|
Post by nova on Aug 13, 2007 21:58:51 GMT -5
LoL DJ Please stop. Yes I traded away all my players for an exuberant amount of draft picks. I then tried my hardest with the team I had to win. This is why I won with Dino Radja, Wang Zhi Zhi, Tyus Edney while you lost with Tmac, AK, Redd, and Arenas. Can you really argue with that? You dig yourself deeper and deeper we all know how much you tanked in order to win. If you really want to compare 1 losing season I had to your 4, go ahead. You gutted your team so you could land a top pick. That is tanking. I never compared myself to anyone(one of many arguments you made up over the years to suit yourself). I said there are no degrees of tanking. You either tanked or you didnt. You did. You can claim "you tried your hardest"... but that is nothing more than a claim, which, of course, you are going to say because it suits your argument. If 3-4 losing seasons are such a terrible thing, how come you arent condemning some of the current GMs in the league for doing it? Ah, because they are who they are... or perhaps to say it better...because they aren't certain people. I wasn't around back then, so I don't know all the facts. However, your saying that any GM who deals off all of his good players for 1sts & cap space is tanking? That may be the most ridiculous thing I've ever read. That is called REBUILDING, not tanking. Tanking is intentionally putting out a DC that you know will help you lose as many games as possible, and trying to lose on purpose. That's tanking, not your ridiculous definiton of it. I honestly am not fond of tanking, I don't have respect for GM's whose only way to build a good team is to tank and get high draft picks, and I for one will never tank just to get a high pick. I had that opportunity last year to not sign Smush & Nene and to tank like a crazy sumbitch and try to get a top 3 or top 5 pick so I could add someone like Hibbert or Thabeet, but I would rather take the pro-active approach and build a team through drafts, free agency, and trading rather then just drafts. To each his own, but I'm with krup on this one.
|
|
|
Post by Outlawz on Aug 13, 2007 22:11:37 GMT -5
There's a big difference between tanking and rebuilding. In my mind at least Tanking - You have talent but yet do things to your dc to purposely lose Rebuilding - You have no talent, you lose, you hopefully get a franchise player and continually strive to get better. I did it the proper way. DJ did it the shady way. 1st year of rebuild i traded away all my picks for future picks, 2nd year of rebuild i land the 3rd pick and get Yao 3rd year i get hinrich 4th year i make the playoffs I built my team through trades and picks. Not by tryin to lose for as many years as possible. You tanked and got Yao. Of course you are going to try and say that isnt what you did to make yourself look better... but that is what happened. There are no degrees of tanking. LOL You seriously need to grasp the difference between tanking and rebuilding. Maybe you should write it down 100 times on the chalk board until you get it? Im not trying to make myself look better. Its just incredible that you can't admit to simply tanking the wrong way and stop trying to call people out for building teams the right way by saying we did the same thing. It's not the same thing. Spencer made the rules for a reason. Your blatant tanking was ridiculous. Im sure the rest of BBS understands the difference so that'll be my last post on that.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Aug 13, 2007 22:15:00 GMT -5
Move on fuckers, who cares. From what I can see, you all tanked, just in varying levels. FFS. Sydney > Melbourne Aussi Aussi Aussi Oi Oi Oi STFU
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Aug 13, 2007 22:16:11 GMT -5
If acquiring over 15 first round picks for Zo, Sheed, and KVH is tanking call me guilty. Tmac was putting up 23ppg when the league was not full of talent and he was considered to be a top 5 talent. A raw Redd and AK were > Dino Radja and Wang Zhi Zhi. I traded away Minny's pick to Kevin(Miami) for the #7 selection. I was afraid that Mike Miller wouldn't pan out and I wasn't sure on who to take so I got the pick from Kevin to take Manu even though I tried desperately to move up trying to convince Andy to trade down so I could get Odom if Aig took Martin but that never panned out. By you not adding anything in free agency and even trying to bench Redd in favor of Mike Dickerson you wouldn't call that trying to do everything you could not to win? If you kept losing your DC remained the same but yet when you hit a win streak it was time to change up the DC. You can say your team was raw but so was mine, Jamal Crawford and Mike Miller are still raw ha! DJ we can go on forever the whole league knows what you did, don't try and condone what you did and condemn Outlawz and I for doing what we did because we are at two different ends of the spectrum. Dickerson was just as good as Redd when he was drafted. After your complaining, Spencer told me to switch it and I did. I never said I didnt tank but, I did play by the rules. My top players were all starters and options. What a Gm chooses to run in terms of setup and style is their own business and should be at their discretion. This is what bothers me most about anything that you say. You make things up to suit yourself. I never condemned anyone for tanking. Ive ALWAYS said if a GM chooses to tank, that is their business. In this very thread, I stated that Outlawz tanked for Yao and the followed it by saying, " which isnt a bad thing"... how does this condemn the action? There is no spectrum. It's about winning. You purposely weakened your team in order to secure a high draft pick... as did Outlawz. That is tanking. The only difference between us on this issue is that you deny what you did. Cheating involves violating rules and using something to your advantage that others aren't able to use. I had the same advantages/disadvantages as everyone else and always followed the rules laid out by the league(Spencer). So, there is no issue here other than your own, personal ones... which isn't anything new. Moving on... Outlawz and Nova basically said everything I would have said in response to this
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 13, 2007 22:36:28 GMT -5
STFU.
Btw, dealing your mediocre players that will never win you a championship for picks is called rebuilding. Having talent and not winning to acquire a good pick is tanking.
|
|
|
Post by tmaczdaddy on Aug 15, 2007 0:07:25 GMT -5
Whats this contract year thing about? If you're in your contract year, you have to win 60 games or you're gone. Teams get chosen out of random each year to be in their contract year. Ok.
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on Aug 15, 2007 1:25:35 GMT -5
We all tanked one time or another so STFU as James and Andy would say
|
|
|
Post by James on Aug 15, 2007 1:40:05 GMT -5
We all tanked one time or another so STFU as James and Andy would say Thank-you.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 10:58:27 GMT -5
Updated!
1.Sacramento. Over 500, and very hot. Things are looking good for Lums.
2.LA Clippers. Over 500 and has acquired some very good players this year. Baron-LO-JO is a nice trio.
3.Utah. Replaced already. Mark has a larger window to win, but Id like to see some progress ASAP.
4.Miami. Horrible year. 5-24 is unacceptable. Will definately be in his contract year next year.
5.Minnesota. Slight improvement in record, huge improvement in talent. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year though.
6.Philadelphia. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year, or at least show a major talent improvement.
7.Orlando. Looking good.
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on Aug 23, 2007 16:55:53 GMT -5
Updated! 1.Sacramento. Over 500, and very hot. Things are looking good for Lums. 2.LA Clippers. Over 500 and has acquired some very good players this year. Baron-LO-JO is a nice trio. 3.Utah. Replaced already. Mark has a larger window to win, but Id like to see some progress ASAP. 4.Miami. Horrible year. 5-24 is unacceptable. Will definately be in his contract year next year. 5.Minnesota. Slight improvement in record, huge improvement in talent. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year though. 6.Philadelphia. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year, or at least show a major talent improvement. 7.Orlando. Looking good. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on Aug 23, 2007 17:01:00 GMT -5
6.Philadelphia. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year, or at least show a major talent improvement. Define major talent improvement. As is, my team will more then likely win more games then last season and my team is pretty damn young as a whole. I don't really think we need to make any major moves to make the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 18:44:42 GMT -5
6.Philadelphia. Probably needs to make the playoffs next year, or at least show a major talent improvement. Define major talent improvement. As is, my team will more then likely win more games then last season and my team is pretty damn young as a whole. I don't really think we need to make any major moves to make the playoffs. The East is tough, so making the playoffs is tough. I think you need to get a big man somehow, as I view all your current bigs as role player types. Because you seem to have a excess of smalls, Id say nearing 500 and acquiring a talented young big would solidify your future.
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on Aug 23, 2007 18:53:47 GMT -5
Define major talent improvement. As is, my team will more then likely win more games then last season and my team is pretty damn young as a whole. I don't really think we need to make any major moves to make the playoffs. The East is tough, so making the playoffs is tough. I think you need to get a big man somehow, as I view all your current bigs as role player types. Because you seem to have a excess of smalls, Id say nearing 500 and acquiring a talented young big would solidify your future. Yeah, that's what I mean though. As is, I feel I just need a real solid big (well, C but still) and I can at least compete this year and make it next yr. Reading it over though, if I happen to make big time deals during the deadline next year (let's say) but still miss the playoffs, does that mean I get another year? Just trying to see where I stand.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 18:59:26 GMT -5
The East is tough, so making the playoffs is tough. I think you need to get a big man somehow, as I view all your current bigs as role player types. Because you seem to have a excess of smalls, Id say nearing 500 and acquiring a talented young big would solidify your future. Yeah, that's what I mean though. As is, I feel I just need a real solid big (well, C but still) and I can at least compete this year and make it next yr. Reading it over though, if I happen to make big time deals during the deadline next year (let's say) but still miss the playoffs, does that mean I get another year? Just trying to see where I stand. Nothing is cut and dry. I want more teams to be focused on winning each year. Im not gonna just fire good Gms who are active who have bad luck. I just want the best core group of GMs. If you are legitimately trying to compete youll be okay. its Gms that sit on thei teams and dont try to get better Ill target, like Manas. He had talent and seemed content to wait for that talent to develop. If youe proactive and try and get better, even if you dont win 40, or make the playoffs, youll be here. Perennial rebuilding i also a negative. Which is something Ive talked to Kevin and Galo about. You cant succeed one year, and then rebuild again. I want 25 teams going for it every year, thats my goal.
|
|
|
Post by nybombers3 on Aug 23, 2007 19:00:50 GMT -5
Alright, got ya.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 19:02:55 GMT -5
I want Gms to have a certain amount of fear, but I dont want to alienate good GMs. Its a fine line. I think that the competition here is a draw though, and people seem to want to fight and claw to win, as opposed to just giving up. I want the added realism of need to win situations.
Hope everyone understands.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 23, 2007 19:03:07 GMT -5
I tanked once to get Gary Payton, had the worst record, and got the 6th pick. That sucked. But not as bad as that time I tanked ten seasons for 2024 and then we re-started. That sucked too.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 19:04:22 GMT -5
I tanked once to get Gary Payton, had the worst record, and got the 6th pick. That sucked. But not as bad as that time I tanked ten seasons for 2024 and then we re-started. That sucked too. I dont miss the old BBS. It was fun, but there were so many fundamental flaws in it. This version of the league is 100 times better.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 23, 2007 19:04:54 GMT -5
And, tanking is overrated, its rare when you actually get what you tank for. its usually better to try and go for it.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 23, 2007 19:09:22 GMT -5
I tanked once to get Gary Payton, had the worst record, and got the 6th pick. That sucked. But not as bad as that time I tanked ten seasons for 2024 and then we re-started. That sucked too. I dont miss the old BBS. It was fun, but there were so many fundamental flaws in it. This version of the league is 100 times better. I wanted to re-start BBS for probably two years. It blew that it happened after I got all of those picks, but oh well, I guess I wanted it to happen.
|
|
|
Post by KruPaxson on Aug 23, 2007 19:24:45 GMT -5
I was just back on the rise in the old bbs rebuilt my team through free agency and trades imagine that!
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Aug 23, 2007 22:34:44 GMT -5
Me, DJ, and Reilly were about to run that.
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Aug 23, 2007 22:46:21 GMT -5
I had Larry Johnson, Mutombo, Terrell Brandon + I forgot who else already on my team I def would have had atleast 1 finals appearance.
|
|
|
Post by cjmjones008 on Aug 23, 2007 22:53:28 GMT -5
i had tim hardaway derrick coleman and at least one other young stud + chris bosh
i thought i was going to be a top team but no one was going to touch reilly in 10 years
|
|
|
Post by aaronjh on Aug 23, 2007 22:58:05 GMT -5
I had Fat Lever, Dennis Scott and Blue Edwards!
|
|