Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 54 of 54

Thread: Masai has already failed

  1. #41
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote jamesk wrote: View Post
    In the lottery era, there have been 150 teams to reach 55 wins or more -- a level around which a team can be said to be contending. How many of those 150 were bad at any point in the preceding four years? How many endured a season of, say, fewer than 30 wins? How many walked the path that tanking teams aspire to walk? Just 34 of 150, or 23 percent, according to the tallies of economist David Berri on the Freakonomics blog. And only two teams -- the Heat last year and Chris Paul's Hornets -- have gone from winning fewer than 20 games to winning more than 55 in four years or less (the Thunder never won fewer than 20). In other words, bad teams have almost no shot of becoming great with any speed, and one of the two that did did so through the power of cap space, not the draft. That's a blow to tanking teams everywhere.

    Does more time help? Not much. Win 34 games or fewer in any season, according to Arturo Galletti at The Wages of Wins, and over the next decade your chances of winning more than 55 are abysmal, at just 12 percent. Think about that. A 34-win team is not bad, winning 41 percent of its games. This season's closest equivalent would be the Timberwolves. But still, a team that good has only about a 1-in-10 chance of winning 55 or more at any point in the next decade. Heaven forbid you are a truly bad team. Even given a full decade to get it done, teams have done the full metamorphosis, from the cocoon of a sub-20 win season to the contending butterfly of 55-plus wins, only six percent of the time, and again, one of those was the outlier Heat.
    Meanwhile, in the four seasons after getting a top-three pick, teams are not living the dream. Dignam shows missing the playoffs for four straight years even after getting that plum draft pick is common, and writes: "After four years -- the amount of time on rookie scale contracts -- about 31 percent of the teams with top three picks hadn’t made the playoffs even once. Almost 26 percent of these teams’ best showing was only the first round. And a further 22 percent of teams topped out in the second round."
    I love how all the criteria is selected, 'sub 20 win team', 34 win teams, 4 years etc. Who selected that as the standard and why?


    Lets look at 55+ win teams last year since this is WoW's standard:

    Miami Heat - 2002/03 25 wins - #5 overall pick
    OKC - 2006/07 - 31 wins #2 pick, 2007/08 - 20 wins #3 pick
    Denver Nuggets - 2002/03 - 17 wins - #3 pick
    LA Clippers - 2008/09 - 19 wins - #1 pick
    SA Spurs - 1996/97 - 20 wins - #1 pick
    Memphis - 2006 through 2009 - 22, 22, 24 wins - #4, #5, #2

    The year before?

    Miami (above)
    OKC (above)
    Spurs (above)
    Chicago - 2007/08 - 32 wins - #1 pick

    Year before that ?

    Boston Celtics - 2006/07 - 24 wins #6 pick (traded for Ray Allen)
    Chicago Bulls (above)
    Miami Heat (above)
    OKC (above)
    SA Spurs (above)
    Los Angeles Lakers - 2004/05 34 wins #10 pick
    Dallas Mavericks - 1997/98 - 24, 20 wins - #6 pick (traded for Dirk Nowitzki)

    So explain to me again WHY the criteria was selected as it was?



    bad teams have almost no shot of becoming great with any speed
    strangely enough so does any team not already great. Thats a blow to any team thats not already great!!

    The ones that do are almost always 1) major market that buy their stars 2) tanked before, and obtained their star or asset in the draft, and are in the process of becoming great.
    Last edited by Craiger; Sat Nov 9th, 2013 at 12:34 PM.

  2. #42
    Raptors Republic Starter Pele's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    mud
    Posts
    268
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craiger wrote: View Post
    I love how all the criteria is selected, 'sub 20 win team', 34 win teams, 4 years etc. Who selected that as the standard and why?


    Lets look at 55+ win teams last year since this is WoW's standard:

    Miami Heat - 2002/03 25 wins - #5 overall pick
    OKC - 2006/07 - 31 wins #2 pick, 2007/08 - 20 wins #3 pick
    Denver Nuggets - 2002/03 - 17 wins - #3 pick
    LA Clippers - 2008/09 - 19 wins - #1 pick
    SA Spurs - 1996/97 - 20 wins - #1 pick
    Memphis - 2006 through 2009 - 22, 22, 24 wins - #4, #5, #2

    The year before?

    Miami (above)
    OKC (above)
    Spurs (above)
    Chicago - 2007/08 - 32 wins - #1 pick

    Year before that ?

    Boston Celtics - 2006/07 - 24 wins #6 pick (traded for Ray Allen)
    Chicago Bulls (above)
    Miami Heat (above)
    OKC (above)
    SA Spurs (above)
    Los Angeles Lakers - 2004/05 34 wins #10 pick
    Dallas Mavericks - 1997/98 - 24, 20 wins - #6 pick (traded for Dirk Nowitzki)

    So explain to me again WHY the criteria was selected as it was?





    strangely enough so does any team not already great. Thats a blow to any team thats not already great!!

    The ones that do are almost always 1) major market that buy their stars 2) tanked before, and obtained their star or asset in the draft, and are in the process of becoming great.

    Raptors got the 2006 #1 pick on the back of a 2005 27 win season. Had there been a Wiggins, Parker or Randle available then, to go with Bosh, Derozan, Ed Davis, Hibbert, Ross... oh well, if my aunt had gonads, she'd be my uncle.

  3. #43
    Raptors Republic All-Star JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,035
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote jamesk wrote: View Post
    In the lottery era, there have been 150 teams to reach 55 wins or more -- a level around which a team can be said to be contending. How many of those 150 were bad at any point in the preceding four years? How many endured a season of, say, fewer than 30 wins? How many walked the path that tanking teams aspire to walk? Just 34 of 150, or 23 percent, according to the tallies of economist David Berri on the Freakonomics blog. And only two teams -- the Heat last year and Chris Paul's Hornets -- have gone from winning fewer than 20 games to winning more than 55 in four years or less (the Thunder never won fewer than 20). In other words, bad teams have almost no shot of becoming great with any speed, and one of the two that did did so through the power of cap space, not the draft. That's a blow to tanking teams everywhere.

    Does more time help? Not much. Win 34 games or fewer in any season, according to Arturo Galletti at The Wages of Wins, and over the next decade your chances of winning more than 55 are abysmal, at just 12 percent. Think about that. A 34-win team is not bad, winning 41 percent of its games. This season's closest equivalent would be the Timberwolves. But still, a team that good has only about a 1-in-10 chance of winning 55 or more at any point in the next decade. Heaven forbid you are a truly bad team. Even given a full decade to get it done, teams have done the full metamorphosis, from the cocoon of a sub-20 win season to the contending butterfly of 55-plus wins, only six percent of the time, and again, one of those was the outlier Heat.
    Meanwhile, in the four seasons after getting a top-three pick, teams are not living the dream. Dignam shows missing the playoffs for four straight years even after getting that plum draft pick is common, and writes: "After four years -- the amount of time on rookie scale contracts -- about 31 percent of the teams with top three picks hadnít made the playoffs even once. Almost 26 percent of these teamsí best showing was only the first round. And a further 22 percent of teams topped out in the second round."
    I call BS on almost every stat in here.

    Quote jamesk wrote: View Post
    In the lottery era, there have been 150 teams to reach 55 wins or more
    For instance, there aren't 150 NBA teams. In this specific instance mentioned, there are maybe 10 NBA team being considered. You aren't just allowed to pretend that the every year, each franchise has a 'new' team, completely discrete and separate from every other year. It's a sly, misleading way to get around the problem of the sample size being way too small to generate any meaningful data.
    Last edited by JimiCliff; Sun Nov 10th, 2013 at 09:37 AM.

  4. Like magoon liked this post
  5. #44
    Raptors Republic Superstar Superjudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    3,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    ugh.

    such bs, all of this.

    The Toronto Raptors, will NEVER contend unless they hit gold in the draft. Period.

    American Basketball players do NOT want to be in Canada.

    Its not a new concept, and it isn't going to change.

    People can analyze this shit till the cows come home but the fact remains, Toronto is a unique situation, not like most of the other franchises in the US due to its location. Its absolutely shameful how many people actually dismiss this as a complaint, or an excuse, when the facts are there, and its right in front of them. denial maybe? Who knows.

    All I know is this, there isn't aplayer in the NBA right now who is considered an all star who wants to go North. none.

  6. #45
    Raptors Republic Superstar Puffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,784
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Craig wrote: View Post
    ...All I know is this, there isn't a player in the NBA right now who is considered an all star who wants to go North. none.
    But there could be 2 or 3 in a couple of years.

  7. #46
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,140
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote jamesk wrote: View Post
    In the lottery era, there have been 150 teams to reach 55 wins or more -- a level around which a team can be said to be contending. How many of those 150 were bad at any point in the preceding four years? How many endured a season of, say, fewer than 30 wins? How many walked the path that tanking teams aspire to walk? Just 34 of 150, or 23 percent, according to the tallies of economist David Berri on the Freakonomics blog. And only two teams -- the Heat last year and Chris Paul's Hornets -- have gone from winning fewer than 20 games to winning more than 55 in four years or less (the Thunder never won fewer than 20). In other words, bad teams have almost no shot of becoming great with any speed, and one of the two that did did so through the power of cap space, not the draft. That's a blow to tanking teams everywhere.

    Does more time help? Not much. Win 34 games or fewer in any season, according to Arturo Galletti at The Wages of Wins, and over the next decade your chances of winning more than 55 are abysmal, at just 12 percent. Think about that. A 34-win team is not bad, winning 41 percent of its games. This season's closest equivalent would be the Timberwolves. But still, a team that good has only about a 1-in-10 chance of winning 55 or more at any point in the next decade. Heaven forbid you are a truly bad team. Even given a full decade to get it done, teams have done the full metamorphosis, from the cocoon of a sub-20 win season to the contending butterfly of 55-plus wins, only six percent of the time, and again, one of those was the outlier Heat.
    Meanwhile, in the four seasons after getting a top-three pick, teams are not living the dream. Dignam shows missing the playoffs for four straight years even after getting that plum draft pick is common, and writes: "After four years -- the amount of time on rookie scale contracts -- about 31 percent of the teams with top three picks hadnít made the playoffs even once. Almost 26 percent of these teamsí best showing was only the first round. And a further 22 percent of teams topped out in the second round."
    It amazes me how many mid-late first round guys come out of relative obscurity to become nba studs.....and how many high first rounders fail. Certainly there can be franchise changers but they are few and far between. You look at a guy like Leonard on the Spurs and say I would love to have him on our team. Finding these guys that will pan out is the key. Hopefully UM is the guy who can find these guys. I think you need some baseline level of talent before you can take a bigger step up in the standings via the draft. Blowing up your whole team leads to pieces that often don't complement each other and further changes. I would like to see 41 wins this year then find that hidden gem in the draft .

  8. #47
    Raptors Republic All-Star themasao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,023
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Step aside Drake. We have a new Global Ambassador:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_(American_singer)

  9. #48
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote psrs1 wrote: View Post
    It amazes me how many mid-late first round guys come out of relative obscurity to become nba studs.....and how many high first rounders fail. Certainly there can be franchise changers but they are few and far between. You look at a guy like Leonard on the Spurs and say I would love to have him on our team. Finding these guys that will pan out is the key. Hopefully UM is the guy who can find these guys. I think you need some baseline level of talent before you can take a bigger step up in the standings via the draft. Blowing up your whole team leads to pieces that often don't complement each other and further changes. I would like to see 41 wins this year then find that hidden gem in the draft .
    Then the Raptors really have nothing to lose. They already have a roster of pieces that do not complement each other. This team is still built on the Bargnani BluePrint with a cast of mismatching talent. No matter what they do they are going to need to make some serious changes if the championship lip service served up by Leiweke is ever to happen. Might as well get some assets out of those serious changes versus letting guys walk (specifically Gay and Lowry).
    "You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"
    Bruno Caboclo

  10. Like Nilanka liked this post
  11. #49
    Raptors Republic All-Star brothersteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Hamilton
    Posts
    1,078
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Karl Marx. wrote: View Post
    I do not want to start normative argument on should we rebuild or not. We are rebuilding and that is reality. And since that is our direction, it is obvious that Masai has made a huge mistake by not trading Gay to Detroit when he had a chance. He felt that he would get more, he passed on Detroit offer and now, given how badly Gay is playing, it is obvious that we will never get a better offer.

    Gay is not good enough to help us move forward, but is good enough to help us will enough games to avoid having a good draft pick in the following years. Not to mention the fact that his minutes as well as touches he is getting are preventing young prospects such as Ross to develop their game.

    Not to mention the fact that Masai decided to keep Casey who we all know is a bad coach. With that in mind, it is clear that so far Masai have failed.

    Raptors are fortunate to finally have a GM that doesn't panic and trade away assets for scrap - thus finally breaking the cycle of futility this team has been stuck in. Detroit will give a lot more for Gay in Jan/Feb than they would have in Aug/Sept and Ujiri will likely have more & better options then if he still wants to do a deal.

    It's good to actually have a GM on board who has been in this situation before and came out the big winner
    The best Raptors discussion board is at Raptors Republic.

    Stephen Brotherston, Pro Bball Report

  12. Like Puffer liked this post
  13. #50
    Raptors Republic Superstar Rapstor4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,063
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Is anyone besides myself more excited about what warlord Ujiri is going to do come June than what is going on during the season? D: lol MAN! bring on the new Era!

  14. #51
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    56
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote brothersteve wrote: View Post
    Raptors are fortunate to finally have a GM that doesn't panic and trade away assets for scrap - thus finally breaking the cycle of futility this team has been stuck in. Detroit will give a lot more for Gay in Jan/Feb than they would have in Aug/Sept and Ujiri will likely have more & better options then if he still wants to do a deal.

    It's good to actually have a GM on board who has been in this situation before and came out the big winner
    Good luck trying to trade Gay on 35% FG. Keep in mind that last season he shot 42% for the season and only Detroit was interested. I am sure Masai would take that deal in a heartbeat now.

    And when we talk about Masai and his success in Denver, other than trading Anthony for solid players that were made to look better than they are by coach Karl, what exactly did he do?

  15. #52
    Raptors Republic All-Star Craiger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    1,119
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote brothersteve wrote: View Post
    Raptors are fortunate to finally have a GM that doesn't panic and trade away assets for scrap - thus finally breaking the cycle of futility this team has been stuck in. Detroit will give a lot more for Gay in Jan/Feb than they would have in Aug/Sept and Ujiri will likely have more & better options then if he still wants to do a deal.

    It's good to actually have a GM on board who has been in this situation before and came out the big winner
    Wow... just wow.

    Over the past four lottery-bound seasons, the Raptors have watched helplessly as key injuries have impacted the roster and the team didnít have sufficient depth to keep their season from imploding.
    link

    Injuries. Injuries have decimated this team over the past 4 seasons
    Link

    While they canít go back, with a few changes next season, the Raptors plan on following a healthy Bargnani into the playoffs.
    Link

    If Colangelo has proven anything over the past seven years, it is that he can make deals
    the outright firing of Colangelo would make little sense
    Link

    A trade like the one: Lowry for a draft pick Ė they just donít come along all that often.
    Gay moves the Raps up another significant step towards challenging the big boys
    Link

    If you want a good comparison, Paul George is becoming what Rudy Gay is now
    Link

    but there were a lot of senior NBA analysts who thought the Raptors could have been a top four team in the East last season if they had Rudy Gay from day one. Thatís a little overly optimistic Ė but not crazy either
    Link

    and here I was thinking Colangelo was good at making deals, and it was injuries and a lack of continuity that was this teams problems....

    .... amazing how much changes when the guy in charge is no longer around!!!

  16. Like Nilanka liked this post
  17. #53
    Raptors Republic Veteran Nilanka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,654
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Brothersteve, you're now reaching Doug Smith levels of delusion/denial....
    "I don't lie. I willfully participate in a campaign of misinformation." - Fox Mulder

  18. #54
    Raptors Republic Icon mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    20,661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Nilanka wrote: View Post
    Brothersteve, you're now reaching Doug Smith levels of delusion/denial....
    Amen

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

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
  •