Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 103

Thread: Tim Leiweke: "we may ultimately have to, excuse my English, suck to be good"

  1. #81
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    21,616
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Marz wrote: View Post
    76ers in 2011:

    1) Pretty high (Holiday, Iggy, Thaddeus Young)
    2) Some are quite young, others are veterans but not old yet (Iggy)
    3) Decent
    4) We will have the 16th pick in the 2011 draft
    5) We are hoping Jrue Holiday and Evan Turner improve
    6) Yes, we have a strong bench
    7) Elton Brand, Francisco Elson, and Andres Nocioni will be gone soon, and Iggy is really the only big contract
    8) Depends on how close we are to a championship.

    Pacers in 2011:

    1) Pretty high (George, Granger, Hibbert, Hansbrough)
    2) Mostly young, with the exception of Granger
    3) A decent amount, but we're about to throw a shit ton of money at Roy Hibbert next year
    4) We're about to trade Kawhi Leanord for George Hill
    5) We're hoping George and Hibbert develop
    6) We'd like to think so
    7) Only Granger's
    8) Depends on how close we are to a championship

    I know I'm writing with a bias, but it's hard with 20/20 hindsight. Still, the two situations look eerily similar given your formula. Are the Pacers succeeding because George/Hibbert's development out-paced Holiday/Turner? Or was it because Granger was injured and didn't shoot them out of games? Or was it that George Hill brought the Spurs mentality with him?

    Honestly I have no idea. But I don't think there is a way to assess if we're at a ceiling or progressing towards the future. The Raptors have young pieces in Val and Jonas, Lowry has room to improve, as does Fields and to some extent DeRozan. I'd say we have some potential.

    Cap killing contracts don't have to be big or even numerous.

    When projecting the talent of your key pieces, what is their skill set? Are they complete players? Do they lack a specific area? I look at Paul George as a complete player and that was evident after year 2.

    The Pacers were going to throw a shit load of money at Hibbert but they managed to lock up a borderline All-Star at PF beforehand.

    George and Hibbert were much more sure bets than Holiday and Turner. Turner has been a bad #2 pick since almost day 1. Holiday was solid.

    The Pacers also had success with Granger. In fact, they had a higher winning percentage with him in '11-12. They lost in 6 games to Miami in '11-12 in the 2nd round vs. 7 games in the Conference Finals this year.


    I think the difference in Indy and Philly was Indy had more proven talent and younger talent with more upside.


    Without considering trades, when looking at the current roster (any current roster) I think one can project. You list the Raptors players but outside of JV, all those players are in the league for 3+ seasons and are 24+ by the start of next season. Looking for players like DeRozan, Lowry, and Gay to somehow become more than what they already are is one of the key ingredients for determining this group has a ceiling. Lowry and Gay are going in to their 8th seasons while DD will be 5th.
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  2. #82
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Etobicoke
    Posts
    991
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Cap killing contracts don't have to be big or even numerous.

    When projecting the talent of your key pieces, what is their skill set? Are they complete players? Do they lack a specific area? I look at Paul George as a complete player and that was evident after year 2.

    The Pacers were going to throw a shit load of money at Hibbert but they managed to lock up a borderline All-Star at PF beforehand.

    George and Hibbert were much more sure bets than Holiday and Turner. Turner has been a bad #2 pick since almost day 1. Holiday was solid.

    The Pacers also had success with Granger. In fact, they had a higher winning percentage with him in '11-12. They lost in 6 games to Miami in '11-12 in the 2nd round vs. 7 games in the Conference Finals this year.


    I think the difference in Indy and Philly was Indy had more proven talent and younger talent with more upside.


    Without considering trades, when looking at the current roster (any current roster) I think one can project. You list the Raptors players but outside of JV, all those players are in the league for 3+ seasons and are 24+ by the start of next season. Looking for players like DeRozan, Lowry, and Gay to somehow become more than what they already are is one of the key ingredients for determining this group has a ceiling. Lowry and Gay are going in to their 8th seasons while DD will be 5th.
    West was on a miniscule 2 year deal (I believe it was $15M over 2 years), hardly what I'd call locked up.

    But again, hindsight is 20/20. Turner had only been in the league a year, and Hibbert hadn't shown that he'd "figured it out" yet on offense or defense (though the potential was there). I personally feel that Indiana did have better young talent, but I'm suspicious that that's because of what I know now. I remember being envious of both teams in 2011 because they were progressing while our Raptors were (are?) still on a treadmill.

  3. #83
    Raptors Republic Superstar iblastoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,120
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I think the point you’re missing is that for a team like the Raptors, who haven’t made the playoffs in several seasons, making the playoffs would be significant progression. Nobody is suggesting simply making the playoffs is the end goal, but rather an initial goal, to be used as a stepping stone for greater, sustainable success.

    Making the playoffs as the 8th seed doesn’t automatically mean that the team is unable to become anything better. Only poorly managed teams become the dreaded “treadmill” team that is too bad to improve and too good to rebuild. I hate when people equate a non-playoff team finally making the playoffs to perennial “treadmill” teams like Atlanta and Milwaukee, simply because they’ve fought and improved to make the playoffs in the first place. I don’t think TL or MU are the type of guys to rest of their laurels of simply making the playoffs... they’d only use that as motivation to continue to improve.
    you just basically just flip flopped on your own point which is fine, except you did it nearly instantaneously. you said making the playoffs (even as an 8th seed this season) is a GOOD thing and counts as 'significant progression', but then you say with this current team the max ceiling is ONLY the 1st round unless we trade/blow things up by having everyone on the team as a potential trade asset minus JV and DD