Great Article by Chris Mannix on "Tanking"

[Jailan34]

I guess the major difference between those who want to rebuild through the draft and those who want to rebuild on the fly is that one believes we have the talent to win a title currently and one doesn't.

I believe we have a great set of complementary pieces to surround a franchise guy but we don't have a franchise guy which is so crucial to winning in the nba.

I don't believe we can make the 8th seed and then trade all our mid round picks for any kind of real star. Also I think we know just how good all our players are, sully is a fringe all star, Olynk is our biggest unknown but I don't believe he's a huge upside guy.

I'm not sure what non tankers view as a bigger gamble, waiting, making a run for a first round exit And hoping a trade partner pops up. Or trusting in Ainge to be able to pick talent at the top of the draft, or trade that more valuable asset for star who is leaving his team if a situation like that even happens.

Either way we have a bunch of players I enjoy watching and will be intersted in seeing this team rebuild and move in the direction of number 18.

[MBunge]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

[Jailan34]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

[Moranis]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

trades like that aren't all that rare.  Great players are traded all the time, you just have to have the assets available to be in contention.  The problem Boston has right now is that it doesn't have the pieces to be in the running for one of those players so it would miss out.  That may not be a bad thing, but it isn't a realistic option right now.  After the season, Boston will add 2 more first rounders, which increases the odds of being a player in that sort of trade market, but right now boston is not.

[Jailan34]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

trades like that aren't all that rare.  Great players are traded all the time, you just have to have the assets available to be in contention.  The problem Boston has right now is that it doesn't have the pieces to be in the running for one of those players so it would miss out.  That may not be a bad thing, but it isn't a realistic option right now.  After the season, Boston will add 2 more first rounders, which increases the odds of being a player in that sort of trade market, but right now boston is not.

I agree with pretty much everything you say but we still need that top lottery pick to bring in a star or draft which is why I'm so in favor of tanking, because we aren't winning a title with our current roster.

[BballTim]

I guess the major difference between those who want to rebuild through the draft and those who want to rebuild on the fly is that one believes we have the talent to win a title currently and one doesn't.

  I don't think you'll find many (if any) people who think we currently have enough talent to win a title.

[mmmmm]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

We only 'tanked' that year because Pierce and Tony Allen both got hurt.  I don't believe 'tanking' was the plan going into that year at all.   We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down.   The team struggled without him, but did start to win again as Tony emerged as a scoring threat (folks probably forget how extremely athletic he was before the injury).   But then Tony got hurt and we _then_ lost 18 in a row.

At that point, it was moot.  You can't recover from something like that.  There was no decision to be made.

We ended up getting screwed by the lottery balls, getting the 5th pick, which Danny turned into lemonade (Ray Allen).

Suppose, hypothetically, that Pierce and Allen had not gotten hurt?   We likely would have made the playoffs.  We would not have been a title contender, but the team would have looked at least competitive.

And Danny already had accumulated every piece to trade for KG.   Folk's like to think that without the Ray Allen trade that KG doesn't come here, but I'm not so sure.  If Tony had gotten through that season healthy, he was an emerging young talent.  And the starting 5 that KG would have been looking at would have been Perk + KG + Pierce + Tony + Rondo.

It's completely hypothetical, of course, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that KG would still have come and that 'tanking' was never really a 'necessity' or 'the plan'.   It was just the reality after the injuries.

[mmmmm]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

trades like that aren't all that rare.  Great players are traded all the time, you just have to have the assets available to be in contention.  The problem Boston has right now is that it doesn't have the pieces to be in the running for one of those players so it would miss out.  That may not be a bad thing, but it isn't a realistic option right now.  After the season, Boston will add 2 more first rounders, which increases the odds of being a player in that sort of trade market, but right now boston is not.

At this point in the 2006-2007 season, Big Al had not really yet established his value.  His value went up as his share of the offense became more important after Pierce and Allen went down.

Al had not really done more his rookie year than Sullinger.  He played more games, obviously, because Sullinger's season was cut short.  But he played only a handful more total minutes because he was a bench player.  Sully, conversely, out-right earned a starting spot as a rookie on a playoff-bound team.  That's a pretty big deal.

At this point in time, Sullinger has accomplished more and probably would be considered to have more value than Al did at the same point/age -- except for concerns about Sully's back, of course.

Oddly, that (perceptions about his back issues) may make Sullinger more valuable to keep than to trade.

[Jailan34]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

We only 'tanked' that year because Pierce and Tony Allen both got hurt.  I don't believe 'tanking' was the plan going into that year at all.   We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down.   The team struggled without him, but did start to win again as Tony emerged as a scoring threat (folks probably forget how extremely athletic he was before the injury).   But then Tony got hurt and we _then_ lost 18 in a row.

At that point, it was moot.  You can't recover from something like that.  There was no decision to be made.

We ended up getting screwed by the lottery balls, getting the 5th pick, which Danny turned into lemonade (Ray Allen).

Suppose, hypothetically, that Pierce and Allen had not gotten hurt?   We likely would have made the playoffs.  We would not have been a title contender, but the team would have looked at least competitive.

And Danny already had accumulated every piece to trade for KG.   Folk's like to think that without the Ray Allen trade that KG doesn't come here, but I'm not so sure.  If Tony had gotten through that season healthy, he was an emerging young talent.  And the starting 5 that KG would have been looking at would have been Perk + KG + Pierce + Tony + Rondo.

It's completely hypothetical, of course, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that KG would still have come and that 'tanking' was never really a 'necessity' or 'the plan'.   It was just the reality after the injuries.

We tried to trade for KG but he declined, I believe he had a no trade or outright said he wouldn't re sign here. Then we got ray allen and only after that he agreed to come. I don't think KG was going to leave Minnesota for Boston if hes only joining piece.

At this time don't forget perk and rondo were both huge unknowns and unproven.

[mmmmm]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

We only 'tanked' that year because Pierce and Tony Allen both got hurt.  I don't believe 'tanking' was the plan going into that year at all.   We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down.   The team struggled without him, but did start to win again as Tony emerged as a scoring threat (folks probably forget how extremely athletic he was before the injury).   But then Tony got hurt and we _then_ lost 18 in a row.

At that point, it was moot.  You can't recover from something like that.  There was no decision to be made.

We ended up getting screwed by the lottery balls, getting the 5th pick, which Danny turned into lemonade (Ray Allen).

Suppose, hypothetically, that Pierce and Allen had not gotten hurt?   We likely would have made the playoffs.  We would not have been a title contender, but the team would have looked at least competitive.

And Danny already had accumulated every piece to trade for KG.   Folk's like to think that without the Ray Allen trade that KG doesn't come here, but I'm not so sure.  If Tony had gotten through that season healthy, he was an emerging young talent.  And the starting 5 that KG would have been looking at would have been Perk + KG + Pierce + Tony + Rondo.

It's completely hypothetical, of course, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that KG would still have come and that 'tanking' was never really a 'necessity' or 'the plan'.   It was just the reality after the injuries.

We tried to trade for KG but he declined, I believe he had a no trade or outright said he wouldn't re sign here. Then we got ray allen and only after that he agreed to come. I don't think KG was going to leave Minnesota for Boston if hes only joining piece.

At this time don't forget perk and rondo were both huge unknowns and unproven.

He declined because we were a crappy lottery team and why would he want to leave one crappy team (Minnesota) for another?  Acquiring Ray was Danny's way of saying, "We are serious about contending."

But - to the hypothetical I proposed - if Pierce and Tony had NOT gotten hurt, the team would NOT have been 'crappy'.  It very likely would have been in the playoffs.  KG would have been joining a competitive base.

Perkins and Rondo are a wash in this.  The only difference between that scenario and what KG ended up joining is Ray Allen (coming off ankle surgery) compared to a hypothetical Tony Allen NOT having been injured.

[guava_wrench]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

We only 'tanked' that year because Pierce and Tony Allen both got hurt.  I don't believe 'tanking' was the plan going into that year at all.   We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down.   The team struggled without him, but did start to win again as Tony emerged as a scoring threat (folks probably forget how extremely athletic he was before the injury).   But then Tony got hurt and we _then_ lost 18 in a row.

At that point, it was moot.  You can't recover from something like that.  There was no decision to be made.

We ended up getting screwed by the lottery balls, getting the 5th pick, which Danny turned into lemonade (Ray Allen).

Suppose, hypothetically, that Pierce and Allen had not gotten hurt?   We likely would have made the playoffs.  We would not have been a title contender, but the team would have looked at least competitive.

And Danny already had accumulated every piece to trade for KG.   Folk's like to think that without the Ray Allen trade that KG doesn't come here, but I'm not so sure.  If Tony had gotten through that season healthy, he was an emerging young talent.  And the starting 5 that KG would have been looking at would have been Perk + KG + Pierce + Tony + Rondo.

It's completely hypothetical, of course, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that KG would still have come and that 'tanking' was never really a 'necessity' or 'the plan'.   It was just the reality after the injuries.

We tried to trade for KG but he declined, I believe he had a no trade or outright said he wouldn't re sign here. Then we got ray allen and only after that he agreed to come. I don't think KG was going to leave Minnesota for Boston if hes only joining piece.

At this time don't forget perk and rondo were both huge unknowns and unproven.

He declined because we were a crappy lottery team and why would he want to leave one crappy team (Minnesota) for another?  Acquiring Ray was Danny's way of saying, "We are serious about contending."

But - to the hypothetical I proposed - if Pierce and Tony had NOT gotten hurt, the team would NOT have been 'crappy'.  It very likely would have been in the playoffs.  KG would have been joining a competitive base.

Perkins and Rondo are a wash in this.  The only difference between that scenario and what KG ended up joining is Ray Allen (coming off ankle surgery) compared to a hypothetical Tony Allen NOT having been injured.

"We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down."

Really? http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2007_games.html

Our best record was 10-13 after a 5 game winning streak. We were bad all season. We were 12-22 when TA went down. No, we were not on the edge of the playoffs.

People are mentioning many things that are not true or of questionable relevance. The perception at the time was that later in the season, we did not play Pierce when he was ready to return from injury. If I remember correctly, it was an elbow injury.

[chambers]

No one's saying that you can tank your way to a ring.

But saying it doesn't work because the Bobcats are still awful is a lazy equivocation.

It's not so much that it doesn't work for the Bobcats. It doesn't work for anyone.

How many of the last 25 years of championships have not been won by teams with their own top 5 or 10 pick in place already?

Eight.  Five by the Lakers, one by the Celtics, one by the Pistons (if you discount Darko), and one by the Mavs.

well Pierce and Bynum went 10th and Dirk went 9th, so if you go top ten you eliminate 4 more titles.

lol.
Kobe came out of high school and was picked 13th. He also refused to play for any other team than the Lakers, and was picked for the Lakers by the Hornets in a pre-arranged trade.
 If he goes to college he's gone top 5 easily. Take Kobe out of the equation and the number is ?

One?

[moiso]

No one's saying that you can tank your way to a ring.

But saying it doesn't work because the Bobcats are still awful is a lazy equivocation.

It's not so much that it doesn't work for the Bobcats. It doesn't work for anyone.

How many of the last 25 years of championships have not been won by teams with their own top 5 or 10 pick in place already?

Eight.  Five by the Lakers, one by the Celtics, one by the Pistons (if you discount Darko), and one by the Mavs.

well Pierce and Bynum went 10th and Dirk went 9th, so if you go top ten you eliminate 4 more titles.

lol.
Kobe came out of high school and was picked 13th. He also refused to play for any other team than the Lakers, and was picked for the Lakers by the Hornets in a pre-arranged trade.
 If he goes to college he's gone top 5 easily. Take Kobe out of the equation and the number is ?

One?

He didn't refuse to play for any team other than the Lakers.  That can't happen.  And he actually worked out for the Celtics.  Why would he do that if he refused to play for them?

[BballTim]

'Tanking' has a lot of negative connotations- but if you know by putting young guys out there that you'll develop them- yet risk losing more games- is that considered tanking?

Let's not kid around.  Everyone knows what "tanking" is.  It's making a deliberate effort to be as bad as you can.  That's what Philly did when they traded away an All-Star for a draft pick who probably won't even play this season.  That's what San Antonio did when they sat Robinson when he was healthy.  Sometime you can get lucky and that can work but few teams have ever really succeeded by following that strategy, just like few teams have ever really been able to "buy" a championship in the NBA.

To me, the best plan is the one Ainge followed both to bring KG and Ray to town and what he seems to be doing now.  You accumulate assets and wait for the right opportunity.  Right now, Ainge has all the draft picks you could reasonably want.  He's also got several NBA caliber players in Green, Bradley, Bass, Sully and Hump, an injured All-Star in Rondo and a rookie prospect in KO.  He's also got a big contract (Wallace) that will be a valuable trade chip in a few years when it's an expiring deal.  The argument that we should just give away any of those assets now to minutely increase our chances of getting a top 3 pick in 2014 doesn't make a lot of sense.  It also wouldn't make a lot of sense to make any moves designed to win more games right now.

This team is in a holding pattern and probably will be unless someone is willing to part with some real value at the trade deadline for somebody like Green, Hump or Bradley or until the draft next year.  Given that, I'd rather Ainge just let this team play and win as many games as they can.

Mike

We tanked the year prior and had the 5th overall pick, we also had al Jefferson who had huge upside and teams wanted. Currently we don't have a similar pick or player to make those deals.

That was also a rare block buster opportunity with some help from an old Celtic too.

We only 'tanked' that year because Pierce and Tony Allen both got hurt.  I don't believe 'tanking' was the plan going into that year at all.   We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down.   The team struggled without him, but did start to win again as Tony emerged as a scoring threat (folks probably forget how extremely athletic he was before the injury).   But then Tony got hurt and we _then_ lost 18 in a row.

At that point, it was moot.  You can't recover from something like that.  There was no decision to be made.

We ended up getting screwed by the lottery balls, getting the 5th pick, which Danny turned into lemonade (Ray Allen).

Suppose, hypothetically, that Pierce and Allen had not gotten hurt?   We likely would have made the playoffs.  We would not have been a title contender, but the team would have looked at least competitive.

And Danny already had accumulated every piece to trade for KG.   Folk's like to think that without the Ray Allen trade that KG doesn't come here, but I'm not so sure.  If Tony had gotten through that season healthy, he was an emerging young talent.  And the starting 5 that KG would have been looking at would have been Perk + KG + Pierce + Tony + Rondo.

It's completely hypothetical, of course, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that KG would still have come and that 'tanking' was never really a 'necessity' or 'the plan'.   It was just the reality after the injuries.

We tried to trade for KG but he declined, I believe he had a no trade or outright said he wouldn't re sign here. Then we got ray allen and only after that he agreed to come. I don't think KG was going to leave Minnesota for Boston if hes only joining piece.

At this time don't forget perk and rondo were both huge unknowns and unproven.

He declined because we were a crappy lottery team and why would he want to leave one crappy team (Minnesota) for another?  Acquiring Ray was Danny's way of saying, "We are serious about contending."

But - to the hypothetical I proposed - if Pierce and Tony had NOT gotten hurt, the team would NOT have been 'crappy'.  It very likely would have been in the playoffs.  KG would have been joining a competitive base.

Perkins and Rondo are a wash in this.  The only difference between that scenario and what KG ended up joining is Ray Allen (coming off ankle surgery) compared to a hypothetical Tony Allen NOT having been injured.

"We had a slow start, but were right on the edge of the playoffs when Pierce went down."

Really? http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2007_games.html

Our best record was 10-13 after a 5 game winning streak. We were bad all season. We were 12-22 when TA went down. No, we were not on the edge of the playoffs.

People are mentioning many things that are not true or of questionable relevance. The perception at the time was that later in the season, we did not play Pierce when he was ready to return from injury. If I remember correctly, it was an elbow injury.

  The last 3 playoff teams in the east were 40-41 win teams. We probably were right on the edge of the playoffs at 10-13. I think Al started the season coming back from injury but after he got going Doc put him and TA in the starting lineup and the team started to click. I'd say there was a good chance they'd have made the playoffs. I'd also say they seemed to have no intention of tanking before the PP injury.

[chambers]

No one's saying that you can tank your way to a ring.

But saying it doesn't work because the Bobcats are still awful is a lazy equivocation.

It's not so much that it doesn't work for the Bobcats. It doesn't work for anyone.

How many of the last 25 years of championships have not been won by teams with their own top 5 or 10 pick in place already?

Eight.  Five by the Lakers, one by the Celtics, one by the Pistons (if you discount Darko), and one by the Mavs.

well Pierce and Bynum went 10th and Dirk went 9th, so if you go top ten you eliminate 4 more titles.

lol.
Kobe came out of high school and was picked 13th. He also refused to play for any other team than the Lakers, and was picked for the Lakers by the Hornets in a pre-arranged trade.
 If he goes to college he's gone top 5 easily. Take Kobe out of the equation and the number is ?

One?

He didn't refuse to play for any team other than the Lakers.  That can't happen.  And he actually worked out for the Celtics.  Why would he do that if he refused to play for them?

He worked out for a few teams, including us. But he and Jerry West fell in love. (seriously) So the Lakers + Kobe's agent went around to the lottery teams informing them that Kobe would refuse to play with them.
Kobe had already met with Jerry West, and was set to force his way to LA. The Hornets worked out a deal to get Vlade and drafted Kobe as a trade asset.
The common myth at the time was that he refused to play for the Hornets- it was actually that he wouldn't play for anyone but the Lakers.