OK. Markieff Morris a Raptor? Really??

[Axel]

I don't think most people were suggesting trading PP for Morris. I think the idea was to get MM for some package of guys like JJ, Bebe and Ross which would make the team better.

Which doesn't make much sense to me either.

MM and PP are very similar - so adding MM doesn't address our rebounding problem and moving JJ/Ross means we take a hit on defence and perimeter shooting.

So we replicate a strength but create new weaknesses.

[mcHAPPY]

A lot of trade proposals in this thread have started with PP.

Glad to see people coming to senses! Lol

[planetmars]

Casey apparently said that "Patterson is better off the bench" - so the train of thought was that Scola will start (this comment was made after the Scola signing).

I always thought Scola was acquired to replace Amir, while Biyombo was here to replace Psycho-T. So starting Scola makes sense to me. Would rather have Morris over Scola but can't trade him until mid December.

[thead]

And this is the key.

What would PP look like if he had 13.4 FGA per game and nearly 32mins?

To add to that, while MM is locked up longer, PP is still $2m less per season for this year and next.

Then we always come back to the intangibles. It is known PP fits the team, culture, and locker room.

And finally, if Masai is going to put together a trade package, in the next 5-6 of months, who is likely to have more trade value? Due to Morris' actions on and off the court and especially the unknown off the court with felony assault charges, I would say PP (just my opinion, I really don't know).

I really think this is all that needs to be said.

[JWash]

Which doesn't make much sense to me either.

MM and PP are very similar - so adding MM doesn't address our rebounding problem and moving JJ/Ross means we take a hit on defence and perimeter shooting.

So we replicate a strength but create new weaknesses.

MM and PP aren't very similar at all except that they play the same position, and could both be called "stretch 4s".

PP is primarily a spot up shooter, Morris can do much more operating with the ball in his hands (better post game, ability to beat opposing 4s off the dribble, etc). MM prefers to operate in the 10-16 FT range, and hits 3s on occassion. Patterson takes 53.9% of his shots from three and doesn't really shoot from mid-range at all.

They don't operate from the same areas of the floor and don't have the same game. So calling them similar players is pretty incorrect.

As for the rebounding issue, no MM doesn't address that. However replacing Ross with Carroll in the starting lineup and hopefully increased playing time for JV should move us from below average to about league average on the glass.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

I don't think most people were suggesting trading PP for Morris. I think the idea was to get MM for some package of guys like JJ, Bebe and Ross which would make the team better.

What's the point of a trade like that?

It creates redundancy at the PF spot, with PP, MM and Scola. With Valanciunas hopefully getting more minutes and Biyombo backing him up, there likely won't be a ton of minutes available for any of those PF at C, even playing small ball. With Carroll likely getting big minutes at SF (and now none at PF, given the added depth), those PF likely won't get many minutes at SF, even if JJ is traded.

It also creates a big hole at the SG spot, especially when it comes to bench scoring. I understand that Joseph and possibly even Wright could get some minutes at SG, but I'm hoping that Lowry's minutes are reduced significantly this season, to avoid injury and to keep him fresh for the playoffs.

Given the cost to acquire him and the off-court issues, I really don't get all the hype for Morris.

[JWash]

What's the point of a trade like that?

It creates redundancy at the PF spot, with PP, MM and Scola. With Valanciunas hopefully getting more minutes and Biyombo backing him up, there likely won't be a ton of minutes available for any of those PF at C, even playing small ball. With Carroll likely getting big minutes at SF (and now none at PF, given the added depth), those PF likely won't get many minutes at SF, even if JJ is traded.

It also creates a big hole at the SG spot, especially when it comes to bench scoring. I understand that Joseph and possibly even Wright could get some minutes at SG, but I'm hoping that Lowry's minutes are reduced significantly this season, to avoid injury and to keep him fresh for the playoffs.

Given the cost to acquire him and the off-court issues, I really don't get all the hype for Morris.

Point is it increases the talent level of the team.

Scola is going to get minutes at backup center anyway (kind of like Amir did). I really don't expect Biyombo to play a lot under Casey.

There's no redundancy between MM and PPat. They're as different as DeMar and Klay Thompson.

[Letter N]

I feel like a lot of MM's low rebounding numbers was due to the system PHX runs. It's lots of perimeter shooting and fast paced breakouts, and featured big rebounding guards (Bledsoe, Dragic, Green, PJ Tucker). MM still did lead PHX in rebounding.

[Axel]

MM and PP aren't very similar at all except that they play the same position, and could both be called "stretch 4s".

PP is primarily a spot up shooter, Morris can do much more operating with the ball in his hands (better post game, ability to beat opposing 4s off the dribble, etc). MM prefers to operate in the 10-16 FT range, and hits 3s on occassion. Patterson takes 53.9% of his shots from three and doesn't really shoot from mid-range at all.

They don't operate from the same areas of the floor and don't have the same game. So calling them similar players is pretty incorrect.

As for the rebounding issue, no MM doesn't address that. However replacing Ross with Carroll in the starting lineup and hopefully increased playing time for JV should move us from below average to about league average on the glass.

I think you're looking too closely to get my point. Both are ok scorers with some range and neither are particularly good on defence or on the glass.

So yeah, in a micro sense they produce in different ways but in a larger team sense, they produce the same thing and are weak in the same areas. So not incorrect to call them similar when the end production amounts to the same.

Now if you want to talk about micro fit, PP works better with the current group. We have ball dominant guards in KL and DD and an emerging centre who needs touches. A ball dominating PF doesn't fit that nearly as well as an off-ball deep threat PF.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

Point is it increases the talent level of the team.

Scola is going to get minutes at backup center anyway (kind of like Amir did). I really don't expect Biyombo to play a lot under Casey.

There's no redundancy between MM and PPat. They're as different as DeMar and Klay Thompson.

I disagree with your assessment of the backup C spot, but we'll have to see how DC uses all his depth.

As for the redundancy I mentioned, I was simply referring to the fact that the trade would leave the Raptors with 3 PFs. I don't think any of them would get many minutes at C or SF, which means that at least one of them would become almost a 3rd string player.

I don't think Morris moves the needle enough, or is a good enough asset, to give up assets and force a quality PF into a tertiary role (while also creating a big hole at SG).

I totally support the idea of adding talent and acquiring assets, but I personally don't see a great fit for the Raptors, in terms of need or cost (salary and outgoing assets).

[JWash]

I think you're looking too closely to get my point. Both are ok scorers with some range and neither are particularly good on defence or on the glass.

So yeah, in a micro sense they produce in different ways but in a larger team sense, they produce the same thing and are weak in the same areas. So not incorrect to call them similar when the end production amounts to the same.

Now if you want to talk about micro fit, PP works better with the current group. We have ball dominant guards in KL and DD and an emerging centre who needs touches. A ball dominating PF doesn't fit that nearly as well as an off-ball deep threat PF.

I'm understanding just fine, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

They don't produce in different ways in a micro sense, they just don't produce the same way at all. Two totally different players. I know it's easy to lump stretch 4s into the same category, but not all stretch 4s are equal. PPat is a spot up shooter while Markieff is a guy who can play off ball but also still create his own offense when necessary.

Whether PPat works better with the current group is debatable. My opinion is just that if we can move Ross+Bebe or JJ or something like that for Markieff I don't see how that isn't a good move. You're adding talent without really giving up much and it's a low risk situation because he has a bargain contract for his production in the new cap environment (<10% of the cap moving forwards)

[mcHAPPY]

What's the point of a trade like that?

It creates redundancy at the PF spot, with PP, MM and Scola. With Valanciunas hopefully getting more minutes and Biyombo backing him up, there likely won't be a ton of minutes available for any of those PF at C, even playing small ball. With Carroll likely getting big minutes at SF (and now none at PF, given the added depth), those PF likely won't get many minutes at SF, even if JJ is traded.

It also creates a big hole at the SG spot, especially when it comes to bench scoring. I understand that Joseph and possibly even Wright could get some minutes at SG, but I'm hoping that Lowry's minutes are reduced significantly this season, to avoid injury and to keep him fresh for the playoffs.

Given the cost to acquire him and the off-court issues, I really don't get all the hype for Morris.

I agree.

Lack of patience being displayed.

This season is just another to becoming a contender. Morris isn't going to make them a contender.

[Letter N]

I'm understanding just fine, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

They don't produce in different ways in a micro sense, they just don't produce the same way at all. Two totally different players. I know it's easy to lump stretch 4s into the same category, but not all stretch 4s are equal. PPat is a spot up shooter while Markieff is a guy who can play off ball but also still create his own offense when necessary.

Whether PPat works better with the current group is debatable. My opinion is just that if we can move Ross+Bebe or JJ or something like that for Markieff I don't see how that isn't a good move. You're adding talent without really giving up much and it's a low risk situation because he has a bargain contract for his production in the new cap environment (<10% of the cap moving forwards)

Exactly.

A lot of people are attached to Ross because he was drafted by the Raps and he has flashes but so did Ed Davis. Ross may at best end up being a great 3 and D player in the league, but really that's not that high of a ceiling to not risk trading for a guy that could end up being your starting PF.

[Axel]

I'm understanding just fine, just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

They don't produce in different ways in a micro sense, they just don't produce the same way at all. Two totally different players. I know it's easy to lump stretch 4s into the same category, but not all stretch 4s are equal. PPat is a spot up shooter while Markieff is a guy who can play off ball but also still create his own offense when necessary.

Whether PPat works better with the current group is debatable. My opinion is just that if we can move Ross+Bebe or JJ or something like that for Markieff I don't see how that isn't a good move. You're adding talent without really giving up much and it's a low risk situation because he has a bargain contract for his production in the new cap environment (<10% of the cap moving forwards)

Well when you say that what I'm saying is incorrect, then proceed to explain points that are not particularly relevant to my point, then yeah, misunderstanding seems applicable.

Macro Level
- scorers - neither great scorers, both capable scorers at comparable levels
- rebounding - neither great at comparable levels
- defence - neither great at comparable levels

That is it. No further analysis is necessary since my point was team strengths and weaknesses that would be impacted.

All of the stylistic things you pointed out are really a micro level analysis (how they score, where they prefer to shot from, etc) and not particularly important to the point I was making. Micro analysis is more to do with fit. In a micro sense they are different styles of players, but that wasn't the point I was making.

[JimiCliff]

Well when you say that what I'm saying is incorrect, then proceed to explain points that are not particularly relevant to my point, then yeah, misunderstanding seems applicable.

Macro Level
- scorers - neither great scorers, both capable scorers at comparable levels
- rebounding - neither great at comparable levels
- defence - neither great at comparable levels

That is it. No further analysis is necessary since my point was team strengths and weaknesses that would be impacted.

All of the stylistic things you pointed out are really a micro level analysis (how they score, where they prefer to shot from, etc) and not particularly important to the point I was making. Micro analysis is more to do with fit. In a micro sense they are different styles of players, but that wasn't the point I was making.

At some point, DanH offered good evidence that Kieff is a very strong defender.