Poll of the Day > "Spurs should trade Kawhi Leonard and tank rest of season"

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpqfY4iDI-g" data-time="

oh ESPN

when will you stop making mountains out of mole hills

kawhis not getting traded
nobodys tanking

iirc you can't even trade injured players
---

You can definitely trade injured players. I really dont think kawhi plays another game in a spurs uniform.

To be honest I have no idea what kawhi wants. Hes an enigma
---

Lol wtf, there are like ten games left in the season and the Spurs are in a playoff spot. How exactly do you "tank" at that point? And what incentive would a trading partner have to take a trade like this right now?

This is a ludicrously dumb take. It's something you would expect from some random schmo who calls into the radio show to say his team just needs to trade for LeBron and Steph.

Is this what Max is always like on First Take? I know that it is generally acknowledged that Skip says stupid shit on purpose, but I don't know if Max completely took on that role. But man, I kind of wish I could get paid to be a moron on TV.

SteamedHams posted...

Lol wtf, there are like ten games left in the season and the Spurs are in a playoff spot. How exactly do you "tank" at that point? And what incentive would a trading partner have to take a trade like this right now?

This is a ludicrously dumb take. It's something you would expect from some random schmo who calls into the radio show to say his team just needs to trade for LeBron and Steph.

Is this what Max is always like on First Take? I know that it is generally acknowledged that Skip says stupid shit on purpose, but I don't know if Max completely took on that role. But man, I kind of wish I could get paid to be a moron on TV.

Well, Im not saying this is what they should do, but they could start losing now and get a pretty good pick. Right now theyre the sixth seed and if they lose the rest of their games theyd be in the lottery and could honestly end up with a top ten pick in a pretty deep draft. Not to mention they could trade kawhi to say.. the 76ers for Ben Simmons and Fultz and have a nice young core to build around.

I didnt even watch the clip so Im not sure what max says but its not that surprising to me.

He usually takes the smart side of the argument against Stephen a smith, but every once and awhile he has to have a hot take like this to keep the show interesting. I honestly hate first take but I loved max on sports nation and was so sad when he left. And now that beadle is gone too the show is basically unwatchable
---

Worst the Spurs could finish is 42-40. There are already twelve teams with 40 or more losses, and I assume the ones with 40 will lose at least once more, so you're looking at the Spurs with a 13th pick if they have no lottery luck.

I don't know much about this year's draft but there's rarely a real franchise-changer outside of the top five of the NBA draft, and outside of the top ten it's basically a complete crapshoot.

Also, how exactly do you tank by trading a player who isn't playing? They'd have to change something in their lineup to tank, which is something that can be done independent of trading Kawhi. Trading him in the offseason would be a more attractive proposition for both the Spurs and possible trade partners.

Right, 13th pick (although could be higher, lottery and all) as opposed to making the playoffs and losing. Im sure hes talking about trading kawhi in the off-season because the trade deadline is over.

Im not saying they should do this, but if their options are wait for kawhi to leave next year when his contract is up or trading him, they obviously should trade him. And if their options are get into the playoffs at the sixth seed and playing the blazers first round or losing their next ten games on purpose and getting a decent pick in a draft where trey young might drop to the tenth pick, smart money would be lose on purpose.
---

There is no possible way they would have the tenth pick. Do you know how the lottery works? It doesn't shuffle everyone, there are only drawings for the top three picks. The only way they'd move up is if they got a top three pick, which is probably a worse thing to bet on than Kawhi still being good and deciding to re-sign with the team.

SteamedHams posted...

There is no possible way they would have the tenth pick. Do you know how the lottery works? It doesn't shuffle everyone, there are only drawings for the top three picks. The only way they'd move up is if they got a top three pick, which is probably a worse thing to bet on than Kawhi still being good and deciding to re-sign with the team.

???

They all have a chance to move up, dont they? Thats how the Orlando Magic got Shaq with the number one pick even though they were the 11th seed?
---

They can move up to a top three pick, but it looked to me like you're saying they could move up anywhere. And the odds of that are only 2.7% for the 13th lottery team.

The fact that tanking is a legitimate strategy speaks to the shallowness of basketball in general. In no other sport, except arguably the quarterback in football, does one elite player make that much of a difference. Team building should be based upon identifying players that fit your system and accumulating depth; not intentionally losing so that you're in a position to take a consensus top prospect.

Look at the Edmonton Oilers. They have the best player under 30 in the world, he's 2nd in the league in scoring right now, and they're nowhere near playoff contenders. The Penguins on the other hand, while yes they have Sid and Geno, their most recent cup wins are equally attributable to guys like Rust, Guentzel, Sheary, and Murray coming up through the system and making big contributions.

On the other hand, you have basketball, where the 6ers spent a half decade intentionally sucking in order to be good, and now we have the Grizzlies doing the same, and you're discussing the Spurs potentially doing the same. Even the NFL, where 'Suck for Luck' was a thing, we can see how that didn't work out. Only basketball is that shallow.
---

Oh I thought they all were in the lottery and it shuffled all the picks with each team having better odds based on their positions. I didnt know that it was just the top three
---

BADoglick posted...

The fact that tanking is a legitimate strategy speaks to the shallowness of basketball in general. In no other sport, except arguably the quarterback in football, does one elite player make that much of a difference. Team building should be based upon identifying players that fit your system and accumulating depth; not intentionally losing so that you're in a position to take a consensus top prospect.

Look at the Edmonton Oilers. They have the best player under 30 in the world, he's 2nd in the league in scoring right now, and they're nowhere near playoff contenders. The Penguins on the other hand, while yes they have Sid and Geno, their most recent cup wins are equally attributable to guys like Rust, Guentzel, Sheary, and Murray coming up through the system and making big contributions.

On the other hand, you have basketball, where the 6ers spent a half decade intentionally sucking in order to be good, and now we have the Grizzlies doing the same, and you're discussing the Spurs potentially doing the same. Even the NFL, where 'Suck for Luck' was a thing, we can see how that didn't work out. Only basketball is that shallow.

Shallow


---

MICHALECOLE posted...

Oh I thought they all were in the lottery and it shuffled all the picks with each team having better odds based on their positions. I didnt know that it was just the top three

It's all good, I used to think that's how it worked too

Jazz vs 76ers 2018 Finals lezgo

Dakooder posted...

Jazz vs 76ers 2018 Finals lezgo

Lol

More likely is Houston/Cleveland or Houston/Toronto if derozan and Lowry can slay the king

*spoilerz*
They cant
---

But yeah on the real tanking wouldnt get them anywhere. Ive always appreciated Kawhi being a quiet player and just going about his business.

But this has spurs fans tearing their hair out. The guy needs to come out and tell us what the fuck is going on. Being an enigma is one thing, he just needs to speak up for once
---

BADoglick posted...

The fact that tanking is a legitimate strategy speaks to the shallowness of basketball in general

Tanking works in baseball too

Wut? Baseball probably has the least tanking of any of the major sports. Most of the time there isn't even one "sure thing" prospect in the draft. They also have like 20 draft rounds or something insane, and guys spend ages in the farm system

Plus one player in baseball changes like nothing. One player in basketball can get you to the finals seven times in a row (in the east)
---

MICHALECOLE posted...

One player in basketball can get you to the finals seven times in a row (in the east)

lol'd
---

SteamedHams posted...

Wut? Baseball probably has the least tanking of any of the major sports. Most of the time there isn't even one "sure thing" prospect in the draft. They also have like 20 draft rounds or something insane, and guys spend ages in the farm system

tanking does indeed happen all the time in mlb.

it doesn't help as much as it does in the nba, sure, but it does/is happening in the mlb

green dragon posted...

SteamedHams posted...

Wut? Baseball probably has the least tanking of any of the major sports. Most of the time there isn't even one "sure thing" prospect in the draft. They also have like 20 draft rounds or something insane, and guys spend ages in the farm system

tanking does indeed happen all the time in mlb.

it doesn't help as much as it does in the nba, sure, but it does/is happening in the mlb

Well it does/is happening in the nfl too. It just matters most in the nba because one player can literally change your franchise for decades.

And that doesnt make basketball shallow its just the nature of the sport. One guy can change everything.
---

What is your definition of "tanking" in MLB? You could maybe look at the Astros from a few years back, but that isn't something that happens every year like the tanking in the NBA.

The closest thing to tanking teams do in MLB is trading star players for a lot of prospects. If you were talking about that, I suppose it makes sense, but I assumed you meant tanking for the draft. I just don't know if I'd really count that as true tanking, especially since most of those big trades happen midseason, sometimes after a team intended to contend but ended up being out of it. Or you have teams sit veterans to bring up prospects, but that happens the most in September with expanded rosters - again, when they already know they're out of it.

On the subject of tanking though there's tanking which is what teams decide to do midway through the season when playoff positions are finalised to make the most of a bad situation, then there's doing what philadelphia did which was abhorrent.

There's the argument that the draft should be more like the free agent market, or the job market in the "real world". i.e. you wouldn't make a computer engineering grad from MIT join some shitty startup that has a history of poor products and terrible management. So why would you ask the top rookies to join perennially terrible and poorly run franchises like Sacramento and Phoenix? Nah that grad wants to join Google or Microsoft, and so should rookies.

The idea is rookies should be "drafted" as free agents, and have the choice of where to go. There's the argument it'll end up in the league being top heavy but I think it's more likely it'll force teams to develop better management and culture. Ultimately incentivising teams to stop "losing to win".

Also I think the "top heavy" argument is moot because it'd end up balancing out. For example if an Anthony Davis/KAT type rookie comes around they won't really find a place on a roster like Golden State's, especially for the money they'd be demanding. So they're likely to go where they'd get the most minutes and make the most impact for the most money they can get. I'd imagine they'd end up on middle of the road teams or teams trying to get over a particular hump like Washington or Toronto which seem to be one star player away from being contenders.

Anybody got Adam Silver's no.? I think I'm onto something here
---