Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Can someone explain something to me?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    I'm shocked you ask...it was the only verified rumour out there, at least that I remember.

    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/blog/ey...ever-they-want
    I don't recall either organization ever confirming the rumor, just the Chicago Tribune reporter.

    I really think that the Raps didn't like the fact that the deal would put them in an even deeper financial hole. Plus, they'd become a luxury tax team in a season when playoffs were still a long-shot. I don't think they have an issue paying tax, but doing so with the repeater tax about to kick-in, to not be a playoff team... I think that was too big a risk, especially when the deal would likely still be available in the offseason (assuming it was there in the first place).

    The deal could still be done in the offseason, but Toronto would need to add $1,410,000 to the deal in addition to Bargnani's salary, in order for it to work under the CBA trade rules (ie: Lucas or Gray, if options are picked-up). For Toronto, the additional salary for Boozer next season compared to Bargnani ($15.3M - $10.75M = $4.55M), could essentially be offset by using amnesty on Kleiza ($4.6M). Considering another player would have to be added (ie: Lucas or Gray), the Raps could actually wind up with a net reduction of their total team salary through those 2 moves (but have 2 less players on their roster).

    Comment


    • #17
      heinz57 wrote: View Post
      Easy.

      Because if they got rid of Bargs and Lucas they would have never been able to secure that lucrative advertising contract for Diamond & Diamond Personal Injury Lawyers
      Good one....lol

      Comment


      • #18
        psrs1 wrote: View Post
        Good one....lol
        at the Wizard's game... one of the two Diamonds of Diamond and Diamond addressed the crowd. i'm not sure why, or what he said, i had beer, and was playing leg room wrestling with the douche beside me..

        but ya... that's where we are at as a franchise... an ambulance chaser can afford mic time at raps games

        Comment


        • #19
          akashsingh wrote: View Post
          so is it the right move or the wrong move? you didn't say.
          I have no idea..... You'd need to rethink the offense. Not enough ball to go around if you've got Gay/Derozan/Boozer out there. No one else would get to play offense. Look at how efficient Amir and Val are and, most games, they struggle to get touches, let alone shots. Maybe adding a 3-pt shooter who can play defense at the SG and moving Amir and Demar to second unit to beef up the bench?

          Then there's the cap issue. Don't know enough about that...

          Comment


          • #20
            slaw wrote: View Post
            I have no idea..... You'd need to rethink the offense. Not enough ball to go around if you've got Gay/Derozan/Boozer out there. No one else would get to play offense. Look at how efficient Amir and Val are and, most games, they struggle to get touches, let alone shots.
            Exactly, and I have been arguing this for some time to all those that want to stick Amir back on the bench in favour of a more offensively gifted PF. How many scorers do we need in our starting 5? Add Boozer and we would have 5. Unless, of course, it would be preferred to relegate JV to a non-offensive role, and NOBODY wants that I'm sure. Amir is a great compliment to JV, and both are young and continually improving. This is a fantastic frontline going forward. I, personally, do not want anything to do with Boozer's over-inflated contract, and even less with Nate Robinson. Every starting line needs a grinder or two!
            Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Fri Apr 5, 2013, 02:52 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              apologize for screwing up the quote,

              Comment


              • #22
                CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                I don't recall either organization ever confirming the rumor, just the Chicago Tribune reporter.

                I really think that the Raps didn't like the fact that the deal would put them in an even deeper financial hole. Plus, they'd become a luxury tax team in a season when playoffs were still a long-shot. I don't think they have an issue paying tax, but doing so with the repeater tax about to kick-in, to not be a playoff team... I think that was too big a risk, especially when the deal would likely still be available in the offseason (assuming it was there in the first place).

                The deal could still be done in the offseason, but Toronto would need to add $1,410,000 to the deal in addition to Bargnani's salary, in order for it to work under the CBA trade rules (ie: Lucas or Gray, if options are picked-up). For Toronto, the additional salary for Boozer next season compared to Bargnani ($15.3M - $10.75M = $4.55M), could essentially be offset by using amnesty on Kleiza ($4.6M). Considering another player would have to be added (ie: Lucas or Gray), the Raps could actually wind up with a net reduction of their total team salary through those 2 moves (but have 2 less players on their roster).
                I don't know, it seemed like a very deliberate leak to me. And no team confirmed it openly (that doesn't usually happen until the deal is near completion), but I don't remember any denials coming from Chicago. And it would fit iwth the fact that they were shopping Boozer with the priority of getting under the tax threshold, not of upgrading their roster. I don't remember where I read it at the time, but it was a Bulls-related site, and I remember the guy (probably just a normal beat writer or blogger) was saying how if they're shopping BOozer, it is not to improve the roster, that you cannot expect to get a better player and a better contract.

                So I guess I have no hard evidence, but again, when is there any except for when deals are basically done (Michael Jordan vetoes notwithstanding)? I think the kind of leak it is is about as close as you get, especially since it was weeks after the inital Boozer-Bargs rumours. It's not as explicit as BC saying he offered Jose and Ed for Gay...but I think that was a very poor PR move by a normally sly BC, and actually true to form since it was him basically already catering to Gay's ego and trying to make him happy, like "look, look, I'm trying to get you".
                Last edited by white men can't jump; Fri Apr 5, 2013, 02:28 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  slaw wrote: View Post
                  Colangelo's moves (and non-moves) can be understood through two lenses: maneuver warfare; and the Red Queen Theory.

                  In terms of maneuver warfare, Colangelo loves to stay active and continually make moves. He cleary values flexibility and the ability to adapt and change course. One of my complaints with Colangelo is his resistance to go "all-in". He wants the best of all worlds (winning, developing young players, maintaining some cap freedom). Sadly, instead of getting the best of all worlds, he's mostly got the worst. In fact, most of the activity has been busy work and amounts to the Raps running very fast (lots of roster turnover) to basically stay in exactly the same place (the Red Queen Theory part).

                  There's something to be said for Colangelo's overall approach in terms of wanting to retain fliexibility and the ability to adapt on the fly and I'm not arguing it can't work. Unfortunately, the actual decision-making has largely been poor. Colangelo to me is like the mediocre chess player who has great strategy and understands the theory but, when it comes to actually playing, can't find the right move.
                  Interesting post.

                  I believe, however, that there is also a third lens through which his moves can be understood; it's known as "throwing shit at the wall and hoping some of it sticks."
                  "Stop eating your sushi."
                  "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                  "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                  - Jack Armstrong

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    slaw wrote: View Post
                    Colangelo's moves (and non-moves) can be understood through two lenses: maneuver warfare; and the Red Queen Theory.

                    In terms of maneuver warfare, Colangelo loves to stay active and continually make moves. He cleary values flexibility and the ability to adapt and change course. One of my complaints with Colangelo is his resistance to go "all-in". He wants the best of all worlds (winning, developing young players, maintaining some cap freedom). Sadly, instead of getting the best of all worlds, he's mostly got the worst. In fact, most of the activity has been busy work and amounts to the Raps running very fast (lots of roster turnover) to basically stay in exactly the same place (the Red Queen Theory part).

                    There's something to be said for Colangelo's overall approach in terms of wanting to retain fliexibility and the ability to adapt on the fly and I'm not arguing it can't work. Unfortunately, the actual decision-making has largely been poor. Colangelo to me is like the mediocre chess player who has great strategy and understands the theory but, when it comes to actually playing, can't find the right move.
                    An impressive and accurate observation of BC's managerial style. His resistance to go all in though must be attributed to self created circumstances which is the blunder of retaining Bosh even though he had not signed an extn. I believe that by now he would have gone all in if Bosh was not lost in that fashion or if he(Bosh) was traded for an equally(almost) good player.

                    His moves since then, although not mistake free, have been mostly good but have not been sufficient to make the Raps. a serious contender. His record as Raps. GM is not an accurate indication of his ability. Even though I'm optimistic by nature, I believe Raps. have a realistic chance of being good next year. Their present performance may not be an indication of that but staying the course for at least another year will pay dividends. If given another year, Colangelo can and will get the job done.
                    Attitude Is A Choice.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      I don't know, it seemed like a very deliberate leak to me. And no team confirmed it openly (that doesn't usually happen until the deal is near completion), but I don't remember any denials coming from Chicago. And it would fit iwth the fact that they were shopping Boozer with the priority of getting under the tax threshold, not of upgrading their roster. I don't remember where I read it at the time, but it was a Bulls-related site, and I remember the guy (probably just a normal beat writer or blogger) was saying how if they're shopping BOozer, it is not to improve the roster, that you cannot expect to get a better player and a better contract.

                      So I guess I have no hard evidence, but again, when is there any except for when deals are basically done (Michael Jordan vetoes notwithstanding)? I think the kind of leak it is is about as close as you get, especially since it was weeks after the inital Boozer-Bargs rumours. It's not as explicit as BC saying he offered Jose and Ed for Gay...but I think that was a very poor PR move by a normally sly BC, and actually true to form since it was him basically already catering to Gay's ego and trying to make him happy, like "look, look, I'm trying to get you".
                      I feel like you're stretching the "truth" just to have something else to complain about BC. If there was an offer, it was probably much more favorable to the Bulls than this, just look at the source. Also, BC won that Gay trade, Ed has been playing like crap and we all know Jose + raptors does not = win.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Primer wrote: View Post
                        I feel like you're stretching the "truth" just to have something else to complain about BC. If there was an offer, it was probably much more favorable to the Bulls than this, just look at the source. Also, BC won that Gay trade, Ed has been playing like crap and we all know Jose + raptors does not = win.
                        It's not about winning the trade. PR is about trying to keep all sides as happy as possible, basically. By coming out and saying he'd offered up his players, he risks damaging his relationship with them if the trade doesn't go through. Lucky for him it did, and also lucky that at least Jose has had something like that happen to him and been a class act. Honestly, that could easily piss off some players.

                        *I don't think Chicago confirmed it because they are smarter than that. They were/are a playoff team that couldn't afford to make a player unhappy, and screw up chemistry going into the playoffs. Like most well-run teams, they probably keep everything as publicly quiet as they can. BC I think didn't confirm it because he didn't like and didn't want to back himself into a public corner. Look how pissed fans are at him now, how much worse would it be if he came out publicly and said "it's on the table, but we're looking for a better deal"?

                        Also, I'm not complaining about BC other than saying it was a poor PR move with the Ed/Jose stuff. I don't give a shit about the trade either way and I was someone who strongly supported avoiding Boozer like the plague at the deadline. I was just trying to find the story to show that the trade wasn't something that Raps fans dreamed up to complain about. The first rumours came out a month before that, and that one was like an update, probably just saying where the talks stood last. I firmly believe that BC cut off talks because Chicago wouldn't move from the Boozer + Nate option, which heavily favors Chicago since the primary motives for this deal are financial and coming from their end. I actually think it's one of the smarter things he's done this season.

                        Why do you think the deal would be much more favorable than this? If they could've gotten a better deal for Boozer, I'm sure they would have.
                        Last edited by white men can't jump; Sat Apr 6, 2013, 09:24 AM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Ed has not been playing like crap. He's getting a lot of playing time now and they run a different system where he isn't relied on as a primary offensive weapon, which is what ended up happening here.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Blacklash2k4 wrote: View Post
                            Can someone explain to me exactly why did BC not take the Bargnani and Lucas for Boozer and Robinson trade, run and never look back? Just curious after watching the Brooklyn/Bulls game where Boozer had 29 points and 18 rebounds and Robinson hit the game winning shot along with 12 points and 5 assists.
                            I am basing this post on the assumption the deal was there for the taking and Toronto said no.

                            Reasons why Toronto might say no:

                            1) Chicago is still going to try and move Boozer this summer and will likely be more desperate as:
                            a) they just paid tax for first time ever,
                            b) luxury tax is getting jacked next season,
                            c) they just used a year towards repeater tax.

                            2) Toronto avoids a year towards repeater tax as it looks like they will definitely be a tax team in 2013-14 and most likely 2014-15 before having nearly a clean slate in 2015-16 right in time to avoid the repeater tax.

                            3) Assuming cap level and luxury tax goes up next season and Kleiza is amnestied, the trade will be able to be made in a straight one for one deal.

                            4) My hope is desperation leads to including a first round pick.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              If that Boozer deal is still on the table BC should take it after looking at what else is available Bargs is still relatively young (27?) I can see LA saying he could be part of the future lets move Gasol for him, Raps have Gasol for the season and he walks in 2014 we have cap sapce available after what should be a playoff berth season.

                              There is a small market for Bargnani and beggars cant be choosers the Raps already play bette with him in a suit so this is addition by subtraction, still its BCs job to move that tumor for something the franchise can use immediately.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Rapstor4Life wrote: View Post
                                If that Boozer deal is still on the table BC should take it after looking at what else is available Bargs is still relatively young (27?) I can see LA saying he could be part of the future lets move Gasol for him, Raps have Gasol for the season and he walks in 2014 we have cap sapce available after what should be a playoff berth season.

                                There is a small market for Bargnani and beggars cant be choosers the Raps already play bette with him in a suit so this is addition by subtraction, still its BCs job to move that tumor for something the franchise can use immediately.
                                Bargs is in that tweener age right now. He's likely at the end of his prime, and hasn't shown any consistency or improvement through the last couple of seasons. Mind you, he has played relatively well during healthy stretches, but teams need to think about whether those "stretches" can last for a season-plus.
                                Twitter - @thekid_it

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X