Charles Barkley's preview of the Raptors 2012-13 Season

[TheGloveinRapsUniform]

Is that not the way trending and projections work? If I'm way off base please tell me, but your projection for Kyle Lowry becoming a star player for this team -- is that not based on his previous track record as a defensive guy and his brief success as a starter in Houston? Are projections not based on what a person has done in the past? If not then what do you base it on -- gut feeling?

This also reminds me of a person trying to shake a bad habit, who says 'from now on, I'll stop doing this', and then an hour later they catch themselves doing it and they say 'starting.. now!', and then they do it again and they say 'seriously though, starting NOW!'.

At what point do you look at Colangelo's history and say 'from this point on, he has been doing really good work'.

Because the way I see it things were beginning to look good again with the hiring of Casey. That was his "starting...now!" moment for maybe the 11th time overall. They went after a defensive guy who had just come off building this awesome defense for the Mavs who had just won a championship. Even JV, despite my reservations was at least in line with the new team building philosophy. They came off a year where their defense was much better than average. They had managed to mold the team in such a way that the culture had changed, not necessarily by winning but by being able to preach defense and the players buying into it. They were building from the ground up, harvesting young talent and adding key veteran leadership in reserve roles in order to ensure young players were learning and growing.

Then, they went after Steve Nash which had nothing to do with any of the above. A complete 180 degree turn back to the old ways. A quick fix. Defense.. nah, let's get Steve Nash. Youth? Humbug! Get me Wayne Gretzky on the line! We'll sellout all our games! Then came the Landry Fields accident and subsequently getting Kyle Lowry. This is the "seriously though.. starting NOW!" moment for those in the forgiving mood.

And nothing has really transpired since then for me to think that he has turned over a new leaf. Basically all he's done since the latest pressing of the Reset button is sign Kyle Lowry, and that only happened because thankfully the Lakers jumped in and saved the day.

You do make a good point, but it actually does not apply to the Raptors, since, the Raptors is a team, a combination of players. Of course you can make assumptions on how a player *may* play for the next season because players tend to stick to habits, style of play but assuming a team will be the same as the previous season when it has almost an entirely different roster for the upcoming season, is inaccurate.

I too was actually deterred the first time i heard that the Raps were trying to get Nash. From a basketball perspective, it made little sense to me, but the NBA is not about just basketball anymore. Having Nash here will definitely boom the business side for the Raptors. It would be a feel-good story having a canadian MVP play for a canadian team and having a superstar of Nash's calibre may entice other superstars to explore canada as well.

I dont think BC actually made disastrous moves in the past, things just did not work out.

I think the current Raps roster could do some good things this season and possible do a bit of damage in the east. If you were expecting BC to have built a contender in a span of one off season then i think thats a bit to over the top.

[Gman]

Guys, bashing Barkley for not knowing about basketball is just plain dumb. The dude has more basketball IQ in his foreskin than all message board posters in the world combined.

I understand he's go an..um.. unique delivery. I understand he's not vigorously reviewing stats and working sources behind the scenes, but the guy knows his shit. He knows what it takes to win in the NBA. He can quickly assess a basketball related situation and determine a valid point of view based on his own unique perspective.

Chuck is spot on - we don't have the horses to compete in the deepest division in the NBA. His indifference towards the Raps is not something exclusive to him or to the Raps. It's what national media members do to perennial lottery teams. If you are dismissing his point of view because you don't think he's qualified to speak on the subject, then you are kidding yourself.

What I do agree with is that our spot of last in the division is not a foregone conclusion. However likely it may seem, injuries happen, relationships implode and guys exceed expectations all over the league. Like everyone else here, I'm hoping for a better result than a 5th straight lottery and the Atlantic division cellar. But at the same time, the only realistic response to Chuck here is that he's correct and we've got work to do to prove him wrong.

So you appreciated the level of insight he brought in to that segment did you? I particularly liked the way he jousted with 4 and 5. That was extremely helpful if any preschool children we're watching this instead of Sesame street. Charles is a clown. He's on TV because he's a clown. If he actually cared enough to really sit inside something like this and do the homework necessary to say something of value then of course he could enlighten all of us...but that wasn't the case was it. That segment represented itself as something it wasn't and it made him look like somebody who was more than a bit mentally deficient.

[NoBan]

So you appreciated the level of insight he brought in to that segment did you? I particularly liked the way he jousted with 4 and 5. That was extremely helpful if any preschool children we're watching this instead of Sesame street. Charles is a clown. He's on TV because he's a clown. If he actually cared enough to really sit inside something like this and do the homework necessary to say something of value then of course he could enlighten all of us...but that wasn't the case was it. That segment represented itself as something it wasn't and it made him look like somebody who was more than a bit mentally deficient.

You and I both knew what to expect from a Barkley season preview. My point is that he's a great basketball mind, the the fact that he dismisses our team is valid. He understand we are an also-ran and best, and likely a lottery team. That translates into indifference on his part. It's not something we should be getting defensive about and resorting to taking shots a his intelligence.

[Raptor_11]

You and I both knew what to expect from a Barkley season preview. My point is that he's a great basketball mind, the the fact that he dismisses our team is valid. He understand we are an also-ran and best, and likely a lottery team. That translates into indifference on his part. It's not something we should be getting defensive about and resorting to taking shots a his intelligence.

How do you know he's a great basketball mind? It can't be because he's on national TV every day. Because Skip Bayless is on national TV and we all know how much he knows about basketball. My point is that Barkley is a part of these basketball talks mostly for his appeal to fans and his ability to create controversies, IMO

[Matt52]

Is that not the way trending and projections work? If I'm way off base please tell me, but your projection for Kyle Lowry becoming a star player for this team -- is that not based on his previous track record as a defensive guy and his brief success as a starter in Houston? Are projections not based on what a person has done in the past? If not then what do you base it on -- gut feeling?

This also reminds me of a person trying to shake a bad habit, who says 'from now on, I'll stop doing this', and then an hour later they catch themselves doing it and they say 'starting.. now!', and then they do it again and they say 'seriously though, starting NOW!'.

At what point do you look at Colangelo's history and say 'from this point on, he has been doing really good work'.

Because the way I see it things were beginning to look good again with the hiring of Casey. That was his "starting...now!" moment for maybe the 11th time overall. They went after a defensive guy who had just come off building this awesome defense for the Mavs who had just won a championship. Even JV, despite my reservations was at least in line with the new team building philosophy. They came off a year where their defense was much better than average. They had managed to mold the team in such a way that the culture had changed, not necessarily by winning but by being able to preach defense and the players buying into it. They were building from the ground up, harvesting young talent and adding key veteran leadership in reserve roles in order to ensure young players were learning and growing.

Then, they went after Steve Nash which had nothing to do with any of the above. A complete 180 degree turn back to the old ways. A quick fix. Defense.. nah, let's get Steve Nash. Youth? Humbug! Get me Wayne Gretzky on the line! We'll sellout all our games! Then came the Landry Fields accident and subsequently getting Kyle Lowry. This is the "seriously though.. starting NOW!" moment for those in the forgiving mood.

And nothing has really transpired since then for me to think that he has turned over a new leaf. Basically all he's done since the latest pressing of the Reset button is sign Kyle Lowry, and that only happened because thankfully the Lakers jumped in and saved the day.

Solid points raised.

Every decision BC has made has not been bad. In fact he has made enough good decisions in the past to be a 2x EoY. I probably should have elaborated and stated that. The guy has made bad decisions and good decisions. He has had good years and bad years. Why is the assumption only bad is coming in the future.

How do we know Nash wasn't part of another plan that if Nash had come then move x, y, and z were to be made? All we know is Nash was pursued and it did not work out. He then moved on and we are watching what happens.

The assumptions made to me are akin to picking up a 1000 page novel and reading page 45, 140, 287, 315, 498, 509, 631, 799, 836, and 900 and thinking you know what the book was all about.

[minks77]

Y'know why he seems like he could care less about this squad? Because he doesn't give a shit about the raps or any other bubble team with no marquee player, no history of being anything other than crap to mediocre and when you're best player is a guy who had a decent 2 months last year and your biggest hope is a guy no one has seen play this side of the Atlantic ocean and you're in the deepest division in the league guess what? YOU DON'T FRIGGIN MATTER. AT ALL! If the raps make him eat his words he'll own up to it (Seen him do it in the past) and he'll give credit where it's due but c'mon you guys: GROW UP. it was a throw away 2 minutes of nothing because there's nothing to be said.

Bashing the IQ of one of the greatest players to ever play the game because he could give 2 shits about any of these "previews" much less 2 shits about a team that is AT BEST one and done in the post season says more about you girls than it does Barkley.

You no this is all a part of his schtick right? yeesh

[Apollo]

Came across this on NBA.COM - this is the most ridiculous preview I've seen so far; I'm a big Barkley fan and think he is hilarious to watch in between NBA games. This is stupid - he has no reasoning behind his points, and he bashes them by stating they have absolutely no chance of finishing better than last in their division. I expect a little more from Charles......thoughts?

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nb...r-preview.nba/

Apologies if this was posted somewhere else, but I saw this and had to put this up - didn't see it anywhere else. I guess if I'm playing devil's advocate, my point would be they need to start winning to gain the respect of US media....same story every year

To paraphrase Chuck: "I don't know anything about the Raptors and I didn't count the number of teams in the Atlantic prior to this interview but I'm assuming the Raptors will be the worst."

Guys, if we get bent out of shape over this stuff we'll be jumping off the ledge before opening tip off.

[ebrian]

How do we know Nash wasn't part of another plan that if Nash had come then move x, y, and z were to be made? All we know is Nash was pursued and it did not work out. He then moved on and we are watching what happens.

The assumptions made to me are akin to picking up a 1000 page novel and reading page 45, 140, 287, 315, 498, 509, 631, 799, 836, and 900 and thinking you know what the book was all about.

I don't know what plans he had, but Steve Nash was obviously not in line with what we were doing all last season. Looking at Lowry and what he brings proves that without a doubt.

Actually, using your analogy I've read volumes 1-5 of a series of books. It's been a long series of a genre I happen to enjoy but I'm a bit upset about the whole thing because although volume 1 was a really good book that showed a lot of promise, volumes 2-5 have been filled with disappointment. I can't believe I keep buying these books, but at this point I feel like I have no choice.. I've invested so much time and money. And I'm not the only one--fans of this book series have suggested that perhaps they replace the author with someone who has a better vision. The first book showed so much potential, but was it a fluke? Many people are wondering because books 2-5 have just been really bad.

I've now read chapter 1 of volume 6, and it is looking like the author still doesn't know what he's doing. He's all over the map. The patterns are there, and I'm beginning to think volume 6 is going to be just as bad as 2-5 based on past history of what I've read in the previous volumes.

I'm not saying volume 6 is going to end horribly, but I also don't understand why there are people out there who are optimistic about it. They've read that same horrible chapter 1. Why think otherwise?

[tkfu]

I don't know what plans he had, but Steve Nash was obviously not in line with what we were doing all last season. Looking at Lowry and what he brings proves that without a doubt.

Actually, using your analogy I've read volumes 1-5 of a series of books. It's been a long series of a genre I happen to enjoy but I'm a bit upset about the whole thing because although volume 1 was a really good book that showed a lot of promise, volumes 2-5 have been filled with disappointment. I can't believe I keep buying these books, but at this point I feel like I have no choice.. I've invested so much time and money. And I'm not the only one--fans of this book series have suggested that perhaps they replace the author with someone who has a better vision. The first book showed so much potential, but was it a fluke? Many people are wondering because books 2-5 have just been really bad.

I've now read chapter 1 of volume 6, and it is looking like the author still doesn't know what he's doing. He's all over the map. The patterns are there, and I'm beginning to think volume 6 is going to be just as bad as 2-5 based on past history of what I've read in the previous volumes.

I'm not saying volume 6 is going to end horribly, but I also don't understand why there are people out there who are optimistic about it. They've read that same horrible chapter 1. Why think otherwise?

Love the analogy, and I totally agree about books 2-5. I just think our hapless author got a brand new editor for book six...let's call him Wayne Dacey.

[NoBan]

How do you know he's a great basketball mind? It can't be because he's on national TV every day. Because Skip Bayless is on national TV and we all know how much he knows about basketball. My point is that Barkley is a part of these basketball talks mostly for his appeal to fans and his ability to create controversies, IMO

I felt the urge to launch into all the reasons why Chuck may know a thing or two about basketball, but then I came to the realization that I was falling victim to a troll. This is a troll response, right? Just in case, I'll link you to wikipedia so you can check for yourself some of the reasons why Chuck knows ball.

[Raptor_11]

I felt the urge to launch into all the reasons why Chuck may know a thing or two about basketball, but then I came to the realization that I was falling victim to a troll. This is a troll response, right? Just in case, I'll link you to wikipedia so you can check for yourself some of the reasons why Chuck knows ball.

Still doesn't disprove my point that he isn't there for his knowledge. I'm not trolling or anything, but it's pretty clear to most people that he doesn't portray himself as a particularly smart person, but rather a controversial one. Whether he has a high basketball IQ is irrelevant if he isn't going to use it

[Arsenalist]

Well, that was incoherent! He literally had nothing to say, I'd hardly call this a "preview" of anything, just NBA.com banking on Chuck's personality to get some cheap hits.

[NoBan]

Still doesn't disprove my point that he isn't there for his knowledge. I'm not trolling or anything, but it's pretty clear to most people that he doesn't portray himself as a particularly smart person, but rather a controversial one. Whether he has a high basketball IQ is irrelevant if he isn't going to use it

He's there to present highly credible opinions in a highly entertaining fashion.

In this scenario, his opinion is that the raps are irrelevant & guaranteed to finish last in the atlantic. The entertainment part is how he plays the clown that doesn't know the teams in the division. Anybody that reacts negatively to the second part is doing so because they are defensive about the first part.

Stop trying to tell me that Barkley doesn't know basketball.

[Matt52]

I don't know what plans he had, but Steve Nash was obviously not in line with what we were doing all last season. Looking at Lowry and what he brings proves that without a doubt.

Actually, using your analogy I've read volumes 1-5 of a series of books. It's been a long series of a genre I happen to enjoy but I'm a bit upset about the whole thing because although volume 1 was a really good book that showed a lot of promise, volumes 2-5 have been filled with disappointment. I can't believe I keep buying these books, but at this point I feel like I have no choice.. I've invested so much time and money. And I'm not the only one--fans of this book series have suggested that perhaps they replace the author with someone who has a better vision. The first book showed so much potential, but was it a fluke? Many people are wondering because books 2-5 have just been really bad.

I've now read chapter 1 of volume 6, and it is looking like the author still doesn't know what he's doing. He's all over the map. The patterns are there, and I'm beginning to think volume 6 is going to be just as bad as 2-5 based on past history of what I've read in the previous volumes.

I'm not saying volume 6 is going to end horribly, but I also don't understand why there are people out there who are optimistic about it. They've read that same horrible chapter 1. Why think otherwise?

I have to say that is an awesome post, ebrian. Well done.... 100% sincerity by the way.

Keeping with your analogy, I would say volume 1 was great. Volume 2 was so so. I think there were issues beyond the author's control that affected the success. I agree volume 3 and 4 were dreadful. The author tried really hard but it just didn't come together. Volume 5 was a total flop but you could see some of the storylines starting to come together, clearly the author spent a lot of time on character development. Volume 6 you could see a shift in the direction of the story and it is showing great promise although at the end of it there was a "WTF moment" where many wondered what was going on with this mysterious new character. This new guy was interesting but he probably would have done more harm to the story than good long term. Volume 7 is starting up and this mysterious character was removed from the story - thankfully - and it remains to be seen how all these fascinating story lines come together. Needless to say, despite some major let downs in earlier volumes, Volume 7 has a lot of people excited.

[Raptor_11]

He's there to present highly credible opinions in a highly entertaining fashion.

In this scenario, his opinion is that the raps are irrelevant & guaranteed to finish last in the atlantic. The entertainment part is how he plays the clown that doesn't know the teams in the division. Anybody that reacts negatively to the second part is doing so because they are defensive about the first part.

Stop trying to tell me that Barkley doesn't know basketball.

If you read my post again, you'll see that I didn't at all say that Barkley doesn't know basketball. And I get your point completely. I just find he puts the "entertainment" aspect in front of the "credible" aspect most of the time

[NoPropsneeded]

He's there to present highly credible opinions in a highly entertaining fashion.

In this scenario, his opinion is that the raps are irrelevant & guaranteed to finish last in the atlantic. The entertainment part is how he plays the clown that doesn't know the teams in the division. Anybody that reacts negatively to the second part is doing so because they are defensive about the first part.

Stop trying to tell me that Barkley doesn't know basketball.

He doesn't actually. He was a great player and thats it, outside of playing he has no knowledge of basketball. Stop treating him like a god. Btw if anyone's trolling around here its you, and you've been doing it since day 1 when you joined this site.

[NoBan]

He doesn't actually. He was a great player and thats it, outside of playing he has no knowledge of basketball. Stop treating him like a god. Btw if anyone's trolling around here its you, and you've been doing it since day 1 when you joined this site.

Youre on tilt, bro. Its great how you played out my negative reaction/defensive theory to a T while quoting my post about it.

Demar sucks! (OK that was trolling)

[NoBan]

I just find he puts the "entertainment" aspect in front of the "credible" aspect most of the time

Thats much more agreeable than the "he's an idiot" response. His point in the clip is that the raptors are irrelevant. while certainly not a unanimous opinion, its also not uncommon among non-idiots.

[ebrian]

I have to say that is an awesome post, ebrian. Well done.... 100% sincerity by the way.

Keeping with your analogy, I would say volume 1 was great. Volume 2 was so so. I think there were issues beyond the author's control that affected the success. I agree volume 3 and 4 were dreadful. The author tried really hard but it just didn't come together. Volume 5 was a total flop but you could see some of the storylines starting to come together, clearly the author spent a lot of time on character development. Volume 6 you could see a shift in the direction of the story and it is showing great promise although at the end of it there was a "WTF moment" where many wondered what was going on with this mysterious new character. This new guy was interesting but he probably would have done more harm to the story than good long term. Volume 7 is starting up and this mysterious character was removed from the story - thankfully - and it remains to be seen how all these fascinating story lines come together. Needless to say, despite some major let downs in earlier volumes, Volume 7 has a lot of people excited.

Ack.. volume 7! I guess there have been so many bad volumes that I've lost track of them.. I thought we were on 6!

I just wanted to add that this analogy reminds me of Game of Thrones a bit.

[Puffer]

...I just wanted to add that this analogy reminds me of Game of Thrones a bit.

That was my first guess. I am trying to force my way through volume four. Tough sledding.