View Poll Results: What word best describes your preference moving forward for the Raptors?

Voters
38. You may not vote on this poll
  • Tanker

    12 31.58%
  • Tweaker

    26 68.42%
Page 2 of 47 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 932

Thread: Rebuild or Re-tool? (thread merge in post #358)

  1. #21
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,007
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I'm not a tanking fan, but even if you're tanking, the goal is to acquire long-term assets at the same time. This tank plan acquires exactly one long-term asset that we didn't already have (the Milwaukee pick), and improves one we already have (our own first-rounder). Plus, we give up a second rounder? Now, 2014 lottery picks are going to be difficult to acquire (I think even Milwaukee would want better protection than top 7... probably top 12 or even top 15). $40 million of cap space is going to be useless in attracting any free agents to such a brutal team, unless we're prepared to overpay. It's going to take a couple years of winning with our young guys before any star players would consider signing here for market value. We're also left with next to no salary to use in any sign-and-trade scenario.

    If we're trading Gay and Kleiza for Gasol and then immediately waiving Gasol, why wouldn't we just waive Gay? And since we could always just amnesty Kleiza anyway, this means we're giving away Gay for exactly zero assets going forward. Do you really think that's the best use of Gay's contract? Heck, at least grab Morris from the Lakers.
    And I don't understand trying to get rid of Kleiza (who's really a negative trade asset), and yet bringing in Roy, who's a pretty-much identical asset. Also, I believe that the Wolves already waived Roy a couple days ago.
    Also, you could simply keep Bargnani over Gordon (who probably helps us lose just as much), amnesty Bargnani next summer, and not give up a second round pick in the process.
    And Lowry and DeRozan. These are valuable assets... at least trade them for filler plus prospects who won't win right now, but might turn into something a few years down the line.

    However, I will give you credit that the lineup you proposed is definitely worthy of a top 5 pick. Resigning Anderson is a nice touch. For what it's worth, I think I'd probably watch less than a dozen games if that was our lineup next year. Can't see the media conglomerate owners committing the ratings suicide that would be involved in this.

  2. #22
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,521
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote NoBan wrote: View Post
    Similar to everyone else, I too liked your post. But I don’t think you can legitimately believe that we’re likely to make a contender out of the current core. If you, me, Lieweke, whomever are truly focused on brining the Raps to the finals, the blow it up option is the most realistic path to get there.
    I would argue that history is against your claim. If you look back at the NBA finals over the past 13 years (2000-2012), building through the draft has only been successful when the team lucked into an absolute superstar, when reaching the finals is the goal.

    2012 - Miami (superteam) VS OKC (Durant + 2 other top-4 picks)
    2011 - Dallas (Dirk & vets) VS Miami (superteam)
    2010 - Lakers (superteam) VS Boston (superteam)
    2009 - Lakers (superteam) VS Orlando (Howard)
    2008 - Boston (superteam) VS Lakers (superteam)
    2007 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Cleveland (LBJ)
    2006 - Miami (superteam) VS Dallas (Dirk)
    2005 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Detroit (solid team, not all via draft)
    2004 - Detroit (solid team, not all via draft) VS Lakers (superteam)
    2003 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
    2002 - Lakers (superteam) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
    2001 - Lakers (superteam) VS Philly (Iverson)
    2000 - Lakers (superteam) VS Indi (Miller)

    Unless you luck into a superstar, building through the draft alone is hardly a proven recipe for sustainable, championship-caliber success. If you look at the 65 top-5 picks over the past 13 years, I would be willing to bet that there are far more "busts" than there are superstars, which is why I don't fully understand the desire to put all your faith/hope in a few draft picks.

    First, there's no guarantee the Raptors will even wind up with top-5 picks. Second, there's no guarantee that the Raptors' picks (even if in top-5) will wind up being great players, let alone superstars to build a contending team around. Third, there's not even a guarantee that the new core that's built through the next few drafts will be any better than the current core that has been built through multiple draft lotteries (Bargnani-06, DeRozan-09, Gay via Davis-10, Valanciunas-11, Ross-12).
    Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Tue May 14th, 2013 at 12:28 PM.

  3. #23
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    258
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I would argue that history is against your claim. If you look back at the NBA finals over the past 13 years (2000-2012), building through the draft has only been successful when the team lucked into an absolute superstar, when reaching the finals is the goal.

    2012 - Miami (superteam) VS OKC (Durant + 2 other top-4 picks)
    2011 - Dallas (Dirk & vets) VS Miami (superteam)
    2010 - Lakers (superteam) VS Boston (superteam)
    2009 - Lakers (superteam) VS Orlando (Howard)
    2008 - Boston (superteam) VS Lakers (superteam)
    2007 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Cleveland (LBJ)
    2006 - Miami (superteam) VS Dallas (Dirk)
    2005 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Detroit (solid team, not all via draft)
    2004 - Detroit (solid team, not all via draft) VS Lakers (superteam)
    2003 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
    2002 - Lakers (superteam) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
    2001 - Lakers (superteam) VS Philly (Iverson)
    2000 - Lakers (superteam) VS Indi (Miller)
    OKC, Cleveland, Boston, Orlando, Dallas, and even San Antonio got the key pieces to their championship contenders by being terrible prior to their runs. Once they landed their stars (Durant, Lebron, Garnett, Howard, Dirk, Duncan), they were able to assemble contenders. Only Dirk in Dallas was not acquired with a top 5 pick, 4 of those guys were 1st overall picks. It seems like you've made my point for me here.

    The superteam option is not on the table for us. We're not signing Shaq or LBJ away from a rival.

    The Nets/Pistons model is not totally off the table. But we don't have the pieces to mirror either team's strategy. We have zero all stars, they had 3 or 4. We are A LOT closer to getting a great lotto pick than making the finals with the "solid team, not all via draft" model.

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    Unless you luck into a superstar, building through the draft alone is hardly a proven recipe for sustainable, championship-caliber success. If you look at the 65 top-5 picks over the past 13 years, I would be willing to bet that there are far more "busts" than there are superstars, which is why I don't fully understand the desire to put all your faith/hope in a few draft picks.
    The desire to rebuild through a bottoming out/drafting strategy is to avoid a repeat of the last 5 seasons. Nobody in Cleveland or Orlando's management team wanted to be a bottom feeder, but they knew they had to do it to get back to relevancy. Now the Cavs have Kyrie and the Magic are going to get a stud, too. That should be us. Instead we're paying Rudy Gay 350% of the GDP of Prince Edward Island.

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    First, there's no guarantee the Raptors will even wind up with top-5 picks. Second, there's no guarantee that the Rators' picks (even if in top-5) will wind up being great players, let alone superstars to build a contending team around
    But what is guaranteed is continued futility with the current core & strategy. Why not choose the option more likely to deliver something close to one of the superstars that appears on your list on contenders?

  4. #24
    Raptors Republic All-Star Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    The problem with this logic is that there's no guarantee that the new core will be any better than the current core. Plus, Toronto has never been effective with their cap space, mainly driven by their inability to lure top free agents. Blatant tanking and being extremely bad will only further hurt the team's reputation/perception among free agents and player agents.
    This seems to be the same logic that says keeping Colangelo is a good idea because his replacement may be even worse. No, there's not a guarantee of future success with the "get bad to get good" model, but there isn't a guarantee of anything in sports, which includes this current version of the Raptors as well. At least with my scenario, the ceiling is much higher, the financial flexibility is there and the team will have countless more options moving forward opposed to the present roster construction.

    As to your second point, do you really think free agents will be lining up to play with DeRozan & Gay? Even if you did think that would happen - which I would vehemently disagree with - the team has next to 0 resources to make it happen.

    "We're better off with no cap space because we wouldn't be able to use it properly anyway" sounds like a Colangelo line. Something along the lines of "We're better off without a first round pick this summer because we won't need to integrate another rookie!"

    Cap space doesn't necessarily need to mean that you're out signing max contract guys every summer, nor would I expect that to happen with the Raptors. It simply gives you more options. You can absorb bad salaries as part of the rebuild over the next two years - something OKC did well and the Magic and Cavs have done recently - and pick up assets in the process. You can sign players that fit around your young stars, not necessarily stars themselves.

    All in all it gives you flexibility moving forward, something that I think every team should try to protect until they are sure that they have the correct pieces in place to become a contender.

  5. #25
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote NoBan wrote: View Post
    Allow me to play devil’s advocate...

    Waiting until the deadline is a mistake if we are really going to do pursue a “blow it up” strategy. We’re not going to win a title (like it says in your sig) with this group. Waiting for months and letting this draft go buy only delays the inevitable.



    I don’t think you can address it with those assets. We’re dancing around the obvious here: We don’t have what it take to dig out of the “no mans land” that BC mired us in.


    The HC needs the final say. The lead assistant you’re referring to needs to be in place from day 1 or else it will destroy the credibility of the HC within the room. If we’re handing the offense completely over to somebody else, we need to fire the coach. Another restart at HC lends itself more to a “blow it up” strategy than a “tinkering” strategy.


    Those jumpers are the result of him being flexible to the strengths of the team. Long jumpers are a major part of both Demar and Rudy’s game. That was the problem with the acquisition. I actually think that Demar’s long jumper is encouraging, because its a really nice stroke and he’s got potential to extend that range into 3 pt territory. Getting him confident with the outside shot is a positive, imo. I think Casey’s shown more willingness to adapt than he gets credit for (finally phasing Bargs out, working with Kyle even though he clearly preferred Jose, letting Rudy shoot from distance because the analytics guys say it’s a good strategy even though it doesn’t fit Casey’s approach, letting Val work through his mistakes because he brings more to the table than he was taking off, sitting down the useless Landry Fields even though the front office invested heavily in him, sliding Rudy or AA down to the 4 and going small).


    That’s not only unrealistic, it’s next to impossible.

    Guys overachieving? We’ve been hoping for that year after year. And even when they do, other guys underachieve and we wind up still stuck in no-mans-land.

    Major coup in a trade? I’m sure every single team is hoping for this. Is there anything to suggest this is the slightest bit lucky? NBA teams aren’t going to hand assets to us. Even teams with poor decision making processes (Kings, Nets) aren’t going to hand us something useful just because. Not to get too far off topic, but we all know how this strategy worked out for the Jays. “Major coup in a trade” is off the table.

    Bargains on minimum contracts? The way to make this happen is to nail a second round pick (or very late first). Not only has that never happened for this organization, we don’t even have a second round pick to use. This option is off the table as well.

    Somebody else mentioned that we need to find a “diamond in the rough.” Well, thats kinda what AA was if you look at his paycheque vs contribution. Finding another AA, AP or Garbo is not the ticket to a contender (again, like it says in your sig).


    This sounds GREAT. But every team in every sport can do this with their roster. History and logic tell us that our team is not going to be it’s best case scenario. To borrow a quote from the immortal Denny Green, we are who we thought we were.


    We could use one of these assets to ditch Bargs’ contract, but to expect a valuable piece back too? That’s unrealistic. We could trade DD or Ross straight up for a nice piece. Throwing Bargs in eliminates the potential to land a real contributor.


    Definitely plausible; not getting us beyond the 7-8 range, best case scenario.


    Not happening without a second rounder


    Not impossible and would be very nice to see. But these kinda fall into the “we are who we thought we were” category.

    Similar to everyone else, I too liked your post. But I don’t think you can legitimately believe that we’re likely to make a contender out of the current core. If you, me, Lieweke, whomever are truly focused on brining the Raps to the finals, the blow it up option is the most realistic path to get there.
    You have cherry picked my post with the selective quotations. The context of my quotes are lost and you've taken a discussion and turned it in to an argument. Perfect example is the list of what would have to go perfectly for the Raptors to compete - which I made clear.

    I don't think this is as black and white as you make it out to be. With new leadership I would not be opposed to tearing it down but there is more than one option. However, once you get in the playoffs with a good team (not an 8th seed), anything can happen. I think the Raptors can be a good team with a little tinkering - not the current core.
    "You don’t know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  6. #26
    Raptors Republic All-Star Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    . However, once you get in the playoffs with a good team (not an 8th seed), anything can happen. I think the Raptors can be a good team with a little tinkering - not the current core.
    Is this actually true? It's accurate in the other three major sports but how many championships or (even finals appearances) have been captured in the last 25 years by teams coming from the bottom half of the playoff seedings?

    I haven't looked at it closely but I bet you can count on one hand the number of times a seed higher than 4 made it to the Finals in the last 25 years, from either Conference.

    Edit: I just looked it up. In the past 25 years of playoff basketball in the NBA, only two teams have made the Finals with a seed higher than 4. The Rockets won it as a sixth seed in 1995 and the Knicks made it to the Finals during the lockout shortened season as an 8th seed. Even if you widen the criteria to include #4 seeds who make it all the way to the finals, the list only grows by a couple more teams.
    Last edited by Fully; Tue May 14th, 2013 at 01:28 PM.

  7. #27
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    258
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    You have cherry picked my post with the selective quotations. The context of my quotes are lost and you've taken a discussion and turned it in to an argument. Perfect example is the list of what would have to go perfectly for the Raptors to compete - which I made clear.

    I don't think this is as black and white as you make it out to be. With new leadership I would not be opposed to tearing it down but there is more than one option. However, once you get in the playoffs with a good team (not an 8th seed), anything can happen. I think the Raptors can be a good team with a little tinkering - not the current core.
    Whoa, big fella. I didnt want to copy paste everything. The context of your stuff exists only a single mouse scroll above.

    I understand you realized how unlikely your best case scenario was. I felt it necessary to reiterate it as nearly impossible and virtually irrelevant to our discussion of the future of the franchise.

    My points about Casey & the unlikihood of a Demar/Andrea combo fetching a contributor stand. As does my point about there being no benefit in waitng til the deadline to enact a true rebuilding strategy. As does my point that we are extremely unlikely to hit a homerun with a bargain contract without a second round pick. None of those points are invalidated by any "cherrypicking".

    There's been plenty of black/white/grey talk here. My question is, why do you want to live in the grey? The grey is where we've been under Colangelo and Babcock before him. The grey got us into our current situation, which you've correctly identified as unacceptable.

  8. #28
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    852
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Blowing it up after coming this far is neither sensible nor viable. Yes some of BC's moves have been questionable and could have been done differently, but the result of the process of rebuilding is one year away and Raps. should simply stay the course. In fact BC's option year should have been picked up already and I hope the ONLY reason for the delay is the Leafs play off series.
    Attitude Is A Choice.

  9. #29
    Raptors Republic Veteran Nilanka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,371
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
    Blowing it up after coming this far is neither sensible nor viable. Yes some of BC's moves have been questionable and could have been done differently, but the result of the process of rebuilding is one year away and Raps. should simply stay the course. In fact BC's option year should have been picked up already and I hope the ONLY reason for the delay is the Leafs play off series.
    It doesn't make much sense why the Leafs would cause a delay in Colangelo's decision.

    "Can't...conduct...businesss. Watching...hockey"
    "I don't lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation." - Fox Mulder

  10. #30
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,521
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote NoBan wrote: View Post
    There's been plenty of black/white/grey talk here. My question is, why do you want to live in the grey? The grey is where we've been under Colangelo and Babcock before him. The grey got us into our current situation, which you've correctly identified as unacceptable.
    I don't see many people choosing to continue 'as is', without at least some retooling. You're the one who seems to keep arguing that the only options are to 'blow it up' or 'stay as is'. If you look at my post (#20), I'm hardly arguing to keep the status quo, I just don't think there's reason to go to the extreme to 'blow it up' this offseason.

  11. #31
    Raptors Republic All-Star Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,191
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I don't see many people choosing to continue 'as is', without at least some retooling. You're the one who seems to keep arguing that the only options are to 'blow it up' or 'stay as is'. If you look at my post (#20), I'm hardly arguing to keep the status quo, I just don't think there's reason to go to the extreme to 'blow it up' this offseason.
    What does re-tooling mean exactly? No cap space, no pick, very little in terms of trade assets unless you're willing to move a major piece yourself. I'd love to hear the avenues to improve this roster over the next two years without the term "organic growth".

  12. #32
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    852
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Nilanka wrote: View Post
    It doesn't make much sense why the Leafs would cause a delay in Colangelo's decision.

    "Can't...conduct...businesss. Watching...hockey"
    "Can conduct business owning hockey".

    A decision on BC during the Leafs play off series would mean attention diverted from Leafs to Raptors as far as fans who follow both teams are concerned, thereby affecting business adversely. Remember, Leafs play offs generates revenue not a decision on Colangelo.
    Attitude Is A Choice.

  13. #33
    Raptors Republic Veteran white men can't jump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    8,631
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote NoBan wrote: View Post
    (Disclaimer: This is not an Andrew Wiggans thread)

    What do you say we become the worst team in the NBA? BCs desperation has left us in NBA no-mans land.:

    • Not good enough to win a playoff series
    • Unlikely to even make the playoffs
    • Still too good to not get an impactful draft pick
    • Too tied up in terms of cap space to sign a star player
    • Not enough players with trade via to improve the team via trade

    We are headed for AT LEAST 3 more years of irrelevancy as currently constructed under this strategy. This thread is about limiting our continued irrelevancy to only 3 years by aggressively tanking and trading away all current assets for terrible players/contracts and draft picks.

    Move 1:
    Trade Rudy and Landry to the Nets for Gerald Wallace, Chris Humphries and a 1st round pick in 2014
    http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ct86vho

    Given that money is no object for the Nets, perhaps they could even pony up some cash for a potential Wallace buy out in 2015. Rudy and Landry are both overpaid, but the Nets do this to get out of the Wallace deal and to add another “star”. Derron/JJ/Rudy/Evans/Brook. That’s a quasi-contender that King can sell to the Russian as a real contender.

    Move 2
    Trade Amir to Phoenix for Beasley and a (protected) first round pick
    http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=chxpgj6

    Not sure we can land their top 5 pick this year for taking Beez off their hands and giving them Amir. But if we protect it like: Top 10 (2013), Top 5 (2014), Top 5 (2015), Top 3 (2016), unprotected (2017), they might bite on the chance to ditch Beez and we’d still get a lottery pick out of it.

    Move 3
    Trade Lowry and Demar to Detroit for Jerebko, Stuckey and their (top 5 protected) 2013 first rounder
    (Note: This trade fails straight-up in the trade machine, but after the first 2 moves, it works)
    http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=btjas5p

    Detroit gives up a mid-lotto pick to get out of 2 bad contracts, get a good one back (Kyle) and add a pretty good young piece on the wing (Demar). Kyle and Demar are probably both better than what they’d get at 7 this draft, and it accelerates their rebuild.

    Then we bring back Grey, Anderson and Lucas. Your 2013-2014 Toronto Raptors (!!!!):

    1) Stuckey, Lucas
    2) Ross, Anderson
    3) Wallace, Beasley, Jerebko
    4) Bargnani, Humphies, Acy
    5) Valanciunas, Grey

    Plus a top 10 pick in 2013 from the Pistons (say, MCW). We could provide heavy minutes to a young lineup of MCW/Ross/Jerebko/Acy/Val. Is that bad enough to virtually guarantee a top 3 pick in 2014? I say yes. We might even get a top 3 pick in 2015 with this core. Plus, we get a team with 2 guys named Jonas!

    Then Stuckey and Hump are off the books, and Beez/Wallace/Bargs can be bought out or paid to stay home. That leaves us going into 2016 with:

    • Ross
    • Val
    • Acy
    • Detroit’s 2013 (#7)
    • Brooklyn’s late 2014 first rounder
    • Phoenix’s 2014, 2015 2016 pick (likely #6-10)
    • Our top 3 2014 pick
    • Our top 3 2015 pick
    • 2 high second round picks of our own

    We’d have cap space to fill out the roster with veteran leaders as needed, plus potentially get a star to fill whichever remaining hole is biggest.

    We would need a care taker coach for the next few years before bringing in somebody to guide the team forward – similar to the Carlisimo/Brooks handoff in Seattle/OKC (although they may have misfired with Brooks a little). PJ is available.

    Now that I’ve gone through all this, my questions for y’all are:
    1. Would you be on board with another 3-5 year rebuild if we really, truly committed to bottoming out?
    2. Do you think a massive rebuild like this is even necessary, or do you want to roll with the core as constructed?
    3. What do you think the likelihood of any/all of these moves from the other team’s perspective? Could this actually be pulled off?
    4. Do you have your own ideas of how to tank & rebuild?
    5. Do you think we could embark on a strategy like this without mortally wounding the development of any young guys (Ross/Val/etc)?
    I just think blowing it up is something you kind of fall ass backwards into when a season goes badly.

    If, for example, right out of the gate next year, Rudy Gay gets injured early, and the team struggles to find a rhythm, I would probably try to make one or two GOOD trades. By good, I mean not get low-balled just to tank. Lowry for a veteran role player and a pick, would be a good deal to me. Or DeMar for a young player/pick and some cap relief, for example. Might even make both such trades. If they get a young player and/or a draft pick from another team(s), that's a fairly good haul without really compromising any short-term stability that could hurt the development of JV and our other young players. It might help or hurt the record for tanking depending on the deals...so the emphasis is on maximizing return. In fact, the record could still suffer and become worse, as it's hard to mix pieces, let alone young pieces together midseason.

    But, I think blowing it up just because you don't like the team is a really, really, bad idea that doesn't leave any guarantees. You'd be banking on multiple draft picks being good, or at least one netting us a true franchise player. How's that worked out for Charlotte? Detroit? Sacramento? None of those teams are in a better situation than Toronto, despite having committed to losing for several years. Charlotte is still a total mess. Detroit has 2 good players that line up at the same position. Sacramento got 2 top 5 talents with 2 bottom 5 personalities. The draft is such a mess. If the Raps don't get a #1 pick, or heck, they could end up not even getting a top 5 pick at all with all the moves mentioned in the post (banking on their own picks being high), then they could be stuck in an even worse situation.

    It's still better to make slow adjustments, moving pieces for the right assets (whether that's a pick or a player) rather than just shedding them because things aren't projecting to lead directly to a championship. It also gives the added bonus of evaluating each move one step at a time, in case one move brings an unexpected good fit that really helps the team. I think the next big move the team should make should hopefully bring in another star (Love, Horford, Rondo, etc.). Blowing it up does not lead to contention faster than this, IMO, and may, in fact, stall the team another 4 or 5+ years.

    Oh, and btw...If teams know you're tanking, you will not be able to get all the draft picks mentinoed. It's simply not happening. Really, it's pretty straightforward...when teams know you're trying to get rid of a player(s), they only put in low-ball bids. That's why shit players/contracts are so hard to move. Bargnani is not the only carcass that's failing to bring in good bids....Shit, even Boozer and Gasol can't bring back good packages, or else their names would never be in the same sentence as Bargnani's during rumour season. And a team looking to shed such a piece is usually unwilling to attach an asset to get it done...which is usually what it takes. I don't care if it's Rudy Gay or Andrea Bargnani, if a team knows you're actively getting rid of him, you will not get the package you think for him....As I'm sure Memphis long hoped for a better package than Ed Davis, TayShaun Prince and 2nd rd pick for Gay. Gay is the best player on the Raptors and he couldn't return a 1st rd pick when he was traded...Can't say how likely it would be then that other players could bring back such assets.

    Frankly, of the deals in the post, only the first, with Gay going to BKL, seems like a deal the other team would want (and with the least valuable return, including a likely low draft pick). On the others...Why would PHX want to give up a 1st rd pick for Amir? I love Amir, but he cannot possibly be in their future plans. They won't be good while he's under contract, and if I were him, I'd probably bolt after that. Essentially PHX is throwing away a draft pick here. Why would Detroit, who is nowhere close to being relevant, want DeMar and Lowry and give up a 1st rd pick? To give up bad contracts? And then also get one back that's worse than either? Stuckey expires next year. Jerebko is hardly a "poison" contract at 4.5 million per. IF I were them I wouldn't do this deal. I'd rather keep this year's pick, suck again next year for another high pick, and then be relevant for years after that. By your own logic for what you think Toronto should do, 2 of your deals make absolutely no sense for the other teams involved, who are in a better position to tank than Toronto.

    Basically I think your strategy in no way hastens development and shortens irrelevancy. In fact, I see it as very likely to continue irrelevancy for more than 3 years. Partly because you assume deliberate failure ensures a high chance of success in building through the draft.
    Last edited by white men can't jump; Tue May 14th, 2013 at 03:41 PM.

  14. Like NoBan, Fully liked this post
  15. #34
    Raptors Republic All-Star JawsGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,372
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I'd like the team to "blow it up". Would give me a great excuse to stop being a Raps fan. I'm getting sick of cheering for the team we might have in a few years, if we made this move or that move and if this player can turn out to be this or that. I would have much rathered to be a Bulls, Celts, Hawks or Bucks fan this year. No one thought either had a chance to make a run at it (thanks Miami) but at least they had playoff basketball. And I'd rather cheer for that than another high draft pick.

    If this team had trust, chemistry, hard nosed defense and a actual offensive system based on a TEAM game, we would have something to cheer for. Plus, we would have a better idea going forward of the types of moves we need to pull to make the team a contender. Most of the players on this team are at or near their ceilings (minus JV, Ross, and Acy perhaps) so expecting individual improvements in their games to make a significant difference to the success of the team is ridiculous. This team needs to improve at the team level, as a group. Thats what I want to see going forward.

    Get rid of Bargs, sure up the bench, get the players to buy in to a system and lets see if we can't cheer for a 6th seed next season. I'd be happy with that. This may actually show the the organization is moving in a positive direction which may be appealing to FA's. Or, of course, we could lose on purpose (absurd!) and HOPE for a STUD/s in the draft, and then HOPE that the STUD/s (if we are lucky enough to draft him/them) want to stay here and be part of an organization that has shown very little competitive edge since it's inception.

  16. #35
    Raptors Republic Veteran Nilanka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,371
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
    "Can conduct business owning hockey".

    A decision on BC during the Leafs play off series would mean attention diverted from Leafs to Raptors as far as fans who follow both teams are concerned, thereby affecting business adversely. Remember, Leafs play offs generates revenue not a decision on Colangelo.
    I guess we'll agree to disagree. I personally don't believe the Leafs were a factor in Colangelo's (yet to be) decision. I just don't see how one diverts attention away from the other.

    Doug Smith writing about Colangelo's firing doesn't leave empty seats in the ACC. I would hope that most fans in the city can chew gum and walk at the same time.
    "I don't lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation." - Fox Mulder

  17. Like isaacthompson liked this post
  18. #36
    Raptors Republic Superstar planetmars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,569
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    We don't need to blow it up... what we need is for Lebron to move to the West coast so that a team in the Eastern conference has a chance to get into the finals.

    Boston is done. Brooklyn has over paid vets and have no room for growth. NY is extremely old. Atlanta has cap space and good players, but they have no fan base and if I was on that team I wouldn't give a sh!t. Chicago is cheap and is Rose going to be Rose again? And even if he was back, are they so much better then the Raptors with a few roster changes? Milwaukee is always going to be on the tread mill.. Orlando/Cleveland have potential but will it work out and how long will it take?

    Look I would love to be OKC or San Antonio. They got lucky in the draft, got awesome studs, and built around them. However the last time Toronto got a #1 pick it was a sh!tty draft and we got stuck with Bargnani. I say we just stick with this current mess of a roster and make a few changes here and there until we can become like Indiana, Memphis, Denver or this years version of GSW.

    Just need the right GM to build a real team that has an actual vision. We are not an European team or a Phoenix of the East. Build a team the right way with a proper identity, and that can be done without blowing it up.

  19. Like CalgaryRapsFan liked this post
  20. #37
    Raptors Republic Superstar TheGloveinRapsUniform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Posts
    2,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    stats aside, this current team was 4 wins away from playing in the playoffs.

    considering mid-season trades, injuries and rotation changes on almost a game to game basis, i think this team needs stability. give the group a chance to develop chemistry and camaraderie with each other.

    of course tweaks are in order, but we all have to realize that success is gradual, you cant have a non-playoff team and gut it and expect to build a contender. for gods sakes, the team hasnt even been to the playoffs in so many years and people are talking about gutting it and aiming for the future as a contender. i think everybody should just level their expectations a notch down first and think of at least making the playoffs.

    like i said, this current team was 4 wins away from snagging a playoff spot. its easy to think that with a healthy core and training camp and practices, this team is a legit playoff contender.

  21. Like JawsGT liked this post
  22. #38
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View Post
    stats aside, this current team was 4 wins away from playing in the playoffs.

    considering mid-season trades, injuries and rotation changes on almost a game to game basis, i think this team needs stability. give the group a chance to develop chemistry and camaraderie with each other.

    of course tweaks are in order, but we all have to realize that success is gradual, you cant have a non-playoff team and gut it and expect to build a contender. for gods sakes, the team hasnt even been to the playoffs in so many years and people are talking about gutting it and aiming for the future as a contender. i think everybody should just level their expectations a notch down first and think of at least making the playoffs.

    like i said, this current team was 4 wins away from snagging a playoff spot. its easy to think that with a healthy core and training camp and practices, this team is a legit playoff contender.
    Don't forget the #AprilFoolsGold that distorted making the playoffs by just 4 wins.

    The issue I have is being 'just' a legit playoff contender. To me, and correct me if I misinterpreted, that means they may make the playoffs or they may not.

    If the Raptors are just going to try and squeak in to the playoffs, then I'm up for radical changes and asset accumulation. I think that is what staying the course implies - again just my opinion and interpretation.

    I'm willing to cheer along the ride if they can find a legit starting PF and back up PG. Come the playoffs the bench is only 8 deep anyways.
    "You don’t know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  23. #39
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,284
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote NoBan wrote: View Post
    Whoa, big fella. I didnt want to copy paste everything. The context of your stuff exists only a single mouse scroll above.

    I understand you realized how unlikely your best case scenario was. I felt it necessary to reiterate it as nearly impossible and virtually irrelevant to our discussion of the future of the franchise.

    My points about Casey & the unlikihood of a Demar/Andrea combo fetching a contributor stand. As does my point about there being no benefit in waitng til the deadline to enact a true rebuilding strategy. As does my point that we are extremely unlikely to hit a homerun with a bargain contract without a second round pick. None of those points are invalidated by any "cherrypicking".

    There's been plenty of black/white/grey talk here. My question is, why do you want to live in the grey? The grey is where we've been under Colangelo and Babcock before him. The grey got us into our current situation, which you've correctly identified as unacceptable.
    Firing Colangelo, trading one of DD/Ross and Bargnani, amnestying Kleiza is not living in the grey.

    That is a full on shift and change.

    You continue to write from the perspective the only two options are to blow it up or keep the current team - at least that is my interpretation of your stance.

    I disagree with that. This team has been constructed around Bargnani. So first things first is to remove Bargnani which in and of itself is huge. But just because it is constructed around Bargnani doesn't mean there are not some good pieces there.

    If the Raptors can obtain a traditional PF then insert Ross as the 5th option at SG (or anyone who can shoot the three - sidenote: Ross actually shot pretty well from my recollection on catch and shoot. His running and curling off screens for 3 point shots was inconsistent but that again comes back to Casey's offense, I digress).

    If the Raptors are able to obtain another stretch 4 (you know who can actually make the 3 and not just look pretty doing it) then insert Fields as the utility/glue guy he showed he can be this season; if his 3pt stroke returns that is a bonus.

    We will see how it all plays out but my point is blowing it up and staying the course are not the only two options.
    "You don’t know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  24. #40
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    351
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    Unless you luck into a superstar, building through the draft alone is hardly a proven recipe for sustainable, championship-caliber success. If you look at the 65 top-5 picks over the past 13 years, I would be willing to bet that there are far more "busts" than there are superstars, which is why I don't fully understand the desire to put all your faith/hope in a few draft picks.

    First, there's no guarantee the Raptors will even wind up with top-5 picks. Second, there's no guarantee that the Raptors' picks (even if in top-5) will wind up being great players, let alone superstars to build a contending team around. Third, there's not even a guarantee that the new core that's built through the next few drafts will be any better than the current core that has been built through multiple draft lotteries (Bargnani-06, DeRozan-09, Gay via Davis-10, Valanciunas-11, Ross-12).
    I agree. Don't forget that there are plenty of other teams that are tanking, or will be tanking for the next few years. How can we be sure that the Raptors tanking would yield better results than CLE, ORL, NO, DET, etc, etc.

    I think a better approach is to have a great coach with a good and consistent system, and build a team around that.

Page 2 of 47 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •