As the NBA regular season winds down, it’s time to assess how some teams paradoxically get worse to get better and why being a middle-of-the-road team in the NBA is the worst place to be.
For the cellar dwellers the race to the bottom is just as hot as the race to the finals. The prize probably more compelling for the tanking teams: an opportunity to draft a franchise-changing young superstar.
Although all teams covet high draft picks, the reality is the value extracted from them is entirely dependent on the front office staff of each franchise in evaluating talent and selecting the transformational superstar. While the probability of finding that player is low, it doesn’t stop teams swinging for the fences and loading up on draft picks to varying degrees of success.
Tanking is an art form, and there are myriad excuses rolled out by coaches, from acquiescing to the front office demands to did not play for rest, rotation players and starters tied to the end of benches in order to roll out inefficient line-ups under the guise of evaluating young players.
Perhaps the most egregious of these loss-promoting tactics for fans is when teams shut down their elite players for the remainder of the regular season under the veil of injury. Quite often these players, who hinder the tanking effort, are able and willing to play, yet under pressure from the franchise’s front office they agree to remain on the bench in street clothes.
This robs fans of the chance to see their favourite players in action and removes some amount of spectacle from each game when lesser players are playing the bulk of the minutes.
Try to watch a late-season Sacramento Kings versus Chicago Bulls game at the moment. The standard of NBA basketball in these tankageddon games is deplorable.
The worst place to be as an NBA franchise is in the middle of the pack. Making the eighth seed in the playoffs should not be cause for celebration unless your team has a superstar who is injured – read the Spurs and Timberwolves – or your team is heading in the right direction, as in the case of the 76ers.
Middle of the road is bad. On only five occasions has the eighth seed progressed past the first round of the NBA playoffs, and your likely draft pick is outside of the lottery, which is proverbial draft purgatory where general managers are resigned to drafting for fit, high upside characteristics or on potential as opposed to a can’t-miss prospect.
With the race to the bottom squarely in the NBA’s sights, it’s a good time to dissect the league’s three premier tank commanders: that is, players entrusted with being so deplorably bad that they could drive their team’s performance off a cliff and into the dark abyss of the 2018 tank race.
The Chicago Bulls have selected co-captains as their tank commanders: Cameron Payne and Cristiano Felicio. While Felicio is having the greatest impact on the Bulls efforts, I felt obliged to include Payne considering the Bulls gave up Doug McDermott and Taj Gibson to acquire him.
Payne is a below league average point guard with a dismal career true shooting percentage of 46.3 per cent. Payne could be fine as a backup or even third ball-handling option with a career 38 per cent three-point shooting clip – granted on a small sample size – and he could at least space the floor in Chicago’s offensive scheme. The problem is that under pressure Payne often makes poor decisions when distributing the basketball and can look flustered at times.
But the real cream on top of this tanking tiramisu is Felicio. In 123 minutes as a starter he has a net rating of -38.7. This is undoubtedly buoyed by Chicago’s abysmal line-ups during Felicio’s time as a starter. What makes his efforts even more outstanding is his newly minted four-year, $32 million contract. That’s enough to keep you awake at night.
Is a projected number three pick worth eating $32 million?
[latest_videos_strip]
The Memphis Grizzlies select their entire roster. The Grizzlies have a mish-mash of second-round rookies and young guys, two-way G-League call-ups and injured expensive players like Mike Conley and Chandler Parsons.
Memphis recently rolled out the following starting line-up against Orlando: Mario Chalmers, Ben McLemore, Dillon Brooks, Jarell Martin and JaMychal Green.
The Memphis tanking effort is led by a group of young guys trying very hard to prove their worth with little distinction. It’s not entirely their fault – young unproven guys need time and support of the regular core to integrate and learn NBA basketball. The Grizzlies are projected to secure a 25 per cent chance in the draft lottery for the number one pick.
The New York Knicks select Emmanuel Mudiay as their tank commander. After acquiring the 2015 lottery draft pick, the Knicks quickly inserted Mudiay into the line-up with instant success. In his past three games Mudiay has shot a combined 3-25 from the field. A bona fide dumpster fire tank effort, Mudiay is leading the charge for the Knicks, who have lost 13 of their last 14 games.
The Knicks were right to take a flyer on Mudiay, a former number seven overall pick who never lived up to potential in Denver. Other than paying him $4 million per season and giving up McDermott, there is a large upside to Mudiay. He’s a six-foot-five-inch ball handler who has the athletic tools to be a good rotation guy and he’s only 22 years old.
The real challenge to the Knicks lottery hopes were the early season wins in a Porzingis-led offence, and they’re racing against a double threat of fellow tank-a-thon teams with the end of the regular season fast approaching.
(AAP Image/Joe Castro)
The NBA knows it has a tanking problem, and Commissioner Adam Silver has warned teams against the practice, which just forces teams underground in their tanking efforts, skirting the shadowy edge of losing and avoiding wins at all costs. The fines are harsh, with Dallas owner Mark Cuban fined $600,000 for proclaiming tanking is in the Mavericks’ best interests.
The NBA’s lottery reform takes effect next season, and it’s hoped these measures will somewhat reduce the league’s tanking teams’ eagerness to put terrible line-ups on the floor.
The league has a real problem on their hands, but that won’t stop the tank commanders manning their battle stations.
express34texas
Guest
What's that, 2-3 examples that kind of worked of many that didn't. Yea, maybe tanking for one year could pay out, but even one year of a losing environment is draining on a franchise. CLE tanking for 2003 worked to get James, but they still had to luck out in getting the #1 pick, and still didn't win a title with him. SEA won 35 and 31 games in 2006/2007 with Allen/Lewis. They weren't going anywhere with these 2 guys, wasn't working, so try something else. They lucked out in winning big in the lottery, and then lucked out when POR picked Oden instead of KD. I wouldn't say they tanked when trading Allen/Lewis, though they got basically nothing for Lewis. It was a win-win for both BOS/SEA in the Allen trade. I don't know if I'd say GS tanked much in 2012. It's possible towards the end of the season in a lost season, but I'd say that's different than a gameplan of tanking initially. Curry was hurt most of 2012, too. And I bet GS still wins the title in 2015 without Barnes. He was only the 7th pick, and most of those lottery picks that year would've been at least comparable to Barnes. PHI is a terrible example. Their franchise has been ridiculous lately. They're finally digging themselves out of a huge hole. Even with all of this supposed talent, they're still just the 6th seed in the East currently. You make it sound so easy: getting a high pick, the year of that pick, the pick you make, and the ability to develop talent.
express34texas
Guest
Often the top guys are very high draft picks, naturally. Kobe is probably an exception, but he was only 17 and coming out of HS, plus he was still drafted 13th. These top/elite guys, are almost always the ones leading teams to titles/deep in the playoffs, though they might not stick with the team that drafted them. Astro, I wouldn't say the draft is the only option for some teams. Having a smart organization is probably most important. Look at SA. Obviously, every team can't win 50+ games every year, but every team could potentially be smartly managed. Tanking is an option, but an option that has little evidence of actually working. It's a poor business model, plus you're relying on basically mostly luck. When teams try to be as good as possible, it's much better for their organization, fanbase, and league. Plus, they look attractive for free agents. A lot of teams are close and maybe 1 piece away from being real contenders. Just this year, I could easily see any of the top 6 teams in the East make the Finals. Any of those teams could beat any of the others. Losing wears on you after awhile and becomes contagious, not a good idea overall.
astro
Guest
A lot depends on the definition of tanking (vs juts being a bad team), but since the 2000s... - The Cavs tanked to get Lebron, by creating a roster designed to fail. They've basically admitted this. - The Sonics/Thunder tanked after drafting Durant. The traded prime Ray Allen and Ray Lewis for picks. Drafted Westbrook. - The Warriors tanked to keep their pick in 2012, and drafted Barnes. - And now of course, Philly have tanked their way to two young All-Stars (one a very-to-be All-Star) and could have had more, if they drafted better. Tanking doesn't promise you anything, but it gives you a shot at finding a star...All comes down to the pick you make and the year you make it, and then your team's ability to turn young talent into stars. Orlando are a good example. Pretty much tanked their way to Oladipo and Gordon in back-to-back years, but couldn't build around them effectively.
astro
Guest
Texas is right...the draft is the only option for a lot of teams. Take a look at the list of NBA champs. Just about every one from the last 10yrs or more has at least one top 5 player in the NBA, and/or multiple All-Stars. If you're the Magic, for example, how else are you supposed to build a championship team if not by tanking and giving yourself the best chance to draft a franchise player or two? Would any of Curry/Kawhi/Lebron/RW/Durant/AD etc sign in Orlando through free agency? They cant get them through a trade, so what's left? Either tank and see if you can draft a superstar to fill the stadium, or spend lots of money to come 8th and lose in 5 to the Raptors.
Jerry
Guest
I do see the point of making the distinction with the rookie contract as convincing a gun player to stick around takes more than just tanking - a team is gonna have to show decent coaching & recruitment to convince the player not to leave. Looking at the list of the last 30 or so NBA finals, I can only see a few that featured a team with a top lottery pick they drafted. Cleveland, with James & then Irving. Orlando with Shaq & Penny and later with Dwight Howard Miami with Wade ( top 5 pick). Philadelphia with Iverson OKC with Durant. San Antonio with Duncan (I can't remember if the draft was a lottery when Robinson was drafted). 3 of those had real long term success - Miami, Cleveland & the Spurs though you could include OKC with a finals and a conference finals, perhaps. There might be a couple I missed, of course but I think those are the examples when the lottery pick was the dominant or top player on the team. So not the best strike rate for sustained success through top picks, let alone tanking.
express34texas
Guest
It shouldn't matter if their #1 player is on his rookie contract or not. And it's not just #1 players either, could be top 5-10 picks, etc. Tanking seems like a very poor business model that almost always fails, but I see the point in doing so, though disagree that it's smart to do so. Except in very rare circumstances, title teams need an elite player(top 5ish) to begin with, and then obviously a solid cast around them. In the past 30+years, I only see 2004 DET(very solid cast, and down year in NBA), and 2014 SA(best team/coach in NBA that year and Kawhi emerged in the Finals) as exceptions. The only ways to get this elite player is trade, free agency, or draft. Especially if you're in a smaller market, draft might be the only option for you.
Jerry
Guest
Ha! The article I read was the one linked above! That's really weird.
Jerry
Guest
Honest question - has a team ever tanked their way to long term success? Ie - has a team thank obviously tanked ever picked up a legacy player in the draft that translated to long term success - ie, finals appearances or a title? I read an article the other day pointing out that the only team that's ever won a title with a #1 lottery pick still on their rookie deal was San Antonion with Tim Duncan, but they didn't tank - they just got extremely lucky and the only reason they were in the lottery was due to David Robinson being injured.
Aaron Callaghan
Roar Rookie
Probably, probably except some places like memphis and Sacramento aren't free agent destinations. You're right the culture in those locations is abhorrent.
Aaron Callaghan
Roar Rookie
I'll take a read, the article is 5 years old, still relevant?
Aaron Callaghan
Roar Rookie
Yep!
Justin Ahrns
Roar Guru
Great read. I find interesting the teams that are currently leading the tank charge - Phoenix, Dallas, Memphis, Orlando, Sacramento, and now New York. Teams that seem to be, with the possible exception of Dallas, stuck in this pattern of tanking for a long time now. It makes you wonder whether it truly is more valuable to build a positive culture, establish solid veterans to lead young guys as they develop, draft well in the 8-12 sort of range, and then build smartly via free agency.
Marc Grayson
Guest
Calling a spade a spade
Kris
Guest
Tanking doesn't work http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/18/tanking_myth_nba_success_comes_from_sound_management_not_draft_picks.html
Tom Atkinson
Guest
Wow fantastic read!