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 15 of 47 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15 16 17 25 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 300 of 932

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

  1. #281
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I think a big reason why so many "quickly shoot down the tanking option" because none of the 4 teams remaining before last night (minus SA 16 years ago) tanked to get where they are.


    Here is another so called reality, if we all get to determine reality:

    If option #2 is so unlikely, then what would make one think the Raptors current assets can return such valuable assets as draft picks, rookie scale contracts, and expiring contracts/cap space?


    I think the bigger reality is nothing is as cut and dry with the current Raptors situation to think that staying the course, blowing it up, or tinkering will ensure success. Each path has its own perils. The 2011-12 attempt to tank is a good example of this: the Raptors ended up 1 spot out of a desired draft pick because other teams tanked better and harder.
    I actually disagree with Memphis/Indy. I think they are perfect examples of tank, draft and rebuild.

    memphis traded Pau Gasol for Marc + an expiring. Spent years in the lottery.

    Indiana tore their team down. Added picks, Spent years in the lottery.

    They still tanked and rebuilt, only to add their final peices once they had a rebuilt core. What they did, as I see it anyways, is precisely tank and rebuild. Not with a superstar, but still a successful tank and rebuild.


    And just for sake of argument, the Raps still landed in a great spot to land a top talent (Drummond) yet chose not to, in my opinion, because Colangelo was never really tanking (or at best half assing it)

    Just my 2 cents

  2. #282
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,999
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craiger wrote: View Post
    and there we go again - right back to the circle of luck. Always luck. The fail safe of luck. And now its 'more lucky'... sigh.
    I'm sorry but aren't "lotteries" and "luck" synonymous?

    Either way you go, you're going to require some good bounces. Go research any successful entrepreneur and you'll see luck had a role in it... Usually those professionals tried to keep as much control in their hands as possible though.

    The lotto requires parking all your chips in one spot and hoping for the best results; giving yourself up to the draft. Then, if you get the desired result, you're hoping that the player works out.

    Wouldn't it be a better idea to manage a good team, get those players working well together and producing? That way you have truly marketable that you can move to capitalize on teams interested in moving out of the lottery in instances where the player you want is there are the pick you can get?

    Let me put it this way, Indiana Pacers players in general are at an all-time high right now in terms of market value. There is a buzz about them If you took a couple of those guys and had them on the Raptors squad this season I assure you they would not have the same market value right now because:

    1. They would not have been utilized properly
    2. Would not be in the right system to shine
    3. Would not be recognized/understood for what they are so that they could be properly identified in relation to #1 and #2.


    And I'm not relating the Pacers' playoff success to the players' value(although that helps too). The fact that they were so good at fitting the pieces and knowing what they had on roster had a hand in that success no doubt though.

  3. #283
    Raptors Republic All-Star Mediumcore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,189
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I think a big reason why so many "quickly shoot down the tanking option" because none of the 4 teams remaining before last night (minus SA 16 years ago) tanked to get where they are.


    Here is another so called reality, if we all get to determine reality:

    If option #2 is so unlikely, then what would make one think the Raptors current assets can return such valuable assets as draft picks, rookie scale contracts, and expiring contracts/cap space?


    I think the bigger reality is nothing is as cut and dry with the current Raptors situation to think that staying the course, blowing it up, or tinkering will ensure success. Each path has its own perils. The 2011-12 attempt to tank is a good example of this: the Raptors ended up 1 spot out of a desired draft pick because other teams tanked better and harder.
    I think this is a good point. Nothing is ever guaranteed, and it goes for both tanking or keeping the team together for the most part.

    Now what I would say in this particular situation of the 2011-12 season, is that if the Raptors truly had a plan to tank they would have done it correctly and ended up with a selection they wanted. Also, if their intention was truly to tank that season to get a specific player, they would easily have traded up to get either Lillard or Barnes by including their pick along with some sort of asset. However, BC just didn't/doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing. There never seems to be a plan for what he wants to acheive each season. Just a mentality of lets head into the season and see what happens.

  4. #284
    Raptors Republic Rookie RAPTORNATION's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    26
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    If we are going to tank and rebuild, who are we going to keep?

  5. #285
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
    They don't have to get a "desired franchise player". If they get a top 5 pick great but tanking guarantees a good pick, not a great one. To get a good player at least, the draft must be a good one. The 2014 draft promises to be one.

    Even if we get a Gay caliber player, Raps. will get him at a Rookie scale contract which will be at least 10 mil. less than what Gay is being paid. The cash at their disposal will enable them to pursue free agents who command contracts like 5 yr/60 mil as opposed to players like L Fields, Jack, Klieza etc, not that we don't need such players. Not specifically them but examples of such players are Nene, Millsap, Jefferson and Gallinari. The only such free agent they were able to sign was Turkoglu who unfortunately did not work out.
    My interpretation of people advocating tanking is getting a Durant/LeBron/Harden/Wade type talent. From what you are saying that is a lot of losing for just a good player.

    Getting a Gay calibre player would be extremely lucky in the draft. How many rookies or 2nd year players come out as 20ppg scoreres?

    Guys who command 5 year/60M (btw max contract now is 4 years) are looking to go somewhere to win. They are 28 year old-ish (i.e. coming off their 2nd contract) and unrestricted. That is part of the problem with tanking: you become known as a loser and who wants to play for a loser? Who wants to be the guy in his prime to try and turn a franchise around?
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  6. #286
    Raptors Republic All-Star Soft Euro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Utrecht, The Netherlands (Yes, that's Europe!)
    Posts
    1,920
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote slaw wrote: View Post
    I'm ambivalent but I would suggest that people who want to compete sooner rather than later may want to look to the Houston model. The Rockets had no superstar to deal, they didn't tank, and they didn't do it through free agency. They made some shrew draft picks and trades and put themselves in a financial position to do a big trade (Harden) and sign another max FA when the situation was right.

    You can argue Morey walked into the perfect storm but he put himself in a position to capitalize on it.
    Morey was already gm when they still had Yao Ming and Tracy McGrady on the roster.

  7. #287
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    I'm sorry but aren't "lotteries" and "luck" synonymous?

    Either way you go, you're going to require some good bounces. Go research any successful entrepreneur and you'll see luck had a role in it... Usually those professionals tried to keep as much control in their hands as possible though.

    The lotto requires parking all your chips in one spot and hoping for the best results; giving yourself up to the draft. Then, if you get the desired result, you're hoping that the player works out.

    Wouldn't it be a better idea to manage a good team, get those players working well together and producing? That way you have truly marketable that you can move to capitalize on teams interested in moving out of the lottery in instances where the player you want is there are the pick you can get?

    Let me put it this way, Indiana Pacers players in general are at an all-time high right now in terms of market value. There is a buzz about them If you took a couple of those guys and had them on the Raptors squad this season I assure you they would not have the same market value right now because:

    1. They would not have been utilized properly
    2. Would not be in the right system to shine
    3. Would not be recognized/understood for what they are so that they could be properly identified in relation to #1 and #2.


    And I'm not relating the Pacers' playoff success to the players' value(although that helps too). The fact that they were so good at fitting the pieces and knowing what they had on roster had a hand in that success no doubt though.

    Exactly. And this is why 'luck' is a pointless argument - because its an attribute in all forms of team building/success.

  8. #288
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,999
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default The draft is one of many pieces, it's not the piece...

    Did you read the next sentence?

    Allow me to elaborate further. Planning around the lotto turns into a reactionary exercise because you don't know what's going to happen and if the balls don't fall your way what then? Take a guy you're not happy with? Trade the pick for a player? Wait, doesn't that put you back a year because now suddenly you've added someone to your team who you didn't get in the lottery who will improve your team and hurt your odds next lotto?

    Building with the draft as viable option when the right opportunity presents itself, to me, is a scenario where you keep more control over your fate. In such a case maybe you move in, maybe you don't but at least if you do, you're doing so because the guy you're drafting is exactly what you're looking for.

  9. #289
    Raptors Republic All-Star ebrian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Markham
    Posts
    1,535
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    Wouldn't it be a better idea to manage a good team, get those players working well together and producing? That way you have truly marketable that you can move to capitalize on teams interested in moving out of the lottery in instances where the player you want is there are the pick you can get?
    It would be a great idea -- how do we get there?
    your pal,
    ebrian

  10. #290
    Raptors Republic Veteran white men can't jump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    7,781
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Soft Euro wrote: View Post
    If we want to tank, we're not going to be the only team that does that. It's gonna be a tanking fight.

    I think it's high time that the lottery system is changed. Each year you have about 25% of the league trying to tank, probably more at the end of the season. It's not good for a competitive league.

    For all the discussion here about tanking or not and the worth of tanking, I don't think there is even a slight chance that this will be the plan that Leiweke and the new gm will come up with, after five years of not making the play-offs. They will want some results, so another route will be taken. It's just not going to happen.
    I so badly want them to think of a way to shake it up. The thing is they still need to somehow find a way to favour the weaker teams chances at adding a highly talented player. The problem is that anything they do, teams will still find a way to try and abuse the rules.

    The best idea (not saying it's good) I have thought of (or maybe I read it somewhere and forgot), is to cluster lottery chances.

    So say the 5 worst teams all have exactly the same lottery odds. And then the next 5 teams do as well, and then the 4 final teams that didn't advance do as well. So if a team has the 7th or 8th worst record, they might find it hard to tank all the way down to 5th, or might see the benefit in asking their guys to compete since they'd still have the same odds if they move up a spot or two. It would be hard for teams in these groups to tank into worse ones.

    For instance, the 2 worst teams in each conference (PHX, NOH, CHA, ORL) were clearly lacking talent compared to every team in the league. They are all in the bottom 5 and should be. Cleveland is the only team that probably shouldn't, and probably wouldn't have been if they were healthy (not just Irving, but Varejao's absence was huge). Other teams would really have to have lose top guys, like Cleveland did, to be close to as bad as those awfully bad teams.

    And after those teams, the talent gaps aren't that big for the other non-playoff teams. Many of those teams start the season with the goal of fighting for a playoff spot. Some of the 6-10 worst teams are ones where something goes wrong...such as injuries in the cases of Minny and Washington. Regardless, it's hard for the teams in the 6-14 range to drop into the bottom 5. And the separation is usually late between the 6-10 group and the 11-14 group. So those 6-10 teams are usually trying to win for too much of the season to be able to tank into the lower group. And the 11-14 teams might have to keep fighting for a playoff spot until far too late in the season for them to be able to tank in any worthwhile way.

    Granted there will be some tanking as teams try to move between groups, but I think it would diminish.
    Last edited by white men can't jump; Tue May 28th, 2013 at 01:25 PM.

  11. #291
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    828
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Getting a Gay calibre player would be extremely lucky in the draft. How many rookies or 2nd year players come out as 20ppg scoreres?

    Guys who command 5 year/60M (btw max contract now is 4 years) are looking to go somewhere to win. They are 28 year old-ish (i.e. coming off their 2nd contract) and unrestricted. That is part of the problem with tanking: you become known as a loser and who wants to play for a loser? Who wants to be the guy in his prime to try and turn a franchise around?
    Memphis were lucky to get Gay at No. 9 (if I'm right). Normally a player like him would go between 4 and 7 which is why THE KIND OF DRAFT that it is, is very important. I'm advocating tanking only because of the KIND OF DRAFT the 2014 draft is going to be.

    Regarding signing 4 yr 45-50mil (thanks for the correction) kinda players, the main problem Raps. have faced is that they've almost never put themselves in a position to sign such players. About what you've said (they go to winning teams), it does not apply to all players. When they did sign such a player(Turkoglu), he came from the finalist Magic team.
    Attitude Is A Choice.

  12. #292
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,999
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote ebrian wrote: View Post
    It would be a great idea -- how do we get there?
    They have the bones of a good team, they just need a few tweaks and suddenly they're a dark horse in the east.

    Danny Granger, Roy Hibbert, Paul George, taken 17th, 17th and 10th. They took those core pieces and then added to it wisely with other pieces which fit. The Raptors can be on the verge of again being respectable IF they choose to go that route. I look at this team now and I see Bargnani and DeRozan as prime candidates to be moved in order to bring in guys who fit what they want to run next season. JV could take a big step forward this season and we know what Rudy Gay will bring. Adding around those two guys while holding onto the glue, like Amir Johnson could have this team moving up in the east.

    At the very least, we could all probably agree that it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they actually attempted to win some games over the next two years while adding to the core?

  13. #293
    Raptors Republic All-Star Soft Euro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Utrecht, The Netherlands (Yes, that's Europe!)
    Posts
    1,920
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    I so badly want them to think of a way to shake it up. The thing is they still need to somehow find a way to favour the weaker teams chances at adding a highly talented player. The problem is that anything they do, teams will still find a way to try and abuse the rules.

    The best idea (not saying it's good) I have thought of (or maybe I read it somewhere and forgot), is to cluster lottery chances.

    So say the 5 worst teams all have exactly the same lottery odds. And then the next 5 teams do as well, and then the 4 final teams that didn't advance do as well. So if a team has the 7th or 8th worst record, they might find it hard to tank all the way down to 5th, or might see the benefit in asking their guys to compete since they'd still have the same odds if they move up a spot or two. It would be hard for teams in these groups to tank into worse ones.

    For instance, the 2 worst teams in each conference (PHX, NOH, CHA, ORL) were clearly lacking talent compared to every team in the league. They are all in the bottom 5 and should be. Cleveland is the only team that probably shouldn't, and probably wouldn't have been if they were healthy (not just Irving, but Varejao's absence was huge). Other teams would really have to have lose top guys, like Cleveland did, to be close to as bad as those awfully bad teams.

    And after those teams, the talent gaps aren't that big for the other non-playoff teams. Many of those teams start the season with the goal of fighting for a playoff spot. Some of the 6-10 worst teams are ones where something goes wrong...such as injuries in the cases of Minny and Washington. Regardless, it's hard for the teams in the 6-14 range to drop into the bottom 5. And the separation is usually late between the 6-10 group and the 11-14 group. So those 6-10 teams are usually trying to win for too much of the season to be able to tank into the lower group. And the 11-14 teams might have to keep fighting for a playoff spot until far too late in the season for them to be able to tank in any worthwhile way.

    Granted there will be some tanking as teams try to move between groups, but I think it would diminish.
    This doesn't do it for me. Teams like Charlotte are purposely tanking and are rewarded for it. Other teams, like Atlanta for years, are trying to be competitive and they are consistently punished for it because there is a 'tax' on being (slightly above) mediocre. I'd like it if there was more incentive not to land in the bottom and less (or no) punishment or even a reward for being competitive.

  14. #294
    Raptors Republic All-Star Mediumcore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,189
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    They have the bones of a good team, they just need a few tweaks and suddenly they're a dark horse in the east.

    Danny Granger, Roy Hibbert, Paul George, taken 17th, 17th and 10th. They took those core pieces and then added to it wisely with other pieces which fit. The Raptors can be on the verge of again being respectable IF they choose to go that route. I look at this team now and I see Bargnani and DeRozan as prime candidates to be moved in order to bring in guys who fit what they want to run next season. JV could take a big step forward this season and we know what Rudy Gay will bring. Adding around those two guys while holding onto the glue, like Amir Johnson could have this team moving up in the east.

    At the very least, we could all probably agree that it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if they actually attempted to win some games over the next two years while adding to the core?
    Just two things which caught my eye. When you mentioned we have the bones of a good team I instantly thought of what Chicago did this season and in the season without D. Rose, and then Deng and Noah in the playoffs. Now that team has the bones of of a good team. Toronto didn't even get a whiff of the playoffs with a mostly healthy team. I don't see the structure of a good team. Also, though I didn't highlight it from what you said, moving AB, DeMar, bringing in the right peices to fit with current core, JV taking a step forward, and to go further for chemistry, and coaching to all combine and make magic is a lot to ask for. Almost as many things need to go right as with the tanking scenario for us to hit the proverbial jackpot. The difference is with tanking we'll be well under the cap, and in striking position to acquire talent via free agency and trades should we acquire some solid talent through the draft.

    Second bold is what concerns me about tinkering with the current roster. Being respectable again is something we all want, but ultimately are you going to be happy with being respectable and not being able to contend? As Matt's signature quote for TL suggests "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them".

  15. Like Fully liked this post
  16. #295
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
    Memphis were lucky to get Gay at No. 9 (if I'm right). Normally a player like him would go between 4 and 7 which is why THE KIND OF DRAFT that it is, is very important. I'm advocating tanking only because of the KIND OF DRAFT the 2014 draft is going to be.

    Regarding signing 4 yr 45-50mil (thanks for the correction) kinda players, the main problem Raps. have faced is that they've almost never put themselves in a position to sign such players. About what you've said (they go to winning teams), it does not apply to all players. When they did sign such a player(Turkoglu), he came from the finalist Magic team.
    Turk is a bad example in my opinion. He is the exact type of free agent you want to avoid. In my opinion he lacked character, was on the decline, had little desire to be his best, put himself before the team, and was looking for the most money he could get. In my opinion he embodied the worst traits of free agency to a tee. Hopefully a really good gm would recognize this and avoid the mistake.

  17. #296
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    828
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Turk is a bad example in my opinion. He is the exact type of free agent you want to avoid. In my opinion he lacked character, was on the decline, had little desire to be his best, put himself before the team, and was looking for the most money he could get. In my opinion he embodied the worst traits of free agency to a tee. Hopefully a really good gm would recognize this and avoid the mistake.
    In hind sight, all of the above is very true. In that off-season, he was one of the most 'sought after' FA.

    That aside though, I don't think EVERY good FA will refuse to sign with the Raps. Some yes but not all.
    Attitude Is A Choice.

  18. #297
    Raptors Republic Superstar planetmars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,381
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Soft Euro wrote: View Post
    This doesn't do it for me. Teams like Charlotte are purposely tanking and are rewarded for it. Other teams, like Atlanta for years, are trying to be competitive and they are consistently punished for it because there is a 'tax' on being (slightly above) mediocre. I'd like it if there was more incentive not to land in the bottom and less (or no) punishment or even a reward for being competitive.
    I think a better system (but harder to actually implement I think) would be a free agency system for rookies. Perhaps create an upper cap as to how much you can spend on a rookie (say $10M with bonuses). This way the player can pick the team that makes the most sense for them similar to how they get recruited in school.

    Attractive cities like LA, NY and Miami may get first dibs which seems counter productive but if those teams are at the salary cap then they wouldn't get a shot at a pick.

    Teams like Charlotte/Cleveland could attract rookies by offering more expensive contracts. Could be risky if the rookie doesn't pan out, but then that's why teams need good scouts.

    It would separate the teams that are run well versus the teams that are not. It would eliminate tanking and introduce savvy front offices to try and lure top ranked rookies.

  19. #298
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,264
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
    In hind sight, all of the above is very true. In that off-season, he was one of the most 'sought after' FA.

    That aside though, I don't think EVERY good FA will refuse to sign with the Raps. Some yes but not all.
    Assuming the Raptors are offering the most and they have been tanking for years/are a known loser then every good FA with an opportunity to play elsewhere more than likely will.
    "Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."
    Tim Leiweke

    Basketball has clear winners every night --
    except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.

  20. #299
    Raptors Republic Veteran white men can't jump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    7,781
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Soft Euro wrote: View Post
    This doesn't do it for me. Teams like Charlotte are purposely tanking and are rewarded for it. Other teams, like Atlanta for years, are trying to be competitive and they are consistently punished for it because there is a 'tax' on being (slightly above) mediocre. I'd like it if there was more incentive not to land in the bottom and less (or no) punishment or even a reward for being competitive.
    I don't think Charlotte IS purposely tanking. Look at their roster and explain to me how they could even be a top 25 team? They have such an incredibly deficient roster (that couldn't possibly be that much better through adding minor free agent pieces last summer). So do Orlando, Phoenix and New Orleans. Those 3 teams all just declined/lost a star recently. Should those 3 be punished for Charlotte repeatedly having bad seasons despite getting high picks?

    Heck, Charlotte has made the playoffs more recently than Toronto (in 2009). And then they didn't blow it up and tank....they finished 34-48 (same record as Toronto this season) in 2010-11, the year they got both Walker and Biyombo from the draft. Last season, where they had their awful record and ended up with the 2nd pick (MKG), was the first year after cleaning house. SO considering all that, the fact that they've had 2 awful years in a row is not surprising at all. They did what any team should do when a playoff window closes: clean house and stockpile assets.

    Again, there's just no way Charlotte would do well. Maybe they "tank" a bit, but that also gets taken care of in the groupings. Teams at the bottom couldn't fight for the top pick. There would be no incentive for them to aim for 15 wins instead of 20-25.

    The thing that bugs me about some kind of more totally equalized system is that then you put no incentive on actually building a contender. Every team will become the Milwaukee Bucks. YOu'll get lots of mediocre teams refusing to spend to win, and just constantly hoping they'll luck into a legit franchise player in the draft.

    And I certainly don't think a good team should be rewarded with a high pick. "you win so here's your next franchise player"....No. That makes no sense whatsoever. The reward for winning IS winning....that's why they give you a trophy and some rings. The challenge has to be sustaining that level of success knowing it will be difficult to add major talent. Doesn't make it impossible. Teams can still trade into the top of the draft. THat's how the Lakers got Magic. Or more recently, the Cavs got Irving due to a trade (they were bad, but their own pick was used on Thompson).
    Last edited by white men can't jump; Tue May 28th, 2013 at 02:06 PM.

  21. #300
    Raptors Republic Veteran ceez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,739
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Turk is the perfect example of why BC was never successful. Turk was all the things my dude matt said, but he was also a terrible fit. Turk needed the ball in his hands to be effective, as a point forward type player, yet that wasn't how he was used. Don't get me wrong, Hedo was a shitbag, but its on Bryan. You can't just take players, especially vets, and try and turn them into players they're not.
    @jerboat

Page 15 of 47 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15 16 17 25 ... 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
  •