Emergency TANK!

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
20,366
Reaction score
11,461
What I'm saying is that I like his game the best of all the players in the draft. I'm biased in favor of defensive skills, I will admit.

I keep saying it, watch full games of his in college. He blocked shots because he was seeking blocked shots, not necessarily because he was playing good defense. He spent large swaths of time on D covering literally no one.

When a big man has limited skills and a motor that is seriously questionable... to me, the red flags could not be bigger. I don't think I'd take Bamba higher than 7th or 8th, and even then it would be entirely on hoping that he lives up to his measurables rather than what the film says. IMO, his ceiling is not that high, at best, I think he caps out as a good defensive big with serious offensive and (unless he bulks up) defensive rebounding limitations, and the other side of the coin is that he is a bust on the level of Bizmack or Thabeet.

I just don't see how one can like his "game" better than the other guys mentioned. He made for some good highlights and he has some long arms... but his "game" didn't amount to squirt and statistically you're looking at a guy who can lurk for blocks against mediocre/bad talent and do little else.
 
OP
OP
pokerface

pokerface

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 20, 2004
Posts
5,369
Reaction score
807
I keep saying it, watch full games of his in college. He blocked shots because he was seeking blocked shots, not necessarily because he was playing good defense. He spent large swaths of time on D covering literally no one.

When a big man has limited skills and a motor that is seriously questionable... to me, the red flags could not be bigger. I don't think I'd take Bamba higher than 7th or 8th, and even then it would be entirely on hoping that he lives up to his measurables rather than what the film says. IMO, his ceiling is not that high, at best, I think he caps out as a good defensive big with serious offensive and (unless he bulks up) defensive rebounding limitations, and the other side of the coin is that he is a bust on the level of Bizmack or Thabeet.

I just don't see how one can like his "game" better than the other guys mentioned. He made for some good highlights and he has some long arms... but his "game" didn't amount to squirt and statistically you're looking at a guy who can lurk for blocks against mediocre/bad talent and do little else.

I was checking out Bamba and Ayton on tankathon and noticed some things on per 36 min...Yeah Ayton pretty much destroys Bamba on offense...more ppg and better fg% and 3P%. But Bamba has almost identical rpg and twice the blocks per game. Bambas wingspan 7'9" vs Aytons 7'5" is an edge.

So Prazbit, I am agreeing with you on the most part...Bamba is probably ranked too high in the draft and yeah he is a serious project. But he does seem to provide solid rebounding and defense and does ''some" scoring. Plus like you implied his measurements are a plus. I still think his fit on the suns would be better than a lot of other teams. We seem to need what he offers but #4 pick seems too high for him. There are question marks to his game plus his weight is very very light.
 

Western Font

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Posts
2,968
Reaction score
3,323
Location
Downtown
I don't get all the "woe is we" stuff. I know we've had an absence of good luck but all the gnashing of teeth seems extreme. It's not like we've had a hundred to one shot jump up to screw us out of something. Our bad luck injuries bother me far more than the almost predictable lottery results we've seen over the years.

I think most teams' fans feel this way, even some delusional Laker fans. It's the same thing that makes most fans think their team is officiated unfairly (either because they're good, or they're bad, or they're big market, or they're small market, because they have stars, or because they have none).

For the Suns drafting, I think it's more that we haven't had many top picks (9 top 5 picks in 50 years), and specifically that we haven't had our top picks own out.

2 Neal Walk
2 Armen Gilliam

4 Corky Calhoun
4 John Shumate
4 Alvan Adams
4 Dragan Bender
4 Josh Jackson

5 Walter Davis
5 Alex Len

That's 2 plus the hopes that Jackson and MAYBE Bender pan out.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of teams have more franchise greats that were taken with later picks - after all, there simply are a lot more later picks every year - but a lot of teams also have picked more all-stars and HoFers in the top 5.

It's Walk and Gilliam drafted #2 behind Kareem and Robinson that really makes the narrative, though. Shumate at #4 behind Bill Walton, well, that hurts more for Philly and Seattle, who both drafted big men in between.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
119,253
Reaction score
59,868
I don't get all the "woe is we" stuff. I know we've had an absence of good luck but all the gnashing of teeth seems extreme. It's not like we've had a hundred to one shot jump up to screw us out of something. Our bad luck injuries bother me far more than the almost predictable lottery results we've seen over the years.

I think the "woe is we" stuff dates backs to the Suns losing out on the rights to draft Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and David Robinson... not necessarily the odds.
 

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,867
Reaction score
16,679
I think the "woe is we" stuff dates backs to the Suns losing out on the rights to draft Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and David Robinson... not necessarily the odds.

Yeah, I understand the disappointment. It's the "we have the worst luck of anyone" attitude that I disagree with. Trust me, Valley fans were very upset when we didn't get Alcindor. But the luck of it was just a 50/50 thing, it wasn't "poor us, can't catch a break". As for Robinson, I really don't remember anyone expecting us to get him back then. Fans were more focused on the drug scandal than anything else.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
119,253
Reaction score
59,868
Yeah, I understand the disappointment. It's the "we have the worst luck of anyone" attitude that I disagree with. Trust me, Valley fans were very upset when we didn't get Alcindor. But the luck of it was just a 50/50 thing, it wasn't "poor us, can't catch a break". As for Robinson, I really don't remember anyone expecting us to get him back then. Fans were more focused on the drug scandal than anything else.

I definitely was focused on the Suns getting David Robinson but I recall the military thing would delay instant gratification.

Oh, well. It's in the past but these two things lead fans who remember... the feeling of the Suns getting the short end of the stick.

Although not draft related, David Stern suspending Amare and Diaw for a critical game against the Spurs lead Suns fans feeling like the underdog as well.
 

devilalum

Heavily Redacted
Joined
Jul 30, 2002
Posts
16,776
Reaction score
3,187
Yeah, I understand the disappointment. It's the "we have the worst luck of anyone" attitude that I disagree with. Trust me, Valley fans were very upset when we didn't get Alcindor. But the luck of it was just a 50/50 thing, it wasn't "poor us, can't catch a break". As for Robinson, I really don't remember anyone expecting us to get him back then. Fans were more focused on the drug scandal than anything else.


I’m totally down with this thinking. That’s why I asked who would you take at #4. It seems like a pretty good worst case scenario. There should be a great player available with all 4 of the first picks no clear cut Lebron in this draft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
17,589
Reaction score
12,811
Location
Tempe, AZ
In regards to Robinson, it was also known that he wouldn't come to the NBA right away. So drafting him was a bit of a gamble because he wouldn't help the team for a couple of years while he finished his Navy commitment. I think almost all of the "woe is we" stuff in regards to him is all hindsight rather than how people felt at that time or even for the next couple of years.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,165
Reaction score
70,341
In regards to Robinson, it was also known that he wouldn't come to the NBA right away. So drafting him was a bit of a gamble because he wouldn't help the team for a couple of years while he finished his Navy commitment. I think almost all of the "woe is we" stuff in regards to him is all hindsight rather than how people felt at that time or even for the next couple of years.

this can only be spoken by someone who didn't follow sports at the time. There were ZERO question marks about how good Robinson was just going to be nor did anyone see it as a "gamble". Dude was a superstar in waiting and It was only a matter of time before he got to the NBA.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
this can only be spoken by someone who didn't follow sports at the time. There were ZERO question marks about how good Robinson was just going to be nor did anyone see it as a "gamble". Dude was a superstar in waiting and It was only a matter of time before he got to the NBA.
There was no question about Robinson at the time.
 

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,867
Reaction score
16,679
this can only be spoken by someone who didn't follow sports at the time. There were ZERO question marks about how good Robinson was just going to be nor did anyone see it as a "gamble". Dude was a superstar in waiting and It was only a matter of time before he got to the NBA.

He had a 5 year commitment at one point which would have scared a lot of teams off. By the time the lottery was held the Navy had decided to only hold him to 2 years so that removed some of the concerns. But then the Players Association got involved by threatening a lawsuit if he was forced into a draft before he was fully eligible. Stern compromised with them and allowed Robinson to be drafted in 87 but with the warning that he wouldn't be bound to that draft unless he signed a contract. Which meant he could go back into the draft when he was again eligible. San Antonio being a small market (and still fairly new NBA market) along with Phoenix being in the throes of a drug scandal raised even more questions because of Stern's decision.

If you watch the 1987 NBA Draft Lottery you'll hear James Brown ask this question of the Spurs GM "Clearly David Robinson is the top pick in the draft this year but he comes with some complications - that 2 year military hitch. Will you still go after him?" The reply was "yes, we've waited 14 years. What's 2 more". But that question doesn't get asked if it wasn't seen as a gamble by at least some people.
 
OP
OP
pokerface

pokerface

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 20, 2004
Posts
5,369
Reaction score
807
https://uproxx.com/dimemag/adam-silver-sixers-tanking-changed-draft-rules/


The article said everything Ive been saying all along...


This will the sixth time in the last 35 years they adjusted the odds.

Tanking is being celebrated

Teams that don't tank are basically being viewed as stupid.

He's worried that the new rules won't do enough.

He blames Philly for the latest rules change.


So let's sum this up shall we? They keep changing the odds to stop tanking and it has never worked...and he still thinks it won't work. Because of Philly he wants to punish every team equally...tankers and non tankers alike. Then he admits that tanking is being "celebrated" ....meaning there is some popularity to it.

Is it just me or does this entire thing seem screwed up? I mean the tanking paranoia has really fried some peoples brains...people that should be smarter than this. Why keep tinkering with something that can't be fixed? Why tinker with something that is semi popular? Why punish the bad teams with the tankers? Is every bad team a tanking team now??

I mean lets just punish teams for being bad shall we? Heap it on. Let's keep them down for good...Just give the Warriors the top picks because they aren't tanking...let's give them EVERYTHING.




:soapbox:
 
Last edited:

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
17,589
Reaction score
12,811
Location
Tempe, AZ
Part of the issue with tanking, at least recently, is that David Stern did not care about it at all. He was in charge up until 2014 and that's when the Sixers were tanking the hardest. Sam Hinkie took over for the 2012-13 season and they got rid of Andre Iguodala, Jrue Holiday, and Thaddeus Young within that first year of him running things. They went all in for the 2013 draft when they traded for Nerlens Noel, who would miss considerable time because of his back injury, and they were fine with him missing all of that time because they had no intention on being competitive. Stern was on his way out also, ready to step down for Silver at the All-Star break in 2014, so no one in the league office cared what the Sixers were doing. By the time Silver was in charge, the Sixers had already tanked their way into 2 drafts, 2013 and 2014, and there was no way they were going to be able to field a competitive roster for the 2014-15 season. Since that was also his first full year in charge he paid attention but what could he do? Colangelo joined the Sixers front office for the 2015-16 season, which helped end the tanking, but by that point they'd already had enough quality draft picks they were going to compete and we're seeing that now. Some of them didn't pan out, Michael Carter-Williams, Jahlil Okafor, and Nerlens Noel, but the ones who did have been big for them, Embiid, Ben Simmons, Dario Saric, and Markelle Fultz. They won't be punished but everyone in the future will be while they'll be competing for titles. That seems fair.

They shouldn't have changed the lottery odds, they should have adopted rules blocking a team from having top 3 picks in consecutive years. Work it backwards, if they get the #1 pick then they can't draft in the top 3 for 3 years, if they get the #2 pick then they can't have a top 3 pick for 2 years, and if they get the #3 pick they can't draft in the top 3 the next year. They also opened up the lottery so the top 4 picks will be selected by lottery rather than just the top 3, so a team with the worst record could fall to #5 going forward. I don't see those changing curbing tanking so much as punishing bad teams. They've done the smart thing in watching the teams in the bottom of the standings to make sure they aren't resting players to tank but injuries happen and they do get exaggerated also. Chicago was warned but somehow the Suns weren't, which is a bit surprising. The Suns had a lot of people missing time at the end of the year and I'm pretty sure most of those guys could have returned if needed. If we were competing for something other than a top pick they would have been playing. The lottery odds won't do much though, IMO. They need to keep up with watching teams resting players and they should have punished Philly for tanking. If they had, then we wouldn't see other teams so openly following the blueprint that Sam Hinkie laid out for everyone when he took over up there.
 

Western Font

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Posts
2,968
Reaction score
3,323
Location
Downtown
It was the trading for injured players that really felt over-the-top to a lot of fans. It had been easier to accept trading for an expiring contract because the implicit strategy was that you were clearing your books and might be a player in free agency after (usually) a year.

But then the idea of putting a temporary and expensive bad team on the court in the hopes of assembling a big three in free agency was also criticized by fans who felt you should build through the draft (esp. if a second-tier market).

It’s tough: I like the idea of a team with the #1 pick being locked out of the top 3 for a few years, but it would also suck to leapfrog a bunch of teams via the ping pong balls in a weak draft, and then lose all chance at drafting a Shaq, Duncan, or LeBron for the next few years - especially if you are not tanking and are just young/bad.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
Team had gone young before. And really young at the end of seasons. But Sam Hinkie took tanking to a completely new level. He purposefully put a non-NBA level club on the floor every night. There was not even a hint of trying to win any games.
 

Folster

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Posts
16,926
Reaction score
7,563
The best resolution I heard discussed for tanking was to order teams based on wins after playoff elimination.
 

CardsFan88

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 28, 2002
Posts
7,642
Reaction score
4,742
It's the error of behavioral psychology. The belief that you can control how others behave. Nudge people. They want people to not tank, thinking that if they lower the odds, teams won't tank.

In reality, it probably will get MORE teams to tank. Why? Because there is no alternative when you're at the bottom.

So this rule will do TWO things, neither of which the smartest men in the room have any clue about.

#1 With higher odds, more teams will tank because they are increasing the odds that tankers can win. Instead of 1-2 teams, it'll pay for 5+ teams to. More teams can now win the tank. This is supposed to create less tanking?

#2 If bad teams can't get top picks, they'll be even more desperate and tank for more years. So it'll take longer for teams to resurface.

The league is controlling something they shouldn't be controlling because they are just going to make a big mess of things.


Meanwhile, Silver and Stern created this situation when they created and allowed superstar teams.

So you have a few super teams all bunched with talent, and everyone else is scrambling. Maybe the answer isn't to punish the bottom, but not allow the top to coalesce.

Especially not LeBron James's habit of going to a team using up all its resources like a locust and then moving on to the next team and doing the same thing, then again. If LeBron leaves, then he will be on his fourth attempt (CLE, MIA, CLE, wherever)

More super teams = more tanking. This really isn't hard, but Silver either doesn't want to face reality or doesn't haven't the balls to make the change and go against the superstars.

In a league where it takes superstars to compete, and you can't sign them because they can all collude together to go somewhere else, your only recourse is to tank.

Tanking isn't the problem, it's the symptom. The NBA should start the assessment of the situation from that angle.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
pokerface

pokerface

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 20, 2004
Posts
5,369
Reaction score
807
Team had gone young before. And really young at the end of seasons. But Sam Hinkie took tanking to a completely new level. He purposefully put a non-NBA level club on the floor every night. There was not even a hint of trying to win any games.

If one car on the road is speeding doing a hundred miles per hour do we give the same ticket to another car that is doing seventy? Also, is there any reasonable law out there that would prevent all speeding? Silver is trying to solve the impossible with simplistic general measures.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
17,589
Reaction score
12,811
Location
Tempe, AZ
If one car on the road is speeding doing a hundred miles per hour do we give the same ticket to another car that is doing seventy? Also, is there any reasonable law out there that would prevent all speeding? Silver is trying to solve the impossible with simplistic general measures.

I think a better way to describe the tanking situation is that there are a few cars speeding, they're all sort of racing, and once one of the cars gets a good sized lead on the others a few cops swoop in and ticket everyone but the fastest car because they were all speeding anyways. The fastest car was too far ahead to bother with though.

That's what's been done with tanking in the NBA.
 
OP
OP
pokerface

pokerface

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 20, 2004
Posts
5,369
Reaction score
807
Part of the issue with tanking, at least recently, is that David Stern did not care about it at all. He was in charge up until 2014 and that's when the Sixers were tanking the hardest. Sam Hinkie took over for the 2012-13 season and they got rid of Andre Iguodala, Jrue Holiday, and Thaddeus Young within that first year of him running things. They went all in for the 2013 draft when they traded for Nerlens Noel, who would miss considerable time because of his back injury, and they were fine with him missing all of that time because they had no intention on being competitive. Stern was on his way out also, ready to step down for Silver at the All-Star break in 2014, so no one in the league office cared what the Sixers were doing. By the time Silver was in charge, the Sixers had already tanked their way into 2 drafts, 2013 and 2014, and there was no way they were going to be able to field a competitive roster for the 2014-15 season. Since that was also his first full year in charge he paid attention but what could he do? Colangelo joined the Sixers front office for the 2015-16 season, which helped end the tanking, but by that point they'd already had enough quality draft picks they were going to compete and we're seeing that now. Some of them didn't pan out, Michael Carter-Williams, Jahlil Okafor, and Nerlens Noel, but the ones who did have been big for them, Embiid, Ben Simmons, Dario Saric, and Markelle Fultz. They won't be punished but everyone in the future will be while they'll be competing for titles. That seems fair.

They shouldn't have changed the lottery odds, they should have adopted rules blocking a team from having top 3 picks in consecutive years. Work it backwards, if they get the #1 pick then they can't draft in the top 3 for 3 years, if they get the #2 pick then they can't have a top 3 pick for 2 years, and if they get the #3 pick they can't draft in the top 3 the next year. They also opened up the lottery so the top 4 picks will be selected by lottery rather than just the top 3, so a team with the worst record could fall to #5 going forward. I don't see those changing curbing tanking so much as punishing bad teams. They've done the smart thing in watching the teams in the bottom of the standings to make sure they aren't resting players to tank but injuries happen and they do get exaggerated also. Chicago was warned but somehow the Suns weren't, which is a bit surprising. The Suns had a lot of people missing time at the end of the year and I'm pretty sure most of those guys could have returned if needed. If we were competing for something other than a top pick they would have been playing. The lottery odds won't do much though, IMO. They need to keep up with watching teams resting players and they should have punished Philly for tanking. If they had, then we wouldn't see other teams so openly following the blueprint that Sam Hinkie laid out for everyone when he took over up there.

I generally like this because it doesn't punish all bad teams and it seems like a reasonable approach.
 

BC867

Long time Phoenician!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
17,827
Reaction score
1,709
Location
NE Phoenix
I think a better way to describe the tanking situation is that there are a few cars speeding, they're all sort of racing, and once one of the cars gets a good sized lead on the others a few cops swoop in and ticket everyone but the fastest car because they were all speeding anyways. The fastest car was too far ahead to bother with though.

That's what's been done with tanking in the NBA.
'Reminds me of the old joke. If you and another guy are trying to outrun a bear, you don't have to be faster than the bear. Just faster than the other guy. :)
 
OP
OP
pokerface

pokerface

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 20, 2004
Posts
5,369
Reaction score
807
Why does anyone care if teams tank?


Good teams don't tank.

There has been a lottery to put randomness in place.

Teams that tank are already punished by poor attendance at games.

Teams should have a right to put whatever players they want on the floor. If fans don't like it they don't have to watch or attend games.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,462
Reaction score
16,990
Location
Round Rock, TX
Why does anyone care if teams tank?


Good teams don't tank.

There has been a lottery to put randomness in place.

Teams that tank are already punished by poor attendance at games.

Teams should have a right to put whatever players they want on the floor. If fans don't like it they don't have to watch or attend games.
As a fan, it's SO easy for you to say that. But that's not the reality.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
22,115
Reaction score
6,551
I keep running the tankathon mock. We get 4th most of the time. 4th just doesn’t seem worth the misery.
 

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
556,146
Posts
5,433,869
Members
6,329
Latest member
cardinals2025
Top