Everything Terrence Ross

[Just Is]

It's not a knock on DD in anyway. Its just much harder to get a read on others due to his high usage and the style of play Casey seems to employ. Defensively, positions are much more interchangable than they are offensively (you could have and do see certain SFs who can guard up to 4 positions but you wouldn't be having them play 4 positions on offense, being an example of what I mean). Ross really is a natural SG playing SF (although he's not doing poorly at it) so it'd be easier to get a read on the player with some extended run playing his natural position with someone else manning the SF and with the offense geared to give him a few plays.

I haven't checked the statistics but you can't honestly compare it to the Spurs. The Spurs have an incredible system and, from the getgo, its literally not about the individual stats. The same can't be said here (or anywhere else pretty much).

[OldSkoolCool]

I don't know guys. I see the wing positions pretty interchangeable. They both play sg/sf/whatever you wanna call it on a game to game basis. Ross usually takes the better wing player on defence and gets guarded by the weaker wing defender on the offence.

Missing dd wouldn't really change much other than ross being guarded by the other teams best wing defender. I don't see what you guys see in ross playing his 'natural position.' What does that mean?

I agree.

The only thing that changes is Ross' usage within the system. We just want to see what it would be like. He is such an unknown because he shows flashes of brilliance, yet floats at the same time.

He could turn out to be great. He could turn out to be awful. At the current rate we will never know. (this is the same for JV)
- time to give them an opportunity to be more than 'potential' or the 'future'

[chico]

I agree.

The only thing that changes is Ross' usage within the system. We just want to see what it would be like. He is such an unknown because he shows flashes of brilliance, yet floats at the same time.

He could turn out to be great. He could turn out to be awful. At the current rate we will never know. (this is the same for JV)
- time to give them an opportunity to be more than 'potential' or the 'future'

Yet in each of his first 3 years, Ross's FGAs average is virtually identical to Kawhi Leonard's first 3 years. Is Pop holding him back for development too? Or is he making more out of his opportunity than Ross?

Is that passive enough? Sorry, but the answer for Ross's development, and JV's, lies with them, not using DD as a scapegoat getting in their way.

[WJF]

Yet in each of his first 3 years, Ross's FGAs average is virtually identical to Kawhi Leonard's first 3 years. Is Pop holding him back for development too? Or is he making more out of his opportunity than Ross?

Is that passive enough? Sorry, but the answer for Ross's development, and JV's, lies with them, not using DD as a scapegoat getting in their way.

No one is using DeMar as a scape goat, you need to see past that argument. Look at OKC for example. Reggie Jackson has had flashes of great play and potential just like Ross, but for many the question was can he do it as a starter for an extended period of time....pretty sure Jackson has earned a big payday from someone due to his recent play.

Is Ross capable of seizing the same opportunity if it were to arise? That is the question, not that DeMar is holding him back, rather circumstance of team composition. If we we had a different starting caliber SF and did not have 6'6" back up point guard and Lou Williams, maybe we would see Ross be the shooting guard on the second unit and be a focal point.....that could give us a similar look to what some are wanting to see.

[planetmars]

No one is using DeMar as a scape goat, you need to see past that argument. Look at OKC for example. Reggie Jackson has had flashes of great play and potential just like Ross, but for many the question was can he do it as a starter for an extended period of time....pretty sure Jackson has earned a big payday from someone due to his recent play.

Is Ross capable of seizing the same opportunity if it were to arise? That is the question, not that DeMar is holding him back, rather circumstance of team composition. If we we had a different starting caliber SF and did not have 6'6" back up point guard and Lou Williams, maybe we would see Ross be the shooting guard on the second unit and be a focal point.....that could give us a similar look to what some are wanting to see.

I don't think Terrence will really ever be given that chance to show what he would be like as a first/second option on the team because of the team's composition as you mentioned.

Which tells me that Terrence is probably the most likely trade asset that Masai will use (other than an expiring contract) to get better quicker. I don't have a problem with that as I do think he makes the best trade asset, but I hope he doesn't turn into a T-Mac type of player if he does get moved - and there is always that possibility as when he has it going he can play like a top 15 player in the league.

[chico]

No one is using DeMar as a scape goat, you need to see past that argument. Look at OKC for example. Reggie Jackson has had flashes of great play and potential just like Ross, but for many the question was can he do it as a starter for an extended period of time....pretty sure Jackson has earned a big payday from someone due to his recent play.

Is Ross capable of seizing the same opportunity if it were to arise? That is the question, not that DeMar is holding him back, rather circumstance of team composition. If we we had a different starting caliber SF and did not have 6'6" back up point guard and Lou Williams, maybe we would see Ross be the shooting guard on the second unit and be a focal point.....that could give us a similar look to what some are wanting to see.

But you see, that's not what was suggested. The English language has many nuances, and one of them is that implications can be embedded within a statement, without the specific wording being present technically. Those implications can be heavily influenced by the source of statements/suggestions. Considering the intense back and forth history about DD, and the blowup over that subject the day before, it's not much of a stretch at all to see using "I'd like to see DeMar out of the way for 5 games, so we can see Ross have the chance to flourish", as implying that DeMar stands in the way of opportunity for Ross. Otherwise, what's the point of bringing DeMar into a discussion about Ross's development?

I know, the naive innocence card is being played, and it's "just wishful thinking" that something will happen that nobody in their right mind would think is remotely possible, without injury, which of course was a qualification. I have no idea what the point of such curiosity is, attached to a specific "solution", but funny thing, this comes from someone who has often spoken down to others as "I'm about TEAM, not about individual", yet this impossible proposal is all about some imagined good of one player, and wishing another player, who happens to be a TEAM leader, was mysteriously out of the way, to satisfy individual curiosity. Different pedestals to suit the chosen rhetoric of the day, eh, but I guess I'm stepping on hallowed ground by saying this, so my bad.

Tell me, if I wished JV would be out of the way, because I want to see Bebe get some burn, do you think I'd be shit on all over the place? I know I would, and rightly so. It's about TEAM, hey, except when it involves undermining a certain leader of that team, that's 8-2 btw.

I notice nobody has responded to my point that K Leonard had the same offensive involvement for his first 3 years, as Ross is having in his 3 years, yet it doesn't seem to have hampered his development. Point being, if what Pop did with Kawhi is okay, why shouldn't it be okay with Ross? Why does he need DeMar out of the way to make the most of his opportunity? He doesn't, and suggesting a solution that hurts the TEAM is telling, in my books, but I was taught to understand even the nuances of the language.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

But you see, that's not what was suggested. The English language has many nuances, and one of them is that implications can be embedded within a statement, without the specific wording being present technically. Those implications can be heavily influenced by the source of statements/suggestions. Considering the intense back and forth history about DD, and the blowup over that subject the day before, it's not much of a stretch at all to see using "I'd like to see DeMar out of the way for 5 games, so we can see Ross have the chance to flourish", as implying that DeMar stands in the way of opportunity for Ross. Otherwise, what's the point of bringing DeMar into a discussion about Ross's development?

I know, the naive innocence card is being played, and it's "just wishful thinking" that something will happen that nobody in their right mind would think is remotely possible, without injury, which of course was a qualification. I have no idea what the point of such curiosity is, attached to a specific "solution", but funny thing, this comes from someone who has often spoken down to others as "I'm about TEAM, not about individual", yet this impossible proposal is all about some imagined good of one player, and wishing another player, who happens to be a TEAM leader, was mysteriously out of the way, to satisfy individual curiosity. Different pedestals to suit the chosen rhetoric of the day, eh, but I guess I'm stepping on hallowed ground by saying this, so my bad.

Tell me, if I wished JV would be out of the way, because I want to see Bebe get some burn, do you think I'd be shit on all over the place? I know I would, and rightly so. It's about TEAM, hey, except when it involves undermining a certain leader of that team, that's 8-2 btw.

I notice nobody has responded to my point that K Leonard had the same offensive involvement for his first 3 years, as Ross is having in his 3 years, yet it doesn't seem to have hampered his development. Point being, if what Pop did with Kawhi is okay, why shouldn't it be okay with Ross? Why does he need DeMar out of the way to make the most of his opportunity? He doesn't, and suggesting a solution that hurts the TEAM is telling, in my books, but I was taught to understand even the nuances of the language.

I think you're blowing things way out of proportion.

Say there are 2 players at a particular position; one starter and one backup.

The starter might be my favorite player on the team, but I can still be intrigued about what the backup would be capable of if given the starting opportunity.

Does that mean I hate my favorite player? No.

Does that mean I want my favorite player injured or traded? No.


You're not curious what Ross could do with a more prominent role in an offense that used less ISO-play?

You're not curious about Bruno's progress?

You're not curious about any other number of 'what if' scenarios?


Although I can't speak for the posters you're responding to, I really believe it's all hypothetical musings; nothing more, nothing less.

[mcHAPPY]

I think you're blowing things way out of proportion.

Say there are 2 players at a particular position; one starter and one backup.

The starter might be my favorite player on the team, but I can still be intrigued about what the backup would be capable of if given the starting opportunity.

Does that mean I hate my favorite player? No.

Does that mean I want my favorite player injured or traded? No.


You're not curious what Ross could do with a more prominent role in an offense that used less ISO-play?

You're not curious about Bruno's progress?


Although I can't speak for the posters you're responding to, I really believe it's all hypothetical musings; nothing more, nothing less.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

The other part of the the post that set this off is the idea of raising trade value.

[chico]

I think you're blowing things way out of proportion.

Say there are 2 players at a particular position; one starter and one backup.

The starter might be my favorite player on the team, but I can still be intrigued about what the backup would be capable of if given the starting opportunity.

Does that mean I hate my favorite player? No.

Does that mean I want my favorite player injured or traded? No.


You're not curious what Ross could do with a more prominent role in an offense that used less ISO-play?

You're not curious about Bruno's progress?

You're not curious about any other number of 'what if' scenarios?


Although I can't speak for the posters you're responding to, I really believe it's all hypothetical musings; nothing more, nothing less.

I get your point about implied meaning, but there's just as equal a chance that pre-conceived perceptions are also at play, when inferring the implied meaning.

"pre-conceived perceptions are also at play, when inferring the implied meaning."

What you call preconceived perceptions, I see as consistent daily actual bent. Black and white reality, not perceptions.

That aside, of course I'm intrigued by all kinds of hypotheticals. Wishing a VERY key player out of the way, for however long, to satisfy that curiosity isn't part of any team-first interest of mine though. You see no difference between:
- I'm intrigued by how Ross would respond to an increased presence on offense
- I'd like to see DeMar mysteriously not be present for 5 games, so we could see Ross's performance without him being there

I see a huge difference, and think I've explained that pretty well. Yup, I'm curious about Bruno, and curious about Bebe too. But I don't dare extend that curiosity to wishing Jonas mysteriously was out of the way, so I could satisfy my curiosity about granting Bebe involvement that he hasn't earned. Team first, right? Wishing a very key player miss 5 games isn't exactly on -side with much stated "all about team" rhetoric, all to satisfy curiosity. That's the difference, beyond "intrigue", that I tried to address. The solution offered is very far from any kind of team first philosophy.

I get the responses though. Pretty predictable, and I know I couldn't possibly sway you, so another agree to disagree moment.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

"pre-conceived perceptions are also at play, when inferring the implied meaning."

What you call preconceived perceptions, I see as consistent daily actual bent. Black and white reality, not perceptions.

That aside, of course I'm intrigued by all kinds of hypotheticals. Wishing a VERY key player out of the way, for however long, to satisfy that curiosity isn't part of any team-first interest of mine though. You see no difference between:
- I'm intrigued by how Ross would respond to an increased presence on offense
- I'd like to see DeMar mysteriously not be present for 5 games, so we could see Ross's performance without him being there

I see a huge difference, and think I've explained that pretty well. Yup, I'm curious about Bruno, and curious about Bebe too. But I don't dare extend that curiosity to wishing Jonas mysteriously was out of the way, so I could satisfy my curiosity about granting Bebe involvement that he hasn't earned. Team first, right? Wishing a very key player miss 5 games isn't exactly on -side with much stated "all about team" rhetoric, all to satisfy curiosity. That's the difference, beyond "intrigue", that I tried to address. The solution offered is very far from any kind of team first philosophy.

I get the responses though. Pretty predictable, and I know I couldn't possibly sway you, so another agree to disagree moment.

I actually don't see any difference because, again, it's all talking hypothetically. It's not like he said "trade player x to let player y play". An expression was made about wanting to see what player x was capable of, knowing full well that that's unlikely, so long as player y is playing. It's not player y's fault. He doesn't want to get rid of player y. He simply knows that for a variety of reasons, his wish is unlikely to be granted, which is what makes it all hypothetical.

I love JV. He's probably my favorite Raptors at the moment and thinking beyond this season. But I agree with you - I'd love to see Bebe get some burn, to see what he can do. If you joked and said that had JV rolled his ankle instead of JJ, we might get to see Bebe-time, I wouldn't have taken that to meant that you seriously wished injury upon JV.

JV is ultimately preventing Bebe from getting court time. DD is preventing Ross from having a bigger role. Saying that I'd love to see what Bebe and Ross can do, when fully unleashed, doesn't mean that I'd bench, trade, injure or make JV/DD vanish into thin air. It just is what it is.

[MixxAOR]

god all of it is just different way of saying things. When a players goes out they say other have to "step up". They start doing things they don't usually do. That's how Paul George emerged. Granger went out and Paul George had to carry more weight. You either crumble under pressure or you emerge. Or you can say Granger was preventing George from succeeding. It's just how you spin it.

[Uncle_Si]

The bickering and bullshit on these forums is getting pretty old.

[chico]

The bickering and bullshit on these forums is getting pretty old.

Perhaps you could be specific about what's getting old, because the beauty of a public forum is that it doesn't belong to a single train of thought. Posters should be aware, and accept, that any opinion or proposal that they express, is open to rebuttal. It's part of the territory, whether the subject is critical or praise in nature. If all parties accept that, there's growth to be had on both sides of the equation. Would you want it any other way?

[Doc]

The bickering and bullshit on these forums is getting pretty old.

Can you show me a forum where there isn't bullshit and bickering? Like it not, those are message boards for you. While I agree it gets a little ridiculous at times, let me know if you find any "greener pastures" out there.

[Fully]

Can you show me a forum where there isn't bullshit and bickering? Like it not, those are message boards for you. While I agree it gets a little ridiculous at times, let me know if you find any "greener pastures" out there.

Do you really find these types of conversations enlightening or informative in anyway though?

We're not even discussing basketball anymore. It's arguing over implied meanings, preconceived notions, which posters care about the team more than others and what lines you are and aren't allowed to cross when bringing up hypothetical scenarios.

It seems like you have to wade through a lot of bullshit in a rising number of threads these days in order to find the actual Raptors content. But hey, you're the boss.