yep thats a much simplier explanation.
Printable View
I have spent over $25,000 over the years attending Leafs games and I would have spent a lot more if I had lived in Toronto. I am happy with the level of entertainment value I received in exchange for my dollars.
I spent just a few hundreds of dollars attending Raptors games the past two years. Again, I am satisfied with the level of entertainment I received in exchange for my dollars.
Sports is entertainment. I am willing to pay for a good game just as much like I am willing to pay to go to a lesser opera house or a non-major theater production.
What exactly is the sacrifice you are willing to make? Are you sure you are not simply asking a corporation to make a (financial) sacrifice so it can have a teeny weeny litlle extra chance, if the gods are willing, to win the championship in a few years?
Although I would like to think the Raptors will go for it if they are ever in position to win it all, I don't want them to adopt a let's suck strategy to get their savior.
What if BC pulled a Pat Riley/Donnie Walsh tactic and convinced 2, not just one superstar to sign with the Raptors?? Do you guys think he'll be successful? I think it would be easier to convince 2 superstars to come here at the same time, rather than just one, and if you have the cap space to sign both at the max, then that would make things easier.
I agree that the Raps franchise earns less than it should for MLSE at large. This is an extremely rich media market starved for successful teams. The Raps could be earning a lot more local money if the ball club was any good. But, I don't think the team does any worse than break-even with all of the many, many bad teams it has fielded over the years. So it can continue.
Congratulations, you have significantly more money than most of us. If you're willing to shell out money to watch bad teams then more power to you.
Keep in mind you're posting in a forum that's frequented mostly by die-hard fans to whom 'entertainment' is the team competing at a high level, not just putting on a show. We're sick to death of teams that can score but can't defend and don't win.
The other point that should be made is that when you build a .500 team, all it takes is one injury or happenstance for you to be back at .333 because your margin for error is so small. The additional downside is that you are then stuck with a lot of overpaid veterans and mediocre players you can't do much with. In other words, you suck as bad as a team that's trying to lose but you have the added benefit of no hope and a longer rebuild phase.
What's funny to me is that Raptors fans just lived through this. We got 2 years of playoff ball, 2 first round exits, and were left with a roster with limited salary cap room, few if any tradable assets, no hope for long term success and desperation just to try and make the playoffs. Then, Bosh leaves and it's back to 20 wins. Let me ask people like Hugmonet this: were those 11 playoff games worth 5-6 years out of the playoffs? Cause that's just a part of the price that was paid for that middling, short-term benefit.
I still contend that if Colangelo had been patient in 2006, this organization would have been far better off in the long run. Instead, he sacrificed long term planning at the altar of quick-fix, one-hour gratification. Look where that got them.
True, but i actually think its beyond location.
Amare wouldnt have signed with NYK just because its in new york. I bet you the guy was promised that the knicks will do everything in its power to get another and another legit superstar to play alongside him. and im pretty sure he's had conversations with melo, paul that they are willing to play for the knicks its just a matter of when. plus the cap space didnt hurt either.
wade wouldnt have resigned with miami if he didnt have at least a 30-40% assurance that lbj and bosh were willing to sign with him. he wouldnt stay in miami just because it was miami.
i think the only way you can get superstars to Toronto is by the pair or threes, give them enough control of the decisions but not too much, and sign them to max contracts.
I"m curious why you say that. Personally, I would say there could be as many as 3 or 4 potential franchise players in the 2012 draft and the chance the Raptors, as currently constructed, of getting a top 3 pick are pretty damn good. Far, FAR better than the chance of being able to become a contender without getting one, anyway.
Again, that's great for you. I don't look at it that way and I know a lot of others don't, as well. When I play, I like to win, and that goes the same for teams I follow. I don't watch any other sport. Basketball is my passion. The only other sport I followed at all was baseball in the few years preceding and when they won their World Series. I even got to watch one game live. I stopped watching not long after that, in part, because I never felt they actually wanted to really win. But when they were one of the best teams it was a fantastic experience. I'd love for that to happen for the Raptors.
It's not as if what I'm suggesting is uncommon in sports, especially basketball. My personal sacrifice is to be willing to watch a sub-par product if it increases the chances of winning a Championship. As for corporations, this wouldn't really be that difficult a sell. Advertising always is a gamble, spending money for the chance at making more of it. As long as they see the plan, the idea that they could be spending their money on an actual contender would be VERY appealing. Companies ultimately want to be associated with a winner, and that's something the Raptors have rarely been over the course of their history.
As for a "let's suck strategy", I don't know if you've noticed but they HAVE sucked for a great deal of the time in the last 15 years. The difference here is the "strategy" part. After putting such bad teams on the floor over the years, I'd love to see some plan that I can actually get behind.
I don't mean to be rude, but you're kind of contradicting yourself. You said earlier you don't like the idea of tanking, but that's exactly what both Miami and NY did in order to free up the space and/or acquire the assets necessary to make a run at that free agent class. We're not talking 'just letting the kids play and let the chips fall where they may', we're talking flat out tanking and dumping contracts, sacrificing entire seasons.
If Wade had have signed with Chicago for example, I very seriously doubt LeBron or Bosh would have signed in Miami. It's not that Miami doesn't have advantages so much as that without Wade there, they would have had a pathetic roster, worse even than the ones LeBron and Bosh would have been leaving. Maybe they end up landing a Boozer or some other 2nd tier FA, but probably not anyone in the first tier.
That's where you and most of the rest of us differ. You're pretty new to following the Raptors. I've been following them since their inception. I can't tell you how thrilled I was when I heard Toronto was getting an NBA team (and then moved to Vancouver, only to discover they were getting one, too, only for it to be...well, you get the idea). As a teenager, I fantasized about playing in the NBA (I had neither the skill nor athletic ability to come even close) and that was LONG before the NBA came to Canada. My dream job would probably be to become the GM of an NBA team. I'm not a casual fan. And it sounds like you pretty much are.
Yes, I agree with that. Wade was probably the main attraction because they wanted to team up together more than anything. But if Wade had left, then they would have a very good chance at getting a guy like Dwight Howard, Deron Williams or Chris Paul later. I'd say they are pretty even with New York in terms of attractiveness, mostly because Miami is also a warm weather city.
Fair enough.
Let's assume there are 3 potential franchise players in the draft. The odds of a 7th worst team to win one of the first 3 picks are less than 15% percent. There is a non-trivial risk the player selected will never realize his perceived franchise-player potential due to many factors, including incorrect evaluation and injuries. So let's pcik an arbitratry reducing-factor and say the odds of a 7th worst team picking a future (as opposed to potential) franchise player in a 3 potential franchise player draft is 10%.
I don't think the team is nearly as bad as many seem to think and at this time, without knowing the effects of trades and free-agency, I expect the Raptors will win 34 to 37% of their games. A 34% win percentage would typically mean a 7th worst team.
I hope whomever they pick turns out to be a great player but I would never create a strategy revolving around a 10% probability.
Now your turn. Where do you see the Raptors finishing at this time? You do say the chances of getting a top 3 pick are pretty damn good so I assume you must have an idea what percentage of their games the Raptors, as presently constructed, would win.
I think they'd have to pick up a player or two to become the 7th worst team. I'm going to concur with the recent RealGM power ranking and say they'll be third worst. I like the potential of the team, but they are simply too young and without enough high level talent to beat even a lot of the lottery teams, in my opinion.