NBA Random Thoughts Thread #18, 2021-22 Season: Omaha!

[vnzla81]

OKC is destroying Brooklyn and they will get really close to passing Pacers in the tank

[vnzla81]

Memphis is just too good right now

[Guest]

vnzla81 you see Kuminga out there tonight?

[vnzla81]

[vnzla81]

BREAKING NEWS: Pacers have won one more game than tanking OKC, never forget that we were told for years that if this ever happened the team would disappear and show up in Vegas next day.

[SaintLouisan]

BREAKING NEWS: Pacers have won one more game than tanking OKC, never forget that we were told for years that if this ever happened the team would disappear and show up in Vegas next day.

Is that really what you were told...

[vnzla81]

Is that really what you were told...

For over a decade.


"If Pacers ever tank this team will disappear in the middle of the night and will be sold to Jeff Bezos who is going to move it as soon as he gets the deal done to Vegas and is going to be called the Vegas Pacers"

[SaintLouisan]

For over a decade.


"If Pacers ever tank this team will disappear in the middle of the night and will be sold to Jeff Bezos who is going to move it as soon as he gets the deal done to Vegas and is going to be called the Vegas Pacers"

One bad season isn't going to do it. Getting stuck in the Kings vortex of perpetual suckitude however...

(Not that I think that's going to happen)

[vnzla81]

One bad season isn't going to do it. Getting stuck in the Kings vortex of perpetual suckitude however...

(Not that I think that's going to happen)

Thing is OKC is building and tanking for something while Pacers keep their "honor" and are losing as much as OKC.


And guess what? the team is still here and didn't move to Vegas.

[Trader Joe]

One bad season isn't going to do it. Getting stuck in the Kings vortex of perpetual suckitude however...

(Not that I think that's going to happen)

It's not going to happen period. For the 5-6 teams that are all stories about "why you shouldn't tank" around here there are like 20 teams who have all tanked at least one season in the last 10-15 years and massively benefitted from it.

Everyone wants to point to Sacramento or Orlando or New Orleans or Minnesota, but those teams are all the exceptions not the rule. Also the Magic actually made an NBA finals more recently than us so hey.

The reality of tanking in the NBA is that 90% of the teams that do it end up coming out on the other side much better than they were pre-tank which is why many teams continue to do it or at least a variation of it.

[vnzla81]

Somebody please send this clip to Herb, it is possible if you have a good front office.

[SaintLouisan]

It's not going to happen period. For the 5-6 teams that are all stories about "why you shouldn't tank" around here there are like 20 teams who have all tanked at least one season in the last 10-15 years and massively benefitted from it.

Everyone wants to point to Sacramento or Orlando or New Orleans or Minnesota, but those teams are all the exceptions not the rule. Also the Magic actually made an NBA finals more recently than us so hey.

The reality of tanking in the NBA is that 90% of the teams that do it end up coming out on the other side much better than they were pre-tank which is why many teams continue to do it or at least a variation of it.

It just always seems to me that it's offered up as a cure-all, which it isn't.

Aside from the Spurs (arguable), I can't think of any teams that won a title because they threw ga...sorry, tanked.

If you just suck, that's not the same as tanking. The fact poor teams get better after a high pick is how it's supposed to work, that's the whole reason the draft system is in place, to reinforce parity.

Funny thing is, all the tankers are always like "oh I'd never support something like the Philly Process", well IMO if you're going to rely on the draft to fix your franchise, that's how you gotta do it, and they're the only ones who had the balls and patience to do it.

(BTW I just meant that I would be concerned if we had a decade long struggle re: the team moving, it wasn't necessarily anything to do with the draft)

[Trader Joe]

It just always seems to me that it's offered up as a cure-all, which it isn't.

Aside from the Spurs (arguable), I can't think of any teams that won a title because they threw ga...sorry, tanked.

If you just suck, that's not the same as tanking. The fact poor teams get better after a high pick is how it's supposed to work, that's the whole reason the draft system is in place, to reinforce parity.

Funny thing is, all the tankers are always like "oh I'd never support something like the Philly Process", well IMO if you're going to rely on the draft to fix your franchise, that's how you gotta do it, and they're the only ones who had the balls and patience to do it.

(BTW I just meant that I would be concerned if we had a decade long struggle re: the team moving, it wasn't necessarily anything to do with the draft)

I think it's all just what you mean by tanking, I think bad teams are tanking at a certain point, they are making sure they are not winning games for a long term plan. Everyone hears tanking and immediately thinks of the Process around here it seems when I don't think anyone is really asking for that, but I do agree with you, long term play if you want to absolutely guarantee a top flight player, you gotta tank like 5-6 years, but I don't think that's necessary to build a good team.

It's just funny to me that as much as the Pacers as a franchise talk about trades and drafting being the two ways they have to get better as a small market, they are rarely, if ever actually agressive on either of those fronts. And even when they are aggressive in a trade, they often use their pick to facilitate it which seems like kind of shooting off one foot so you can buy a single Jordan for your other foot.

[SaintLouisan]

I think it's all just what you mean by tanking, I think bad teams are tanking at a certain point, they are making sure they are not winning games for a long term plan. Everyone hears tanking and immediately thinks of the Process around here it seems when I don't think anyone is really asking for that, but I do agree with you, long term play if you want to absolutely guarantee a top flight player, you gotta tank like 5-6 years, but I don't think that's necessary to build a good team.

It's just funny to me that as much as the Pacers as a franchise talk about trades and drafting being the two ways they have to get better as a small market, they are rarely, if ever actually agressive on either of those fronts. And even when they are aggressive in a trade, they often use their pick to facilitate it which seems like kind of shooting off one foot so you can buy a single Jordan for your other foot.

Fair enough really. For me the tell is when you start seeing good (and esp young) players held out, because until then you're risking injury to guys who might potentially be critical players for you down the line, so i have to think the only reason to do that is to win ballgames.

Honestly I think both tankers and anti-tankers can sleep well at night with this Pacers team -- we're losing, but we are also actually trying to win. It's just a dreadfully constructed team with a raft of injury issues. And I don't even really see how we could swing what we have into a playoff team via trade either. Barring some Angels in the Outfield-type scenario, there's absolutely nothing they can do to turn this team around enough to bring us out of the bottom 8 or so (especially as some teams like Pels and OKC are kinda heating up, relatively speaking).

So everyone should be happy -- we got to see what this roster is capable of (answer: not much -- even though we still haven't seen the team fully healthy, but that's a feature, not a bug), and we'll probably pick in the top 6 or so.

[vnzla81]

Note Memphis got new ownership (young guy) and has a new front office, this doesn’t happen with the people that didn’t know how to use a fax machine.