Printable View
Fair point. And no, he's not currently one of them, but he's probably got the potential to be one of them, so I think my point still stands.Quote:
Soft Euro wrote:
As I said, I agree that its too much, but that's happened so many times with Toronto that it doesn't surprise me.
And with the additions of Lowry and Valanciunas, his scoring is most certainly going to decreaseQuote:
Raptor_11 wrote:
Quote:
Tesla wrote:
And Duane Casey keeps emphasizing how Demar needs to/will become an efficient player. I hope he's right
Assuming he gets better in 2 or 3 years and not now makes this an even worse contract, that means we could've paid him less at the end of the year when he's a restricted free agent (pending a QO)Quote:
IROR wrote:
A) He's been given all the freedom to get better. It was under Triano, but he was giving a ton of PT with little growth. If you're looking at the Nuggets, they've already traded Nene and Afflalo so I don't see where you're going with that.
B) This is a moot point, unlike the Denver situation where George Karl was affirming that it was a distraction, both DD and Colangelo have said in print that the extension was something they'd figure out at the end of the year. Why the rush?
C) This is conjecture, what team is in the market for a high-usage one-dimensional SG? There's no reason we can't offer him this same deal at the end of the year either.
Paying for potential is great, but DD hasn't shown any significant signs of improvement. I really hope he does, but paying him now and hoping he turns into something special is a bad move, when we could've just waited till the end of the season to see how it turns out. I'd much rather pay more for a sure thing, than to gamble on the promise of potential that may or may not be there.
Yahoo's Kelly Dwyer's take on the contract. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-ba...4485--nba.html
Is there any chance this makes it easier to trade Derozan?
lol - I'm not sure. I'm still in shock.... in both GoT and DD.Quote:
ebrian wrote:
Great line from Dwyer:Quote:
koncept wrote:
Quote:
This is why we have lockouts. Teams bidding against absolutely nobody to pay a player what he isn't worth. DeRozan had no leverage here, and Toronto didn't seem to care. Keep these sorts of deals in mind the next time NBA owners kvetch about salary structures gone wrong.
Nailed it.Quote:
koncept wrote:
I agree with most of what he says but it sort of falls apart when he said it is the same bad idea as the Bargnani contract. That one seemed bad at first but now is quite palatable. I think a poll on this site would argue that but still tilt towards the positive side. Hopefully we will say the same about DeMar one day. Not many people seem to think we willQuote:
koncept wrote:
Quote:
koncept wrote:
I would have been unhappy if we would have paid 7 mil a year. That would have really made me question Colangelo.Quote:
The move is so laughable and distressing that you almost wonder if Colangelo is salting the sod for the next GM to take over.
A) I'll take that bet. After 200+ games playing major minutes and being given a starring role, you pretty much know what you have. All you have to do is look at JV in his first game and Derozan in his 200th to know the story about talent.Quote:
IROR wrote:
B) What? Guys play hard in contract years cause they want to get paid. Tonnes of guys play out deals for the sole purpose of upping their FA value. There's no distraction. This is nonsense.
C) Who cares? Hanging on to Derozan is not critical to this team's development. He's a below average SG. If someone wants to pay him $10 million, good for them. The fact that a bunch of teams in the NBA sign terrible contracts doesn't mean Toronto has to do the same thing.
I've never been a Bargnani basher, but he has never ever lived up to his paycheque untill a few games last year. So he's not been worth his contract so far. And worst of it all with the DeRozan signing is that DeRozan has even shown less than Bargnani did when he got his contract and DeRozan doesn't have any unique skills which make you dream of being an amazing mismatch on offense; DeRozan only comes with unique weaknesses.Quote:
Jclaw wrote:
Some quotes from Bryan Colangelo:
Plain and simple.Quote:
BC wrote:
Interesting. There goes some wind out of peoples sails.Quote:
BC wrote:
Quote:
BC wrote:
SourceQuote:
BC wrote:
While I'm obviously in the very small Minority, I agree with Colangelo.
And hearing him say the deal does not affect Flexibility and is Cap-neutral, is a bonus; as I'd imagine he has a far better grasp of the CBA and the Cap than say .. posters here at RR ...
The final straw. I want BC gone now, no matter what. This extension is nothing short of moronic. And BC's defense of it is totally laughable.With makes this far, far more inexcusable.Quote:
BC wrote:
Shiiit, we should have just signed Nick Young or OJ Mayo. I'm cheesed; all my optimism is gone. I mean, just LOOK at our cap situation!
This of course is true; it's true of every move every nba gm or coach makes. That doesn't mean they don't make bad moves that even ignorant fans like me can understand. As Tartakower, a chessplayer from ages long ago once said "It is not enough to be a good player; you must also play well." This goes for Colangelo as well; it's not enough to be more knowledgeable, he also has to make better judgements.Quote:
joey_hesketh wrote:
Was just going to ask if Bryan had been on any of the talk shows yet to put his spin on it. Interesting point. I don't know that he will put it into words but it would be interesting to hear him say the player he envisions that he gave that contract to. Does he expect him to develop a three point shot? Is he content with his level of defense? He will definitely take some grilling. But no doubt, this is a go big or go home move.Quote:
joey_hesketh wrote:
BC wrote:
As far as some of the talk or discussion that we’ve lost some of our flexibility: we really haven’t, in our opinion. This is somewhat of a cap-neutral deal because going forward, had we issued a qualifying offer or dealt with that next summer in terms of going into restricted free agency, you basically have a situation where there is a cap hold. The cap hold is a little bit higher than the actual qualifying offer. In effect, the cap hold was a number that was at or near the number we ultimately settled on.
Interesting. Given that this is mostly math, I wonder where the role of opinion comes in. Would be interesting to hear if there is another opinion offering the opposite (specifically to this as opposed the the 11 pages so far).
20 ppg, 4rpg, 3apg, atleast 45% from the field, atlest 28% from 3(is that too much to ask), and atleast 5 fta. I've always supported DeMar but this contract is a little big. Hopefully he can prove us all wrong and become better than Joe Johnson atleast. and yes, i used the word atleast too many times.Quote:
Chr1s1anL wrote:
Let me start this by saying that this deal is a huge gamble and thus sketchy. So with that in mind, here are some points as the so called devil's advocate. I keep seeing we are screwed because we have a shooting guard that can't hit the three. Well, we have a 4 that hits the three...do most other teams? Some do. His defense is weak. By all accounts, the defense is strong at 1,3 and 5 (yes, after less than 30 minutes of official NBA play, I am putting out that JV is a strong defender...roll with it). Does that suffice? Maybe it is more about building a team rather than expecting each player to do what history suggests they should. What role does he play? Maybe the slasher/rim guy..one day. Who we probably could have gotten for cheaper. But don't let me give the rebuttal. Have away at it. The devil is often wrong.