Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • Boozer can crash the boards tho. We are getting eaten up on the glass by teams

    Comment


    • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
      I agree. I don't think Boozer is a big enough upgrade worthy of making us a luxury tax team. Is Boozer worth loosing all financial flexibility for, including loosing the option of signing free agents in the offsease using the various exceptions? I don't think so.
      Your very confident of us being able to get a 15 n 10 guy in free agency. We have to build a winning resume before we can start think about free agents. That's why I'm fine with him, Rudy and Lowry till 2015
      @Chr1st1anL

      Comment


      • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
        Your very confident of us being able to get a 15 n 10 guy in free agency. We have to build a winning resume before we can start think about free agents. That's why I'm fine with him, Rudy and Lowry till 2015
        Who said he wanted to sign a 15 and 10 guy??? We still have depth issues at PG, to say the least, and who knows what other holes if more moves are made. Boozer is not actually the kind of player we need the most. JV figures to be able to score from all the same spots I think by his 3rd year. We will need a true stretch 4 who can shoot and rebound, so the floor is well spaced.

        Getting Boozer also just moves us more toward Memphis' style by default as we'll have two big men who can't stretch out to the perimeter very well starting, in JV and Boozer....I frankly don't think it's a good idea. If we want to keep fast and athletic, Boozer ismaybe the worst possible choice...even worse than keeping Bargs in that sense. I would be more ok with trading for Millsap and trying to convince him to re-sign, just because of how bad a fit I see Boozer as for what TO seems to be trying to do on the court.
        *I'd just like to add that style, I'm sure, is the other big reason Chicago wants this trade to happen. Boozer is almost useless as a PF when the game speeds up as it tends to these days. He can't guard stretch 4s, he certainly can't keep up with a small-ball lineup, where his bruising kind of post up game becomes harder to utilize because of pace...Thus he's less than ideal on both ends of the court.
        Last edited by white men can't jump; Thu Feb 14, 2013, 01:15 PM.

        Comment


        • I'd just like to point out that the fans of one of the best teams in the league, in the Mecca of Basketball, was booing their team last night during a close game.

          If there's anyone out there who can find a Knicks message board complaining about the boos, they win a prize!

          Comment


          • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
            Who said he wanted to sign a 15 and 10 guy??? We still have depth issues at PG, to say the least, and who knows what other holes if more moves are made. Boozer is not actually the kind of player we need the most. JV figures to be able to score from all the same spots I think by his 3rd year. We will need a true stretch 4 who can shoot and rebound, so the floor is well spaced.

            Getting Boozer also just moves us more toward Memphis' style by default as we'll have two big men who can't stretch out to the perimeter very well starting, in JV and Boozer....I frankly don't think it's a good idea. If we want to keep fast and athletic, Boozer ismaybe the worst possible choice...even worse than keeping Bargs in that sense. I would be more ok with trading for Millsap and trying to convince him to re-sign, just because of how bad a fit I see Boozer as for what TO seems to be trying to do on the court.
            Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

            With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

            But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.

            Comment


            • Nilanka wrote: View Post
              Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

              With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

              But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.
              A big part of the reason Memphis played that way: they couldn't play at a faster pace with those 2 bigs. It wasn't that Gasol and Randolph were better scoring options, it's that they were 2 of the 3 top scoring options, and playing a faster game would take them out of it...much like it would take Boozer out of it.

              Comment


              • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                Personally, I don't think it's necessary to find a 3pt shooting PF at all. Gay's situation in Memphis (with Gasol and Randolph) had more to do with the offensive hierarchy...as in, the big men being option #1 and #2.

                With Boozer in town, Gay would still be option #1.

                But the biggest benefit of this proposed deal is getting rid of Bargnani's carcass. If this is the only offer Colangelo gets, I think it's a no-brainer.
                Finally someone else on this forum that's agrees a stretch 4 is not needed. How many teams in the playoffs a starting stretch 4? They are not needed for good spacing. I'll say it again. We have enough perimeter scoring! We need interior scoring. We don't have a time to wait for JV to become that force. We have a small window to convince Lowry & Gay to say.
                @Chr1st1anL

                Comment


                • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                  A big part of the reason Memphis played that way: they couldn't play at a faster pace with those 2 bigs. It wasn't that Gasol and Randolph were better scoring options, it's that they were 2 of the 3 top scoring options, and playing a faster game would take them out of it...much like it would take Boozer out of it.
                  I'd much rather build a team capable of scoring in a half-court set (i.e. built for the playoffs), than a run & gun fastbreak team.

                  Comment


                  • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                    I'm just glad Casey has the short leash on Bargnani now.
                    +1. Casey really seems to have the rotations down pat lately

                    Comment


                    • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                      I'm just glad Casey has the short leash on Bargnani now.
                      A short leash on him eh? Well be prepared to see him next season.

                      Comment


                      • Nilanka wrote: View Post
                        I'd much rather build a team capable of scoring in a half-court set (i.e. built for the playoffs), than a run & gun fastbreak team.
                        I'd much rather a team that's capable of both with ALL their best players on the court...not one that needs to sub out somebody to go fast or go halfcourt...Boozer is this kind of player....

                        *Miami used LeBron in the post when the game slowed down. It doesn't have to be your big. We've seen Gay is good at posting up and passing out of it. With a stretch 4 you can still do that and have quality spacing.

                        Comment


                        • T.Dot wrote: View Post
                          A short leash on him eh? Well be prepared to see him next season.
                          If that's the case, be prepared for another shitty season.

                          Comment


                          • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
                            Finally someone else on this forum that's agrees a stretch 4 is not needed. How many teams in the playoffs a starting stretch 4? They are not needed for good spacing. I'll say it again. We have enough perimeter scoring! We need interior scoring. We don't have a time to wait for JV to become that force. We have a small window to convince Lowry & Gay to say.
                            Well, the 2 teams that were in the finals played their most common lineups with LeBron at the 4 and KD at the 4....Dirk won a ring as a stretch 4. LA actually played at its best usually with Gasol at the 5 and Odom at the 4 back in the day....

                            Comment


                            • I would like a team that does both, but I would like that low-post player capable of being able to run the floor as well. Milsap is that type of guy, Boozer is not, while Jonas could grow into that role.
                              Twitter: @ReubenJRD • NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.

                              Comment


                              • Some compelling arguments for Ilyasova becoming a Raptor in exchange for Bargnani!


                                http://raptorsrapture.com/2013/02/14...tm_source=t.co
                                Twitter:@coachclement

                                The best way to predict your future is to create it - Peter Drucker

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X