Tanking (losing on purpose)

[Rule]

So I got in a fun debate over the weekend w/ friends over this occurance.


I felt there should be some reprocussions for obvious tanking towards the end of the season. Fans still pay to attend the games, doesn't it just cheapen the experience? Especially if you KNOW what they're doing? As a casual fan, it doesn't bother me to the point of rage, I'm not shelling out big money to watch games live or through TV subscriptions.. what are your thoughts? It's probably impossible for the league to difinitively prove a team is losing on purpose or giving effort towards manipulating the game. Just curious where you all stand.

[minnesotachill]

I'm a Wolves fan but I don't think they are tanking.

They just seem to be refusing to play their good players and filling their lineup with inexperienced players who have no chance.

Oh wait, they are tanking, nevermind.

[Rule]

I'm a Wolves fan but I don't think they are tanking.

They just seem to be refusing to play their good players and filling their lineup with inexperienced players who have no chance.

Oh wait, they are tanking, nevermind.
Lol. See, but does that frustrate you, or are you content because you like the long term goal?

[miamitrev2]

The HEAT owe it to their fan base to never tank, especially when we own the arena and they pay no rent. If they ever tank again it will make me irate and I will boycott for 3x as long as they tank for. Call Miami a poor sports town but I think the opposite because we dont tolerate tanking

[xavieronly1]

I don't mind tanking if you do it for half season. Like if you know your team is not going to make to playoff after all-star break, then tanking may be a good thing.

However, team like Sixers should be kicked from NBA. This team is so bad that they keep on rolling the dice until #1. Hell, even with #1 pick, they will still roll it until that RC becomes the next AD/Lebron/Kobe/Durant/MJ.

[Athey49]

Lol. See, but does that frustrate you, or are you content because you like the long term goal?

I can't stand it. We actually had plans to catch a game at the end of the year but not now with Rubio and Garnett on the bench. Wiggins is really fun to watch, along with the rest, but I can't stand what they're doing

[tristan20]

NBA needs to take the bottom 5 teams and then allow them to play for ping pong balls. Winner gets more balls lol

There needs to be a penalty for losing, you should not reward losers. Anyone can lose

[WHyFLy]

If you want a real case of tanking go see the NHL and you will understand what Tanking is.

[dasiegel]

i dont think the players generally tank... i think it's the management who puts crap talent an doesn't make moves a team needs in the hopes of stacking picks for the future ahem philly ahem

[M4YH3M1]

I was surprised as hell when the owners voted this season to allow tanking to continue to reward higher % chance of drafting top picks.

tanking reduces fan attendance, attendance = income
therefore owners vote to allow tanking which further reduces their shared league income

Then we have a lock-out and the owners demand more money from the players!!?

Fans suffer more.. what a cycle..

[ewilkens]

If you want a real case of tanking go see the NHL and you will understand what Tanking is.

I was thinking the same thing... and fans in Buffalo even bought in, openly rooting against their team at home against the second worst team in the league.

[xavieronly1]

I was surprised as hell when the owners voted this season to allow tanking to continue to reward higher % chance of drafting top picks.

tanking reduces fan attendance, attendance = income
therefore owners vote to allow tanking which further reduces their shared league income

Then we have a lock-out and the owners demand more money from the players!!?

Fans suffer more.. what a cycle..

Because tanking can give you a good choice of landing #1 pick. After a really good #1 pick, you can sell the team for major profit. Attendance income is not that major deal here.

Look at Clippers, they sucked so badly since 1990's. If not Griffin, CP3 wouldn't even go to Clippers. You only need one roll to get a $2 billion check.

Then look at Knicks. They tried to build the team through free agents in the last 15 years. Look at how much money they wasted on FA compared to Clippers wasting money on RC contract. From a pure money making standpoint, Clipper's tanking model actually is the way to run a NBA team.

[Louddog]

Well I definitely wanted the Colts to lose the year Manning didn't play. "Suck for Luck" was our motto. It worked.

[trixstar]

Just give every lottery team the same odds, tanking eliminated.

[Round Mound]

Then look at Knicks. They tried to build the team through free agents in the last 15 years. Look at how much money they wasted on FA compared to Clippers wasting money on RC contract. From a pure money making standpoint, Clipper's tanking model actually is the way to run a NBA team.

It is possible to build a winning team through free agency. But for that, you need a GM with at least half a brain who goes after the right players.

[xavieronly1]

It is possible to build a winning team through free agency. But for that, you need a GM with at least half a brain who goes after the right players.

Not saying it is impossible, but it is more expensive. On top of it, not every city can get the top free agents even if you have the best GM.

[goehring9]

Not saying it is impossible, but it is more expensive. On top of it, not every city can get the top free agents even if you have the best GM.

It's a combination things required, but GM skill and imagination is at the top of the list. See: Spurs and Grizz as examples

[Round Mound]

Not saying it is impossible, but it is more expensive. On top of it, not every city can get the top free agents even if you have the best GM.

Not sure it is less expensive to build a winning team through the draft. How many team won it all with a roster with no maxed out player?

Rookie contract are only 3-4 years long, so by the time your team gets competitive, you have 2-3 players asking for max contracts. Look at the Thunder (Harden), or any other team which had a promising young core.

[xavieronly1]

It's a combination things required, but GM skill and imagination is at the top of the list. See: Spurs and Grizz as examples

Spurs is from draft. They can't even get the top FA, but they get the right pieces.

Same for Grizz. They don't get the top FA, but they get the right pieces.

[xavieronly1]

Not sure it is less expensive to build a winning team through the draft. How many team won it all with a roster with no maxed out player?

Rookie contract are only 3-4 years long, so by the time your team gets competitive, you have 2-3 players asking for max contracts. Look at the Thunder (Harden), or any other team which had a promising young core.

I didn't say to build a team to win. I say to build a team that you can sell for profit. Rookie's contract is so little compared to FA's contract.

[Aripet]

I think it could be like in soccer, 2 divisions, worse teams in 1st division down to 2nd and viceversa... but oh wait, we aren´t talking about soccer...

Tanking is something bad for the NBA show, that´s for sure!

[goehring9]

Spurs is from draft. They can't even get the top FA, but they get the right pieces.

Same for Grizz. They don't get the top FA, but they get the right pieces.

uh.... the Grizz they didn't get ANY of their top players through draft.
Gasol, Allen, Green, Randolph- all were acquired, not drafted.

but I see your point, those are not 'top' free agents- just winning ones.

[tristan20]

Picks doesn't instantly make your team better. Probably makes it worse lol

[elee712]

A team that tanks typically do not have players you want to watch anyways. If you are a fan of a team that sucks enough to want to tank, you're probably going to the games to watch opposing teams players anyways.

[Wolves4Life]

I'm a Wolves fan but I don't think they are tanking.

They just seem to be refusing to play their good players and filling their lineup with inexperienced players who have no chance.

Oh wait, they are tanking, nevermind.

Umm Wolves have been injured the whole year, They had a 100% healthy roster maybe 5 times this year. Wolves are not tanking. Pek is out for year, Dieng has a concussion, Rubio Ankle, KG Knee, Martin missed what a month and half? Injuries are why Wolves have worst record in the NBA not anything else.

[trixstar]

How about this

Instead of a lottery the draft order should be determined by the total points scored once you have been officially eliminated from the playoffs. If you're eliminated early you keep accumulating points by winning or scoring as many points as you can.

How to Cure Tanking | MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference (http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=5496)

[elee712]

How about this

Instead of a lottery the draft order should be determined by the total points scored once you have been officially eliminated from the playoffs. If you're eliminated early you keep accumulating points by winning or scoring as many points as you can.

How to Cure Tanking | MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference (http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=5496)

then there would be no defense played.

[trixstar]

then there would be no defense played.

Because teams not making the playoffs are playing it anyway? I'd rather watch 158 - 147 than what we have right now.

[xavieronly1]

How about this

Instead of a lottery the draft order should be determined by the total points scored once you have been officially eliminated from the playoffs. If you're eliminated early you keep accumulating points by winning or scoring as many points as you can.

How to Cure Tanking | MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference (http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=5496)

The analysis is based on the hypothesis that every team plays to win from Day 1 until mathematical elimination game.

Does this make sense in sports world? No.

After 10 games, you already know whether the team is going to make into playoff or not. You can easily start a season with 0-10. Mathematically, you are still in the playoff race. In reality, no GM/owner/coach would expect a 0-10 team to make into playoff.
What if this "0-10" team starts tanking after 10 games? That is, this team (called Team A) can lose until 0-42. Then they are mathematically eliminated by Jan. So, this bad team has 42 chances to build win for a guarantee #1 pick. Compare to another team (called Team B) that plays hard until March, Team B can have a 15-50 record before they are mathematically eliminated. But Team B only has 17 games left to build the "lottery win".

So, Team A has 42 chances and Team B has 17 chances. With his idea, I bet more teams would start losing on Game 1 knowing that you will get 100% #1 draft pick. And if the team is in the West coast, you can even get eliminated by playoff before 42 games considering all top 8 seeds can win over 50 games.

[elee712]

then there would be no defense played.

It will promote bad habits for players and coaches with defensive philisophies would not go for that. Dantoni will be coaching till he's 100. The state of the nba would be much worse off.
Perhaps something like percentage margin of victory or something like that would be better although in general to players really care what draft seeding they get? Players generally just want to win

[miamitrev2]

It's a combination things required, but GM skill and imagination is at the top of the list. See: Spurs and HEAT as examples

Fixed it for you:)!