Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How many losses before it's BLOWN UP!

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

  • #16
    Bendit wrote: View Post
    MU's contract is for 5 years.
    oops, my bad. I still think he'll start moving guys if the right trades appear during the season tho.

    Comment


    • #17
      p00ka wrote: View Post
      UM can't blow it up until he has willing trade partners. He may decide to after "x" number of games/losses, but we'll likely not know until he can do something that makes sense, which may be only when other teams decide they need to make a move to improve with what he's offering.
      This. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.

      NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.

      Comment


      • #18
        Xixak wrote: View Post
        This. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.

        NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
        All we have to do is change the OP to mean Ujiri's intention to blow it up, and the question is still a valid one.

        Comment


        • #19
          Xixak wrote: View Post
          This. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.

          NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
          True enough. Historically, though, by late December teams are usually ready to make a move if they see a need. That's when a lot of the summer's moves become fixable, due to the trade restrictions on new signings expiring. And at that stage there is still time to impact the season as a whole, whereas a trade deadline deal can be too little too late in terms of impact on record as well as time to gel before the playoffs. So I expect that we'll know either way by January, since the record will be judged in mid to late December.
          twitter.com/dhackett1565

          Comment


          • #20
            Xixak wrote: View Post
            This. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.

            NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
            I expect that MU has been working the phones to determine trade value and lineup potential trades for all his players, since he was hired, and will continue to do so up until the trade deadline. We also aren't talking about trading scrubs for lottery picks; MU has young, talented, slightly overpaid players to trade, who likely will draw plenty of interest on the trade market (ie: Gay, DeRozan, Lowry), as well as a variety of depth/role players (most are expiring) who are often in high demand at the trade deadline each year (ie: Hansborough, Novak). Given half a season to both evaluate his own players and lineup possible trades, I really don't think he'd be too hard pressed to find trade partners that give back acceptable returns (especially if tanking is the goal, where you aren't necessarily looking to get equal talent back in trade).

            Nilanka wrote: View Post
            All we have to do is change the OP to mean Ujiri's intention to blow it up, and the question is still a valid one.
            Exactly. Everything we discuss here is "intended" or "implied" or "hoped for"... at least until RR gets a seat in MU's war room!

            Comment


            • #21
              10 games under .500 at the trade deadline. The Eastern conference has gotten much stronger, and deeper in the past couple years or so. I think the "Eastern Conference is weak" thing is no longer present.

              If we were to blow it up, I'd be happy with keeping Gay, Ross, Amir, Acy, Valanciunas on the roster.
              Twitter: @ReubenJRD • NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.

              Comment


              • #22
                slaw wrote: View Post
                Need to see the schedule first. I believe it comes out this week. If they open with a tough stretch (almost always the case) that will affect the timeline I would think.

                If they can be .500 by new year there will be no blow up.

                Comment


                • #23
                  JawsGT wrote: View Post
                  I don't know if there is a target number of losses which would send us into tank mode. I also don't think MU will send this team into a full on tank situation. His contract is for 3 years, that doesn't give him alot of time to elevate this club, but he has the flexibility going forward to make enough moves to send this team in a better direction and get extended himself. I think MU probably already has and will continue throughout the season to see what he can get for some of our key players. If the right trade appears, I'll think he'll pull the trigger, regardless of our record. I'm convinced MU does not want to ride BC's lineup into the playoffs and wants to put his mark on this club. I don't think playoffs this season is a priority, but if the team seriously over-achieves, MU may just look to add an impact type player somehow and see where that takes us.
                  He already has by dumping AB.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Jclaw wrote: View Post
                      I agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.
                      I think placement in the standings will be a key indicator. They could have an improved record (ie: # of wins, winning %), but still find themselves more in the #9-12 seed, on the outside of the playoff bubble. Or, they could have a losing record but be in the thick of the playoff race (possibly even holding the #7-8 seed). I actually think it depends more on the schedule over the first half of the season and what the team's playoff prospects are looking like, in addition to individual player development (record alone becomes essentially irrelevant).

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Jclaw wrote: View Post
                        I agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.
                        That's actually 6 and 10 games over .500.

                        Games over/under .500 is how many losses/wins you would need to be at .500.

                        3 games over .500 at 40 games played actually isnt possible. 4 over .500 would be 22-18.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                          I think placement in the standings will be a key indicator. They could have an improved record (ie: # of wins, winning %), but still find themselves more in the #9-12 seed, on the outside of the playoff bubble. Or, they could have a losing record but be in the thick of the playoff race (possibly even holding the #7-8 seed). I actually think it depends more on the schedule over the first half of the season and what the team's playoff prospects are looking like, in addition to individual player development (record alone becomes essentially irrelevant).
                          This. What matters is whether it looks like we're going to make the playoffs or not.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Xixak wrote: View Post
                            That's actually 6 and 10 games over .500.

                            Games over/under .500 is how many losses/wins you would need to be at .500.

                            3 games over .500 at 40 games played actually isnt possible. 4 over .500 would be 22-18.
                            No, games over .500 is the same concept as games back in a playoff race. The unit, "game", is the same. And by your definition you can never be 0.5 games back or over .500, which teams often are. A game is a win AND a loss.
                            twitter.com/dhackett1565

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The CORRECT question is:

                              At what point in the season does MJ find the max value for Rudy Gay?

                              The answer? Prior to the deadline in 2014. I think the Raptors are looking at a 1st rounder in picks 5-16. It's that hard to tell right now.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                DanH wrote: View Post
                                No, games over .500 is the same concept as games back in a playoff race. The unit, "game", is the same. And by your definition you can never be 0.5 games back or over .500, which teams often are. A game is a win AND a loss.
                                You can be a half game ahead/behind in the standings, when two teams have played a different number of games (with the difference in # of games played being an odd number). However, when you're looking at a particular team's record as a %, or relative to .500, every game counts as a full game.

                                Standings
                                Team #1: 41-40
                                Team #2: 39-41
                                Team #3: 37-40

                                Team #1 - in first place, 1 game over 500
                                Team #2 - 1.5 games out of first place, 2 games under 500
                                Team #3 - 2 games out of first place, 0.5 games out of second place, 3 games under 500

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X