Article: Ujiri Resting Heavily On Maintaining The Status Quo

[mcHAPPY]

Tbh Knicks might have thrown in the first just to dump contracts. Raptors took Richardson, Novak and Camby and only Novak even played and his deal went one year longer than AB

It really doesn't matter, in my opinion.

When you're in charge, you take the criticism when things go wrong and you reap the praise when things go right.

[raptors999]

It really doesn't matter, in my opinion.

When you're in charge, you take the criticism when things go wrong and you reap the praise when things go right.

Think MU has done a good job but the real question is where does he think this team is going. It just seems like he just paddling around picking stuff up hoping somehow things work out

[mcHAPPY]

Think MU has done a good job but the real question is where does he think this team is going. It just seems like he just paddling around picking stuff up hoping somehow things work out

I think that is a fair question.

I think the fate of DeRozan and Casey in Toronto will help shed some sort of light on his view.

[raptors999]

I think that is a fair question.

I think the fate of DeRozan and Casey in Toronto will help shed some sort of light on his view.

Which means one more season to evaluate. Just saying last season the motto was continuity then the Raptors played a completely different way from last season. This season its defense but God knows if that will make its way to the floor

[Puffer]

...If a team is constantly trading or dumping players that fans hate, Anderson, Salmons, Bargs, Gay, GV, Lou...maybe the problem isn't the players

Or maybe the fans have eyes and can see what happens during a game and can read the stats (advanced or otherwise) and recognize the obvious and maybe management waits for the right opportunity to do what needs to be done (and that the fans have already identified as needing to be done). The fans can start wanting to dump a player in November, but a good GM will not do something to please the fans. They will do something when it makes sense to do it and try to maximize the value of any transaction. THAT is what I see MU doing.

I hope you are not implying that the Raps should have kept Anderson, Salmons, Bargs, Gay, GV and Lou, as opposed to making the moves they did.

[JWash]

Fans didn't hate Lou. Maybe some people on forums but the fanbase as a whole loved the guy.

[raptors999]

Or maybe the fans have eyes and can see what happens during a game and can read the stats (advanced or otherwise) and recognize the obvious and maybe management waits for the right opportunity to do what needs to be done (and that the fans have already identified as needing to be done). The fans can start wanting to dump a player in November, but a good GM will not do something to please the fans. They will do something when it makes sense to do it and try to maximize the value of any transaction. THAT is what I see MU doing.

I hope you are not implying that the Raps should have kept Anderson, Salmons, Bargs, Gay, GV and Lou, as opposed to making the moves they did.

not saying they should have kept any of them but players having a statistical blip while in Toronto then recovering when they leave has to be something

[Lark Benson]

So, in my opinion, clearly the basis of his argument is flat out wrong. I believe he is suffering from any or all of the following: short shortsightedness, a lack of patience, and/or a desire to put something out there that is different regardless if factually correct. 2 years is not a long time and A LOT has been done in these 2 short years.

I actually agree that a lot of what Chisholm states about how Ujiri has operated is incorrect or a half-truth. But that doesn't mean his conclusion is incorrect. I can tell you the sky is blue because of aliens, but that doesn't mean the sky isn't blue.

The conclusion of the article is that at some point patience turns into inertia, and that Ujiri is a potentially DD extension and some more fringe tweaking away from the dreaded treadmill, at least in the short term. You really want to argue with that?

You can criticize the basis for the argument all you want, but I think you're ignoring the forest for the trees. Chisholm makes a pretty concerted effort to state that there is nothing wrong with Ujiri's approach, that the team is in great shape, and that a rash move would be just as harmful as not swinging for the fences when appropriate. All the guy is doing is warning that another year or two of waiting to see how things pan out could backfire. That maybe there won't be a marquee free agent that signs with the team, that maybe we won't see enough internal development to elevate the core, that maybe a couple of years from now the team will still be employing a DD/JV/Lowry/Carroll core and stuck at 50 wins. He's simply wondering if and when Ujiri will make the kind of bold move that elevates a team to contender.

And it's a legitimate question.

[mcHAPPY]

I actually agree that a lot of what Chisholm states about how Ujiri has operated is incorrect or a half-truth. But that doesn't mean his conclusion is incorrect. I can tell you the sky is blue because of aliens, but that doesn't mean the sky isn't blue.

The conclusion of the article is that at some point patience turns into inertia, and that Ujiri is a potentially DD extension and some more fringe tweaking away from the dreaded treadmill, at least in the short term. You really want to argue with that?

You can criticize the basis for the argument all you want, but I think you're ignoring the forest for the trees. Chisholm makes a pretty concerted effort to state that there is nothing wrong with Ujiri's approach, that the team is in great shape, and that a rash move would be just as harmful as not swinging for the fences when appropriate. All the guy is doing is warning that another year or two of waiting to see how things pan out could backfire. That maybe there won't be a marquee free agent that signs with the team, that maybe we won't see enough internal development to elevate the core, that maybe a couple of years from now the team will still be employing a DD/JV/Lowry/Carroll core and stuck at 50 wins. He's simply wondering if and when Ujiri will make the kind of bold move that elevates a team to contender.

And it's a legitimate question.

I'm not arguing the first bold. That is truth. A DD extenstion will definitely alter my view of the future of this team and of Ujiri - same with Casey back beyond this season. Those moves stink of treadmill.

My problem, or argument, is the way in which he shapes the story. He is loose with details. He is basically spinning a story that neglects or minimizes much of what has been done while ignoring the shambles he started to work with from a roster construction perspective and a payroll/contract perspective. To say this team has been maintaining status quo is something I would expect from a US national writer who doesn't spend much time following the team. There has been a lot of change and turnover on this team. You acknowledge all of this though.


The other problem is the second bold. I don't think he is waiting around waiting to see how things turn out. Tim is neglecting Ujiri can't snap his fingers and make a bold move that elevates the team to contender status happen. These types of moves are hardly one sided. Not sure if Tim noticed but Ujiri arranged the books to go after a max free agent this summer with no luck in Aldridge. He then arranged the books to go after one in 2016. He will also likely have the books arranged to pursue another in 2017. He is loading up on draft picks, prospects, and value contracts so that if free agency doesn't land the big one, he has other means in the trade arena.

The only thing Ujiri can do is be prepared for an opportunity to arise. Thus far one has not. Luckily Ujiri remains ready.

[BS10]

I actually agree that a lot of what Chisholm states about how Ujiri has operated is incorrect or a half-truth. But that doesn't mean his conclusion is incorrect. I can tell you the sky is blue because of aliens, but that doesn't mean the sky isn't blue.

The conclusion of the article is that at some point patience turns into inertia, and that Ujiri is a potentially DD extension and some more fringe tweaking away from the dreaded treadmill, at least in the short term. You really want to argue with that?

You can criticize the basis for the argument all you want, but I think you're ignoring the forest for the trees. Chisholm makes a pretty concerted effort to state that there is nothing wrong with Ujiri's approach, that the team is in great shape, and that a rash move would be just as harmful as not swinging for the fences when appropriate. All the guy is doing is warning that another year or two of waiting to see how things pan out could backfire. That maybe there won't be a marquee free agent that signs with the team, that maybe we won't see enough internal development to elevate the core, that maybe a couple of years from now the team will still be employing a DD/JV/Lowry/Carroll core and stuck at 50 wins. He's simply wondering if and when Ujiri will make the kind of bold move that elevates a team to contender.

And it's a legitimate question.

How does Masai's plan back fire exactly? I'm interested in knowing.

I'm not sure what you're complaining about exactly either?

Masai has made bold moves with the Raptors. He traded away our #1 pick in Bargnani for a potential #5-10 pick and traded away Rudy Gay (our star player at the time) for depth at the bench. If you don't consider these trades as bold moves, than IDK what you mean by bold trades/moves. I think the author and you are clearly mad at not seeing a complete overhaul or gutting of the roster, that particularly includes DD, Ross, JV, and Lowry-- or at least half of them.

"At some point patience turns into inertia". Sounds like inertia is more from the perspective of an angry fan that doesn't agree with the moves made by the GM.

Again, becoming a contender is a process. Last year, GSW made marginal tweaks to their roster-- nothing really notable to their core-- and one more change to their head coach. And guess what happened? 2015 NBA champs. The year before that they were a first round exit. Will Masai's tweaks to the roster yield him a similar result? I'm not sure but there's that possibility that this team could make a large leap with the right changes. Or at least I believe so.

It's clear the article is way too premature in questioning Masai's tenure as trending towards inertia when so much has happened in a short amount of time in the Raptors organization. Perhaps if nothing happens within this year and the following, then a questioning of Masai's tenure could be a legitimate possibility however the timing doesn't favour the author. He should have waited another few years before he dropped the article.

Also, a DD extension doesn't necessarily mean a treadmill move. A DD extension could mean a saving of an asset than potentially losing it for nothing. If you haven't considered it, DD could also be traded further down the road to the right buyer than selling for lower than his value. A smart GM, to me, sees that.

[McRealistic]

I disagree.

I think it is going to be a great thread to look at in the 2nd week of July 2016.

Sadly I think 2016 playoffs is likely to be a 3-peat barring significant trade prior to trade deadline.

With this mentality, I guess you are agreeing more with Tim C than you may think :

"There’s always one eye on the future with Ujiri, which is a great quality, but sometimes the future can look so tantalizing you forget that you still have a present to take care of."

"Under Ujiri, there is always a sense of ‘yeah, but wait to see what he does next summer!'"

"Then, this summer he spent that cap space on role players to augment his controversial core, and so everyone is now looking towards that lottery pick next year and the options made possible by the skyrocketing salary cap"

[mcHAPPY]

How does Masai's plan back fire exactly? I'm interested in knowing.

I'm not sure what you're complaining about exactly either?

Masai has made bold moves with the Raptors. He traded away our #1 pick in Bargnani for a potential #5-10 pick and traded away Rudy Gay (our star player at the time) for depth at the bench. If you don't consider these trades as bold moves, than IDK what you mean by bold trades/moves. I think the author and you are clearly mad at not seeing a complete overhaul or gutting of the roster, that particular includes DD, Ross, JV, and Lowry.

"At some point patience turns into inertia". Sounds like inertia is more from the perspective of an angry fan that doesn't agree with the moves made by the GM.

Again, becoming a contender is a process. Last year, GSW made marginal tweaks to their roster-- nothing really notable to their core-- and one more change to their head coach. And guess what happened? 2015 NBA champs. The year before that they were a first round exit. Will Masai's tweaks to the roster yield him a similar result? I'm not sure but there's that possibility that this team could make a large leap with the right changes. Or at least I believe so.

It's clear the article is way too premature in questioning Masai's tenure as trending towards inertia when so much has happened in a short amount of time in the Raptors organization. Perhaps if nothing happens with this year and the following, then a questioning of Masai's tenure could be a legitimate consideration however the timing doesn't favour the author. He should have waited another few years before he dropped the article.

Also, a DD extension doesn't necessarily mean a treadmill move. A DD extension could mean a saving of an asset than potentially losing it for nothing. If you haven't considered it, DD could also be traded further down the road to the right buyer than selling for lower than his value. A smart GM, to me, sees that.

You can get what DD brings to the table for less than a max or near max contract.

You can immediately return value with what his contract would have been.

Letting him walk for nothing would only be a concern, or an argument, if the Raptors were over the salary cap.

[golden]

I actually agree that a lot of what Chisholm states about how Ujiri has operated is incorrect or a half-truth. But that doesn't mean his conclusion is incorrect. I can tell you the sky is blue because of aliens, but that doesn't mean the sky isn't blue.

The conclusion of the article is that at some point patience turns into inertia, and that Ujiri is a potentially DD extension and some more fringe tweaking away from the dreaded treadmill, at least in the short term. You really want to argue with that?

You can criticize the basis for the argument all you want, but I think you're ignoring the forest for the trees. Chisholm makes a pretty concerted effort to state that there is nothing wrong with Ujiri's approach, that the team is in great shape, and that a rash move would be just as harmful as not swinging for the fences when appropriate. All the guy is doing is warning that another year or two of waiting to see how things pan out could backfire. That maybe there won't be a marquee free agent that signs with the team, that maybe we won't see enough internal development to elevate the core, that maybe a couple of years from now the team will still be employing a DD/JV/Lowry/Carroll core and stuck at 50 wins. He's simply wondering if and when Ujiri will make the kind of bold move that elevates a team to contender.

And it's a legitimate question.

It's also kind of a silly unanswerable question, since pretty much every successful franchise building strategy has an element of dumb luck. The single most important "bold move" to made by any franchise in recent memory to elevate them to legit championship contender status was Lebron going home. Was there a timeline for the Cavs to give an answer to that question, if you asked them 2 years ago?

Phoenix seems to be in a somewhat similar situation as the Raps, i.e, tried to tank and unexpectedly found chemistry, and now trying to cash in some young assets to get a true superstar by trade or FA - while still trying to make the playoffs. Celtics are also in a similar point, trying to trade all those 1st round picks to move up to draft Winslow. The question is: how many of those bold moves are really out there? And when those moves are there, what are the Raps chances at winning those deals? The interesting (and possibly sad) thing is that we actually did have a shot at Harden (at the cost of JV), but that was on Colangelo's watch. In hindsight, nobody really had a shot at Wiggins (assuming he even becomes a legit MVP candidate) with that 2014 draft now looking overrated and not worth tanking for.

To be sound, well researched journalism, the legitimate question back to Tim Chisholm would be: what actual bold moves have been available to Ujiri since he took over the Raps, that MU passed on, and what would he (Tim C.) have done differently? That would have added more credibility to the article.

[BS10]

You can get what DD brings to the table for less than a max or near max contract.

You can immediately return value with what his contract would have been.

Letting him walk for nothing would only be a concern, or an argument, if the Raptors were over the salary cap.

Isn't that what DD is worth anyway? Whats the point of replacing him with a guy with the same abilities for the same money? Why not just re-sign him?

[S.R.]

You could have written the similar type of article about Daryl Morey after his first 2 seasons. Morey was hired in 2006 (and became GM in 2007), and didn't land James Harden until 2012. But Morey wasn't sitting on his hands: he was accumulating assets, picks and developing young players in the D-League and waiting in the weeds for a potential all-NBA player to become available. (side note: I guess the Raps getting that D-League franchise was also status quo?)

And that's the important point here: all-NBA talent isn't available every season, so you can't just "make a bold move" for the sake of making a bold move. That's classic Colangelo-esque. You need your assets + external opportunity to line up at the same time. If both those things don't ...... then you just wait and don't just blow your wad for no good reason. MU is just beginning to stock the shelves with assets and waiting for that opportunity. Oh, and in the meantime, we're winning.

So, if you use Daryl Morey as the benchmark, then MU has at least 2 more years before we can judge how successful he is/has been.

Morey faced VERY similar criticisms before landing Harden. He had a nice team that could win quite a few games in the West but at the same time was nowhere near contender status. People thought he was wasting his time accumulating all those nice-but-not-great pieces.

For me the article is nothing more than a good example of how you can put whatever spin you want on anything. Spin spin spin.

He probably was trying to write a devil's advocate piece, as has been pointed out.