Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

JJ Jansen on tanking


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

I probably would have become a casual Hornets fan if Cooper ended up there, but the NBA just solidified my apathy for its product. Hornets also got shafted when Lakers got cold feet on the Mark Williams trade. NBA is corrupt and that alien-headed Silver is the kingpin.

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bucs absolutely tanked the last game of the season in order to draft Winston. It happens.

 

In regards to the lottery, there has always been way too much smoke for there to be nothing burning there. Always has been way too much coincidence, and little visibility. Even if it was all on the up and up, the league has to know there is this negative perception, and they do nothing to change or remedy it.

Edited by UnluckyforSome
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never bought into the idea.

There's just too much at stake, even for front office people. Jobs are lost, trust is lessened, lives are altered, reputations are damaged and more. Throw in that the average front office person isn't as young as the average player. They may not have ten years ahead of them to salvage their careers. Any given year could be their last.

The only person not guaranteed to suffer some direct form of consequence from losing is the owner, and even there you still have problems (fan reaction, team reputation, revenue, etc). You've also got massive egos in play on that front so it can get personal.

Mind you, I do accept that there are "fire sales" in order to build for the future, but even those have consequences. They don't exactly guarantee success either. Poorly run teams often just wind up in the same circumstance a few years down the road.

Sorry gus, but my tinfoil hat just hasn't fit me for quite a while.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Icege said:

Sure, there's definitely a chance that a fire sale in 2022 could've paid off but I don't think that's a certainty. It's not just about stockpiling the picks and bettering odds; it's about hitting on those picks, having a stable coaching staff to develop them, and keeping the locker room engaged. We didn't exactly have a model front office nor stable coaching staff in 2022.

It's worth noting that part of the reason that DJ had to be included in the trade up for #1 was because the Bears needed an immediate, proven WR1 to help Fields. It was him or another immediate first-round pick, not a future one like what was being offered for Burns (whom teams knew that things were shaky with and that they could afford to wait).

As for the Eagles, they recovered because the foundation was already in place. Pederson got flak and was ultimately fired (and was just fired again this offseason from the Jags). Their recovery was quick because the foundation was already in place: Howie Roseman and a solid roster (that included a stacked OL, a second year QB, and a veteran defense). Philly had a margin of error that just wasn't available to Carolina.

I'm not against using the draft to rebuild, but a full-on teardown comes with real consequences: fan disengagement, a fractured locker room, poor development, a losing environment... and I don't believe that we had the necessary leadership at the time to cleanly navigate it. That's a gamble that I want no part of. 

Now that we do have a staff that seems to be in complete alignment and building for the future rather than fighting for their jobs, I'm more inclined to observe their process and see where it leads rather than backseat driving with "perfect" hindsight. 

Dude, I’m sorry but I don’t get your worries about this magical culture and fan involvement. We’ve sucked balls since 2018 because we actually did what you want to do. Limp along and try to win as many games as possible without actually being good. All that does is cause the same problems you didn’t want to gamble on happening. Well, they did what you wanted and what did we get for it? 7 drafts and Young, Horn and Brown, not exactly a SB winning core. We haven’t won more than 7 games since 2017 and you are worried about risking our culture, etc.? That’s silly. Cam and Luke have been gone for 5+ years now. We finally had a draft in 2025 where we actually had our full allotment of picks. We absolutely screwed up by not going full rebuild. Texans did in the same window and they’ve been to the playoffs multiple times and have a much better team. Any fan issues now in Houston even with the Watson massage debacle?

I will separate this statement because I get annoyed at back seat driving type comments. Many of us like minded draft followers and GM and wannabes said that we should have tanked in 2022 and traded every guy where teams offered quality picks. You might not like it, but we were 100% correct. Sure, Fitterer might have pissed them away but the Rams 2024/2025 1sts would have been Morgan’s picks.

You also have to rebuild through the draft, period, which is why bad teams try build up picks, not trade them all away or don’t take hauls when available. There’s not one team that rebuilt through FA and was successful. It doesn’t exist because the key guys (Eagles OL/DL, Hurts, Mahomes, Kelce, Chris Jones) on Super Bowl teams (Kuechly, TD, Cam) are drafted.

I grew up in CT and I went to Pats games when people handed you stacks of free tickets in the parking lot because no one wanted to go to their games. One QB and a bunch of solid OL/D picks and they were a different franchise. We can only hope that Canales is the right coach and that 2025 is the start of drafting well. If I’m being objective, we’ve still got a ways to go.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, WhoKnows said:

I don’t know why the tanking concept is not understood. Coaches and players are not involved at all. It’s always the front office. If we had actually traded players like we should have back in 2022, we would have effectively tanked and gotten a better pick than 9 so we lost all the draft picks to get Young. We traded CMC. We should have traded Burns for the haul and taken GB’s offer of a 1st for Moore. We could have easily traded anyone else.

We see it in every sport, every year. Trade deadlines where bad teams give up current assets for future assets. Unfortunately, we were stupid and decided we only wanted to trade CMC for peanuts even though we clearly had a plan to go after Young. We were dumb and there is no way you can tell me that we shouldn’t have tanked via trading away Burns, Moore and anyone else. We’d be a much better team right now had we had a fire sale and tanked the 2022 season.

Trading away your top players for future draft picks or prospects (baseball) is tanking. Shoeless Joe and the black Sox is not tanking. That’s point shaving/betting on your sport/team. Again, I just don’t get why this concept is so hard to get when MLB, NFL and NBA teams trade players for future assets every single year and usually end up with better draft slots (or at least odds since Hornets never win the lottery).

Acually, Shoeless Joe and Black Sox did tank, just for someone's betting purposes. 

Playing to lose, whatever the reason for it, is unethical. 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

Acually, Shoeless Joe and Black Sox did tank, just for someone's betting purposes. 

Playing to lose, whatever the reason for it, is unethical. 

I get your definition, but to me the definition of tanking is to achieve the worst possible outcome in the regular season to get the best outcome in the offseason (draft).  What the Black Sox did was throw the World Series for money.

I would classify tanking and throwing as two different forms of intentional losing.  But its all losing on purpose.

Edited by PNW_PantherMan
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

Acually, Shoeless Joe and Black Sox did tank, just for someone's betting purposes. 

Playing to lose, whatever the reason for it, is unethical. 

Again, the front office isn’t playing. Doug Pederson aside, tanking has nothing to do with players and coaches. The black Sox weren’t tanking, they were point shaving if you will. They got money to lose. Tanking is all about the FO getting better future assets in reward for making their team weaker. Tanking for a draft pick slot or tanking to get a young prospect or tanking to get future picks.

Again, no playing to lose but there absolutely aren’t hundreds of examples of trading away talent for future picks and prospects which invariably makes your current team worse thus bettering your draft pick slot (potentially, no guarantees). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hornets have had the worst luck of any professional sports franchise this century. Constantly drafting a slot below the generational talent, all because of the lottery done behind closed doors. It's been brutal and frankly unfair to be a diehard fan of this franchise, and I don't blame anyone for cutting out the stress.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably impossible to institute a hard cap without a strike/lockout labor situation.  I'm pretty sure the players would all be against it because it would further limit salaries and player mobility.

Just because it's unfair doesn't mean it can't be good.  I think ideally every league would have parity like the NFL, but I think the NBA could be vastly improved without messing with the soft cap/luxury tax system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Dave Gettleman's Shorts said:

Mavs had a 1.8% odds of winning the number 1 overall pick btw

In 2008, the Bulls had a 1.7% chance of winning the top pick which ended up being Chicago native, D-rose

2 teams with sub 2% odds winning it within a span of less than 20 years. Quite unbelievable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, amcoolio said:

Hornets have had the worst luck of any professional sports franchise this century. Constantly drafting a slot below the generational talent, all because of the lottery done behind closed doors. It's been brutal and frankly unfair to be a diehard fan of this franchise, and I don't blame anyone for cutting out the stress.

To be fair, historically we have overperformed our lottery slot(in terms of probability) and had a pretty significant hand in making very poor draft picks for a long time.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...