to compete with the better teams in the league. Was that the right decision or not?


Sure it was because it placed them in position to draft Jordan.

My point is related to guys like Favre that constantly bash the concept of tanking all of the time. His and others constant claims that Tanking doesn't work is utterly foolish

The 6 rings obtained by the Bulls are the result of tanking and nothing else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
You can consider draft position while still attempting to win.

If you're not trying to win and you're trying to improve draft position above winning, you are tanking.
How can you consider draft position while still attempting to win when they two results are the complete opposite?

Because you can trade for more picks or future picks while still trying to win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
If you at any point "domt mind losing because it improves draft position" you're tanking.
So, roughly half the league is tanking every year in every sport then. :lol:

Yes, are you kidding? There's articles constantly how ots ruining sports

You're either trying to win or you're tanking. That's it.

Your last statement is obviously true but it’s irrelevant to this discussion since we are trying to determine what tanking is.

Are the Bengals tanking this year?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92041
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
You can consider draft position while still attempting to win.

If you're not trying to win and you're trying to improve draft position above winning, you are tanking.
How can you consider draft position while still attempting to win when they two results are the complete opposite?

Because you can trade for more picks or future picks while still trying to win.

You would have to really fleece the other team to not only get draft picks from them but also improve your team for the next game too.

Still though, the entire concept of considering draft position indicates that you would rather not improve the team in a trade for the current year.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
If you at any point "domt mind losing because it improves draft position" you're tanking.
So, roughly half the league is tanking every year in every sport then. :lol:

Yes, are you kidding? There's articles constantly how ots ruining sports

You're either trying to win or you're tanking. That's it.

Your last statement is obviously true but it’s irrelevant to this discussion since we are trying to determine what tanking is.

Are the Bengals tanking this year?

I haven't followed it closely. Are they attempting to win as many games as possible?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 1:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Brick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
You can consider draft position while still attempting to win.

If you're not trying to win and you're trying to improve draft position above winning, you are tanking.
How can you consider draft position while still attempting to win when they two results are the complete opposite?

Because you can trade for more picks or future picks while still trying to win.

You would have to really fleece the other team to not only get draft picks from them but also improve your team for the next game too.

Not really. You can trade potential stars who maybe arent helping you win right now for draft picks. You can trade future picks for this year's draft. You can trade a good player because you're deep at the position and feel like you can win just as much without them.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 141 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group