Minnesota Sports Forum

Do you wish the Wolves had gone into full tank mode even if it had upped their chances a little bit of getting a top three pick. Or do you still believe those 5 wins late in the season will be a spring board for some kind of success next season.

The Wolves could have gone full tank and still gotten screwed by the ping pong balls. It's not like this franchise has had any good fortune to rely on. It is what it is at this point. Minnesota will have to find some way to move on without future Hall-of-Famer Onathan Kuminga (no J) on the roster.

No

No. We needed to see if we can win with a core of towns/edwards/dlo and Finch as coach. I doubt Finch takes the job without any assurance that we wont be tanking and he will get a fair shot to coash his best.

Im glad that the dlo/wig deal is behind us with golden state getting the 7th pick.

I always find that the pro-tankers (which doesn't appear to be many judging by this thread so far) are completely blind to the intrinsic value of simply winning a game. The fans that attended feel good. The players feel good. The fans watching at home feel good. Why is that of no value? Sure, it's fleeting. Sure, the team may not make the playoffs. But there is value to simply winning a competitive basketball game.

"Time isn't precious at all, because it is an illusion. What you perceive as precious is not time but the one point that is out of time: the Now. That is precious indeed. The more you are focused on time -- past and future -- the more you miss the Now, the most precious thing there is." - Eckhart Tolle

I've typically been one of those pro-tankers that Q was referring to. But in this instance I thought the decision not to tank was the right one and I still firmly believe that.

There has to be a balance. You have to understand that draft picks are key to building a team unless you're one of a few select teams like the Lakers. And sometimes that means strategically tanking. But you also have to appreciate the value of winning or at least trying to win. Winning helps create confidence and it typically inspires greater effort -- ultimately creating a winning culture. Trying to win is also important to assessing the potential of the players you have. All of this means not tanking in some situations.

It really depends, in my view, on where you're at in the rebuilding process and how much talent you already have on your team. A couple years ago, when the only all-star talent we had was KAT, tanking made sense. But this past season, with KAT, DLO, Beasley, Edwards and McDaniels on board, it did not. We were far enough down the rebuilding path and had enough talent that it was time to focus on winning and assessing the talent we have by challenging them to compete and win. The result was an 11-11 finish the final 22 games. That to me was a positive that this team can build on.

lipoli390 wrote:I've typically been one of those pro-tankers that Q was referring to. But in this instance I throught the decision not to tank was the right one and I still firmly believe that.

There has to be a balance. You have to understand that draft picks are key to building a team unless you're one of a few select teams like the Lakers. And sometimes that means strategically tanking. But you also have to appreciate the value of winning or at least trying to win. Winning helps create confidence and it typically inspires greater effort -- ultimately creating a winning culture. Trying to win is important to assessing the potential of the players you have. That means not tanking in some situations.

It really depends, in my view, on where you're at in the rebuilding process and how much talent you already have on your team. A couple years ago, when the only all-star talent we had was KAT, tanking made sense. But this past season, with KAT, DLO, Beasley, Edwards and McDaniels on board, it did not. We were far enough down the rebuilding path and had enough talent that it was time to focus on winning and assessing the talent we have by challenging them to compete and win. The result was an 11-11 finish the final 22 games. That to me was a positive that this team can build on.

So to tank they would have what sat Towns and Rubio maybe Russell? It's possible that by playing Rubio he may have increased his value a little bit. It seemed like he played better down the stretch last year. There is probably value in having Towns and Russell plays games because they have dealt with some injuries. Meanwhile Anthony Edwards had already played on a team in college that was not very good around him. I would guess it benefited him to play with some actual good players instead of just balling with a bunch of young guys and maybe stalling in his development by maybe doing some stuff that he wasn't ready for or having to deal with packed lanes and teams able to really key in on him if they wanted to.

OK, I'm going to hang myself out to dry here, but I sense Pork's question implies he didn't see much value in the late season wins...I'm mostly with him on this one. To be perfectly honest, I was hoping to see the team play well and be entertaining, but not win. I admit I got a kick out of the Utah wins, and I was at the home game win and loudly cheering for that win...but deep down inside, I wanted the best chance of getting one of those top three picks. I hear Cam's point that the ping pong balls could have easily gone against us even if we had the most, but I still would have preferred having the best odds on lottery night. I think adding Cunningham, Suggs or Mobley in the draft could have significantly changed Rosas's approach the past couple weeks. Instead, we had no draft pick and a blah free agency with only the blockbuster Rubio/Prince deal.

I just don't buy into the whole "culture" thing, and don't think a couple meaningless wins at the end of the season will carry over to next season. But having a better chance of a top 3 pick could have significantly changed the fortunes of this woebegone franchise.

But let's revisit Pork's question a year from now. I am on record that, absent a true blockbuster deal in the next month, the Wolves will be in the lottery next season and maybe even deep in the lottery. Having a lot of ping pong balls in next year's stacked draft may change my mind about Pork's question, and not having a pick in this year's draft plus making a trade that in my opinion won't lead to more wins, may be just the ticket we need to ensure a great draft pick next year. But if we go 33-49 next season and have several tanking teams with more ping pong balls than us, I'll be terribly unhappy about those meaningless wins this spring.

Pork, is that where you are too, or did you need those wins?

FNG - You make some good points.

Typically I'd be with you on this because I'm not totally sold on the "culture" thing. But I think it was important to see how this team would perform with our core players healthy under our new head coach. Even if you see no value in winning games at the end of last season, trying to win was important to fully assess the team's potential with our core players healthy and a new head coach in place. Once you've decided that you'll try to win, it's impossible to still tank on the final result. So trying to win means winning if that's where the chips fall. And while I'm not sold on the culture thing, the team's late season willing can instill confidence and excitement in our core players, which can then carry over into off-season preparation and early season play. So much of success in the NBA is simply confidence.

I was close to the fence on this at the end of the season. What pushed me to the non-tank side was the uncertainty of our draft prospects because of the DLO deal. Even if we had tanked our way to the 2nd or 3rd worst record, which was potentially doable, there's no telling whether we could have kept our pick after the lottery. Moreover, we had no 2nd-round pick that could benefit from tanking.

Putting it all together, I think the Wolves organization did the right thing trying to win. If you're right about how poorly this team will perform next season, then we'll be well positioned, with a lottery pick, our own high 2nd-round pick and two more 2nd round picks, in what's expected to be a deep draft. If I'm right that we'll likely end up in the running for a 7th or 8th seed, then know this team is on the right trajectory and still have nice draft assets.

I'd rather the Wolves had improved their chances to get a top 3 pick as while it might feel good to get a few more wins, the benefits are fleeting. The Wolves have a big two of KAT and Ant and need a real third cornerstone to contend. I don't see the Wolves as likely to be able to trade for a third one or attract one in free agency. The draft is where the Wolves got KAT and Ant and they need to build through the draft.