But the issues came from before that.

Yeah, even if they had committed to tanking as soon as Porzingis was hurt, they would have gotten to, what, the #7 seed? Maybe? The problem was all of their moves and lack of moves before the season began. Besides playing Jack too much, there wasn’t even that much to blame Horny for, since it was more a matter of the roster that he was given. I agree with the general idea of “You can’t just bench Courtney Lee all season.” The key, then, is to not have Courtney Lee on your team period.

And, you know, not giving THJ the contract that they gave him, as well.

But the issues came from before that. The Knicks ultimately came into the season with a roster that was never going to outtank Phoenix or Memphis or even Dallas and Atlanta, and that’s because they either refused to deal O’Quinn and Lee or had no offers (which I highly doubt), signed Hardaway Jr for no reason at all and instead of filling the last roster spots with young players right away decided to go with Beasley and Jack.

If we had gone the Bulls route, we would have traded at least one of O’Quinn and Lee and went for Dotson, Kornet and Hicks instead of the veterans for the last roster spots, and then tanking for a top pick was a real possibility. But from what happened with the Knicks and how he managed the situation in Sacramento, it just doesn’t seem to be the way Perry works.

But, don’t you dislike losing, especially to that degree? Aren’t you tired of losing?

I don’t like them losing, but there is no way for them to avoid losing. The Process doesn’t kick in if you have an actual good team. It’s only when your team is already not going to be very good. There is no realistic way that the Knicks are not going to lose next season. So if they’re going to be bad, why be bad in a way that just makes sure that they will perpetually be bad when you can be bad in such a way that helps you be good?

Think back over the last three years. The Knicks have been awful. Imagine if they had been awful, but had picked up high draft picks in all of those years that they could? Imagine that they drafted Lonzo Ball last year and were about to draft, say, Luka Doncic this year. That would be a lot better, and it would have “only” required them to get rid of the players…that led to them losing anyways!! They were already losing and yet they have only gotten Frank and the #9 pick out of it (well, knock on wood that they somehow win the lottery. Hey, it could happen!).

Note that no one was saying that they should tank in 2011-12 or 2012-13. Because it didn’t make sense then. They were on a different Win Curve.

One caveat… should they win >20 games rolling out 2018 picks, Trey, Dotson, Frank, Kornet. Mudiay, Hicks, Baker THJr and Williams big minutes

Oh, absolutely true. If you put together a super-young team and you catch lightning in a bottle, then that’s great, too. It’s all about putting together a good team. If the young guys somehow turn good all at once, then that’s totally fine, too.

The killer thing is exactly as you noted, winning games due to guys who won’t be here when the young guys mature. It’s just a total waste. That is precisely what the Kings have done for years and it’s what the Knicks have also done and it is so, so stupid.

But, don’t you dislike losing, especially to that degree? Aren’t you tired of losing?

Of course we’re tired of losing but this season the fates have intervened (mercifully) with KP’s injury. Should they win more than 20 games next season or KP plays before March 15th I’ll consider it a crime against humanity!

One caveat… should they win >20 games rolling out 2018 picks, Trey, Dotson, Frank, Kornet. Mudiay, Hicks, Baker THJr and Williams big minutes …. so be it but if they garner as single win by Kanter, Lee, or beasley, that should be a fireable offense.

Common sense needs to rule sometimes.

Yeah, and the one FA who started the season with them is Redick, a proven veteran who people said was the exact type of player who wouldn’t ever choose to join a “losing culture” team, and they got him by having so much cap space they could heavily overpay him for one year just for the sake of it. That’s also a direct result of not wasting cap space on veterans who won’t move the needle and focusing on rookie contracts and efficient bargains which was a huge part of the process.

Aren’t you tired of losing?

Yes, which is why I wish we had had the good fucking sense to lose more once it was clear the season was over. I mean, we lost a lot, but a couple more games and our odds for a higher draft pick would have gone up substantially. And the odds of picking up a franchise-changing player go up substantially with a higher pick, meaning that it would be more likely we’d STOP losing after doing more of it in the short term.

Not sure why that’s difficult to understand.

Everybody does and I’m sure Sixers fans were as tired of the losing as anyone would be.

While we, Knicks fans, have endured like 15 losing seasons in 18 years while trying to win… Sacramento hasn’t been to the playoffs in 12 years.

I hate losing, but I would 100% every time trade losing badly 4 years in a row for a 52 win team with at least two elite talents under 23 (too early to tell with Fultz) + cap space than lose slightly less badly for 15 out of 18 years and be on the route to lose slightly bad again for next year.

You anti-tank guys always try to make it seem like we enjoy the intentional losing or some shit. Nobody does, it’s ridiculous and it’s a disgrace. But as the NBA is currently constructed it’s far better of a strategy than winning 7 more meaningless games while you draft 9-12 every year.