Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"The Big 10" - where optimists come to discuss the 2nd half of the Raps season

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

  • #16
    white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    i wouldn't take him on, even for a 1st rd pick. To even consider it I'd ask for 2 1st rd picks, and one of them be unprotected even if it's like for 2016.
    If the choices are:

    (1) Bargnani without any picks

    OR

    (2) Thomas plus a 1st rounder

    I choose (2) every time.

    Comment


    • #17
      white men can't jump wrote: View Post
      Chemistry matters a lot with young teams, regardless of the existence of a "core". You could say Sacto has 2 core players in Cousins and Evans, but the players around them, among other things, have clearly not been conducive to positive team growth, and Tyreke's game hasn't even really grown individually. So chemistry is not just limited to how much your best players like each other or whatever.
      My point was, why worry about chemistry before the team is built?

      I would place "upgrading talent" as higher priority than maintaining the chemistry of a lottery team.

      Comment


      • #18
        Nilanka wrote: View Post
        If the choices are:

        (1) Bargnani without any picks

        OR

        (2) Thomas plus a 1st rounder

        I choose (2) every time.
        Why? IF that pick turns into nothing, you're stuck with basically stuck with a contract almost as bad as Bargs, but a player who doesn't give you anything more than Amir, Ed or Acy. He would be impossible to trade again, possibly even in his expiring year, and likely to get rid of him, we'd have to trade away useful players or a pick as well. There's no guarantee the pick end up being a good player, and if he's not, you've added nothing to your team, and you don't even have the benefit of a different skill-set, which at the very least, Bargs offers, and is why teams would trade for him.

        Let me put it this way subbing out the 1st rounder for guys who have been 1st round picks.

        -Bargnani with no picks
        or
        -Thomas + some guy like Jan Vesely, Wes Johnson, Al Farouq-Aminu, Jonny Flynn...etc...the list of crappy 1st rounders is very very long.

        Frankly I think we're a better team in scenario 1, so any trade involving Bargs can't just be about getting one 1st rd pick. Also for what it's worth, people really have to pay attention to the fact that draft picks have contracts. A 1st rd pick this year that ends up being a bust + Thomas' contract could easily be higher than Bargs' over the next few seasons.

        Comment


        • #19
          I've written off Bargnani as having literally zero value to this team, hence the reason I'm more than willing to "gamble" on a 1st rounder even if it means taking on Thomas.

          I don't see any scenario where keeping Bargnani improves this team.

          Can't live in fear of busts.

          Comment


          • #20
            white men can't jump wrote: View Post
            I wouldn't take him on, even for a 1st rd pick.

            I also think they're nowhere near each other's category, but the degree of Bargs hatred/wanting to blow things up scares me sometimes. There are many many players in the league that could lead to disastrous trade scenarios, and I think Thomas is one of them.
            You could always pull a Tinsley on him. If he messes up, send him home, and don't welcome him back..... hypothetically speaking of course.

            Comment


            • #21
              Nilanka wrote: View Post
              I've written off Bargnani as having literally zero value to this team, hence the reason I'm more than willing to "gamble" on a 1st rounder even if it means taking on Thomas.

              I don't see any scenario where keeping Bargnani improves this team.

              Can't live in fear of busts.
              If you truly believe he has zero value, then do you also believe that carries over to his trade value? If trading him can only bring back negative returns, where the best case is likely a mid-late lottery pick that might not turn out to be anything, isn't it just better in that view to amnesty him??

              Comment


              • #22
                Matt52 wrote: View Post
                You could always pull a Tinsley on him. If he messes up, send him home, and don't welcome him back..... hypothetically speaking of course.
                But for 2 and a half seasons? If it gets so bad, do you just buy him out? Isn't that just a waste of money in the end, acquiring a guy with about $9mill/year, then paying him to go home, and have it still count to the cap???

                Again, amnestying Bargs makes more sense in my mind over taking back a guy like Thomas. You could always use a spare part and cash to chase a 1st rd pick, though it may be hard to get one in the lottery.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Who the heck picked the second option to evaluate for another 40 games?

                  Double-you-tee-eff comes to mind, and also, Ess-Em-Ayche and face palm. Are you even watching the games?
                  your pal,
                  ebrian

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                    If you truly believe he has zero value, then do you also believe that carries over to his trade value? If trading him can only bring back negative returns, where the best case is likely a mid-late lottery pick that might not turn out to be anything, isn't it just better in that view to amnesty him??
                    When I said "value", I wasn't referring to trade value, but value specific to the Raptors. Bargnani has more than worn out his welcome in Toronto, has been through 3 coaches, and has played virtually every position on the floor, and neither scenario has made any lick of difference. He's still a net negative to the team.

                    Now, that's not to say some GM wouldn't be willing to take a chance on Bargnani, if it meant ridding himself of an unwanted contract (like Thomas).

                    This is how I view this hypothetical trade: With both Bargnani and Thomas, you have players who have no part in the team's future plans....but only 1 comes with an opportunity to improve the team (i.e. a draft pick).

                    The amnesty clause would be best saved for Kleiza, a player who I think would be much harder to trade.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      ebrian wrote: View Post
                      Who the heck picked the second option to evaluate for another 40 games?

                      Double-you-tee-eff comes to mind, and also, Ess-Em-Ayche and face palm. Are you even watching the games?
                      Yeah, I was wondering that myself. "More time" is the last thing a team devoid of talent needs.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                        But for 2 and a half seasons? If it gets so bad, do you just buy him out? Isn't that just a waste of money in the end, acquiring a guy with about $9mill/year, then paying him to go home, and have it still count to the cap???

                        Again, amnestying Bargs makes more sense in my mind over taking back a guy like Thomas. You could always use a spare part and cash to chase a 1st rd pick, though it may be hard to get one in the lottery.
                        If you are going to amnesty Bargnani, you might as well pay Thomas to send him home and save the amnesty for someone else to free up cap space (Kleiza) to use a spare part with cash to chase ANOTHER 1st rd pick.

                        The whole key is to get picks and prospects (i.e. rookie contracts) because they are cheap. Having deadweight in Thomas is not a big deal because taking him on gives you another $2.5M vs. Bargnani and Raps already have upwards of $5M in cap space plus another $4.6M if Kleiza amnestied.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          ebrian wrote: View Post
                          Who the heck picked the second option to evaluate for another 40 games?

                          Double-you-tee-eff comes to mind, and also, Ess-Em-Ayche and face palm. Are you even watching the games?
                          Good way to get around ***

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Matt52 wrote: View Post
                            If you are going to amnesty Bargnani, you might as well pay Thomas to send him home and save the amnesty for someone else to free up cap space (Kleiza) to use a spare part with cash to chase ANOTHER 1st rd pick.

                            The whole key is to get picks and prospects (i.e. rookie contracts) because they are cheap. Having deadweight in Thomas is not a big deal because taking him on gives you another $2.5M vs. Bargnani and Raps already have upwards of $5M in cap space plus another $4.6M if Kleiza amnestied.
                            Couldn't be explained any plainer than this.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              Good way to get around ***
                              I don't even know what you said there but I think it also applies to option 2. Goodness gracious people want more of this?!

                              I guess there's two sides of this. The one side is that this team sucks and we want to see some changes.

                              The other side is that this team sucks but they are playing with a lot of inspiration and competing in games. I do understand this side, but people have to understand that this can't be sustained forever and all the inspiration in the world can't propel this level of talent (lack thereof) into a playoff team.
                              your pal,
                              ebrian

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                ebrian wrote: View Post
                                I don't even know what you said there but I think it also applies to option 2. Goodness gracious people want more of this?!

                                I guess there's two sides of this. The one side is that this team sucks and we want to see some changes.

                                The other side is that this team sucks but they are playing with a lot of inspiration and competing in games. I do understand this side, but people have to understand that this can't be sustained forever and all the inspiration in the world can't propel this level of talent (lack thereof) into a playoff team.
                                shaking my head is banned here when you type the 3 first letters *** comes up.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X