Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Bargnani

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

  • Letter N wrote: View Post
    Here's my out there idea. Stop constantly adding pieces. We have two wing scorers, and emerging scoring presence in Val who can easily put up 12 per next year, Amir Johnson whose offense in constantly improving and is even being used well by Lowry and Gay to score points.

    If we add Boozer we bring in another scorer with shaky defense, move Amir out of the starting lineup which would cause our D for the 1st unit to suffer AND would cause Amir to go back to being a sub-10 point guy because as a 2nd unit guy he couldn't carry the offense and the offense wouldn't be good enough for him to get easy baskets.
    Agreed. Boozer-Bargnani, straight-up = sh*t deal.

    Boozer-Bargnani with a Chicago 1st-round pick = better deal, but still not worth it, IMO. And I highly doubt a pick is ever put on the table from the Bulls side.

    I'd still advocate for trading Bargs for pennies on the dollar, vs. trying to 'replace' him. Bring back expiring contracts, draft picks (any position), cap relief, trade exception, young players who haven't cracked a lineup elsewhere yet... all of these are more attractive to me, given the current status of this team (that is, nowhere close to contending for a championship), than Boozer and his massive contract burden.

    Boozer-Bargnani is the kind of deal you only entertain if you're 'this close' to contending and think a guy like Boozer can make the difference on-court, in spite of his salary. It's not the move you make if you're a young team still years away from contending. (same criticism I still have for bringing Gay on board)
    Last edited by jimmie; Thu Apr 18, 2013, 03:25 PM.
    Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

    Comment


    • Exactly if BC (or if my prayers come true the GM that replaces him) can flip Bargnani for a 2nd round pick, a 2nd unit guy, an underperforming rookie contract guy I'd be delighted, but if that's not happening let's just amnesty him, get rid of the cancer and move on.

      Comment


      • Letter N wrote: View Post
        Here's my out there idea. Stop constantly adding pieces. We have two wing scorers, and emerging scoring presence in Val who can easily put up 12 per next year, Amir Johnson whose offense in constantly improving and is even being used well by Lowry and Gay to score points.

        If we add Boozer we bring in another scorer with shaky defense, move Amir out of the starting lineup which would cause our D for the 1st unit to suffer AND would cause Amir to go back to being a sub-10 point guy because as a 2nd unit guy he couldn't carry the offense and the offense wouldn't be good enough for him to get easy baskets.

        This is not a Yahoo Fantasy pool, you don't win just by adding points and rebounds. There's a reason Taj Gibson closes out games for the Bulls.
        So what do you suggest a 34 win team do?

        Why can't Boozer serve the same task for Toronto he has served for Chicago?
        Who says Amir can't finish games?
        Who says Amir can't get starter minutes coming off the bench?
        per36 minutes it can be argued Amir is more effective off the bench as is so why is that a negative?

        And you never answered my question: assuming the Raptors amnestied Bargnani, who are the Raptors going to find for next season to replace Bargnani with Boozer's production without giving up any other assets for < $5M per season?

        Comment


        • Im in favor of having amir do his thing off the bench he doesnt care and he plays to win, he comes to work clocks in and puts his hard hat on every night. Leads would be much safer with he and Acy doing that high energy gritty stuff together off the bench with a solid point running the show beside them, add Fields and Ross to that mix and Raptors look pretty golden. Cant forget Having Amir lead the bench is great for the defensive end, and hes developing some go to moves for scoring when he played off the bench or if he started there was no dip in quality in fact anytime off the bench he manhandled the opposing teams back up bigs.

          Comment


          • Matt52 wrote: View Post
            And you never answered my question: assuming the Raptors amnestied Bargnani, who are the Raptors going to find for next season to replace Bargnani with Boozer's production without giving up any other assets for < $5M per season?
            My answer is they don't. You cut off the cancer and you, for the first time in 5 years, let your team build chemistry together. Let them play a full season without major change and if they're still a 34 win team then ya go ahead and make major changes again.

            Comment


            • Letter N wrote: View Post
              My answer is they don't. You cut off the cancer and you, for the first time in 5 years, let your team build chemistry together. Let them play a full season without major change and if they're still a 34 win team then ya go ahead and make major changes again.
              Wasn't that pretty much what this season was, considering Bargnani was injured for most of it? Why do you want to waste yet another season, when this core group of players has proven to be a borderline playoff team at best?

              Comment


              • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                Wasn't that pretty much what this season was, considering Bargnani was injured for most of it? Why do you want to waste yet another season, when this core group of players has proven to be a borderline playoff team at best?
                Cause Boozer isn't Chris Paul, he's not going to help the situation.

                Without him we're a borderline playoff team, with him we're a borderline playoff team.
                It's change for the sake of change. It's the type of change that fans want because it works in video games and fantasy leagues.

                The only way I see this move helping us is if we can get Boozer to come off the bench, give him 25-30 off the bench to provide secondary scoring. But I know how this shit works, you bring in a guy who is an ex-allstar and is getting paid that much and he's going to be front and centre and the offense will change to make it work for him.

                Cue another awful season.

                Comment


                • Letter N wrote: View Post
                  Cause Boozer isn't Chris Paul, he's not going to help the situation.

                  Without him we're a borderline playoff team, with him we're a borderline playoff team.
                  It's change for the sake of change. It's the type of change that fans want because it works in video games and fantasy leagues.

                  The only way I see this move helping us is if we can get Boozer to come off the bench, give him 25-30 off the bench to provide secondary scoring. But I know how this shit works, you bring in a guy who is an ex-allstar and is getting paid that much and he's going to be front and centre and the offense will change to make it work for him.

                  Cue another awful season.
                  I didn't say anything about Boozer. I was referring to your stated preference of making no change whatsoever, in the name of letting the team build chemistry.

                  I personally am not a big fan of a Boozer trade, but I think it's a joke to think that this team is good enough as is that no changes should be made (aside from dumping Bargnani).

                  Even though I'm not big on Boozer (mainly for financial reasons), I think this team would have been much better the 2nd half of this season had a Bargnani-Boozer trade gone down. Bargnani was rotting on the bench while guys like Gray, Acy, Gay and Fields spent time at the C/PF spot on the 2nd unit. Regardless whether he was starting or coming off the bench, I can't see any logical argument for Boozer not improving this team, both on the court with his play and with his veteran leadership. It would have been adding a solid player for essentially nothing.

                  Comment


                  • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                    I didn't say anything about Boozer. I was referring to your stated preference of making no change whatsoever, in the name of letting the team build chemistry.

                    I personally am not a big fan of a Boozer trade, but I think it's a joke to think that this team is good enough as is that no changes should be made (aside from dumping Bargnani).

                    Even though I'm not big on Boozer (mainly for financial reasons), I think this team would have been much better the 2nd half of this season had a Bargnani-Boozer trade gone down. Bargnani was rotting on the bench while guys like Gray, Acy, Gay and Fields spent time at the C/PF spot on the 2nd unit. Regardless whether he was starting or coming off the bench, I can't see any logical argument for Boozer not improving this team, both on the court with his play and with his veteran leadership. It would have been adding a solid player for essentially nothing.
                    It's not about "being good enough as it is that no changes should be made."

                    It's actually the opposite: this team is bad enough that no changes should be made -- until they know where the right changes should actually be made. I'm sure as hell not confident right now saying that Gay/DD/Lowry/Amir/Valanciunas are all definitely long-term pieces here that can win a championship 3 or 4 or 5 years down the line, are you? And if you're not, why would you add Boozer to that mix? Another non-permanent piece who might make the team better for one season -- or worse, two, if he stays til contract end -- while simultaneously taking minutes from the guys they need desperately to continue evaluating to see if they can make the team better for longer than one season.

                    And it's not "no change", either. You ignored the bit about trading Bargnani for smaller pieces. As Letter N said, bringing Boozer on board = making him a starter and a big piece of the team. You don't bring in a guy making $16M a year to play 15-20 minutes a game.

                    You trade for Boozer now, you're basically saying that you're willing to take on that massive contract because Boozer is good enough to significantly improve this team. That's crazy talk.
                    Last edited by jimmie; Thu Apr 18, 2013, 04:27 PM.
                    Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                    Comment


                    • jimmie wrote: View Post
                      It's not about "being good enough as it is that no changes should be made."

                      It's actually the opposite: this team is bad enough that no changes should be made -- until they know where the right changes should actually be made. I'm sure as hell not confident right now saying that Gay/DD/Lowry/Amir/Valanciunas are all definitely long-term pieces here that can win a championship 3 or 4 or 5 years down the line, are you? And if you're not, why would you add Boozer to that mix? Another non-permanent piece who might make the team better for one season -- or worse, two, if he stays til contract end -- while simultaneously taking minutes from the guys they need desperately to continue evaluating to see if they can make the team better for longer than one season.

                      And it's not "no change", either. You ignored the bit about trading Bargnani for smaller pieces. As Letter N said, bringing Boozer on board = making him a starter and a big piece of the team. You don't bring in a guy making $16M a year to play 15-20 minutes a game.

                      You trade for Boozer now, you're basically saying that you're willing to take on that massive contract because Boozer is good enough to significantly improve this team. That's crazy talk.
                      I was just disagreeing with his rationale that "major change" was not required and shouldn't be done, instead letting this core (possibly with minor pieces added from Bargnani trade, if he's not simply amnestied) play all of next season together in order to develop chemistry. The idea of leaving this team as is, aside from very minor changes, is what I think is a joke - but I never referred to what any specific "major change" would entail (he just assumed I meant Boozer, since that's who he and Matt were talking about).

                      For the record, I don't believe this core is good enough. I would prefer Amir being the 3rd big and DeRozan traded for an upgraded starting PF, with Fields moving into the starting SG spot for better balance.

                      Any talk about Boozer, either in hindsight or this offeseason, was a completely separate conversation. I was happy that the rumored Boozer trade didn't go down at the deadline, mainly for financial reasons. I am still not supportive of a Boozer trade, but at least if Kleiza's being amnestied is factored in, then a Bargnani-Boozer trade could be considered net-even financially speaking (though his contract is longer, so still worse in the long-run). Boozer is undeniably a talent/fit improvement over Bargnani, however.

                      Comment


                      • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                        I was just disagreeing with his rationale that "major change" was not required and shouldn't be done, instead letting this core (possibly with minor pieces added from Bargnani trade, if he's not simply amnestied) play all of next season together in order to develop chemistry. The idea of leaving this team as is, aside from very minor changes, is what I think is a joke
                        I don't think it's a joke. While major change is probably needed, I think it should wait until they see what they really have with the current roster. I have my opinion on what they currently have, and it's pretty close to yours. I don't think it's great. But Colangelo obviously think it's pretty awesome, to the point that he plans to try to extend Gay this summer.

                        The only way to know for sure is to leave it much as-is for a full season, and at the same time, prevent any more excuses about new players, new systems, new coaches.

                        Save the 'major changes' for a time when you actually know what those changes should be. Boozer is a stop-gap measure at best, a major change now with little long-term impact. I'm tired of stop-gap measures.
                        Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                        Comment


                        • Letter N wrote: View Post
                          My answer is they don't. You cut off the cancer and you, for the first time in 5 years, let your team build chemistry together. Let them play a full season without major change and if they're still a 34 win team then ya go ahead and make major changes again.
                          That seems counter productive.

                          They have already missed the playoffs for five straight years.

                          They just played a stretch of 35 games where, until the last few, they were 4 games under .500.

                          They went through a stretch of losing 12 of 15 with this group.... and some real shit teams were in there.

                          The Raptors are in the horrendous place where they may not be good enough to make the playoffs (or if they do, likely 8th seed) and they are not bad enough to secure a top 6 lottery pick.

                          The cancer right now appears to be Bargnani (no offense to the poster who took offense earlier in the year when I made this comparison). The only way to get rid of Bargnani is through trade or amnesty. If you amnesty him you are still over the salary cap and you are still carrying $4.6M in dead weight next season in Kleiza.... and you still have to pay him. Then in 2014-15 you are at $49M as of now with no PGs - starting or backup or third string. Forget the idea of amnestying Bargnani.

                          There have been rumours of getting a PF in free agency with Carl Landry having been mentioned. Regardless of who it is, you need someone. So the question is do you pay Bargnani his money and offer up the MLE to a free agent (2013-14 $15.75M, 2014-15 $16.725M) which likely sees Bargnani rot on the bench and another player coming in who is likely not going to produce as Boozer can or do you pay Boozer (2013-14 $15.3M, 2014-15 $16.8M) and not have to worry about the final 2 years of a MLE on a player such as Carl Landry while also possessing possibly $49.25M in expiring contracts in 2014-15?

                          Comment


                          • Letter N wrote: View Post
                            Cause Boozer isn't Chris Paul, he's not going to help the situation.

                            Without him we're a borderline playoff team, with him we're a borderline playoff team.
                            It's change for the sake of change. It's the type of change that fans want because it works in video games and fantasy leagues.

                            The only way I see this move helping us is if we can get Boozer to come off the bench, give him 25-30 off the bench to provide secondary scoring. But I know how this shit works, you bring in a guy who is an ex-allstar and is getting paid that much and he's going to be front and centre and the offense will change to make it work for him.

                            Cue another awful season.

                            The plan worked out well for Indiana - and they brought in a guy coming off an ACL tear.

                            Comment


                            • jimmie wrote: View Post
                              It's not about "being good enough as it is that no changes should be made."

                              It's actually the opposite: this team is bad enough that no changes should be made -- until they know where the right changes should actually be made. I'm sure as hell not confident right now saying that Gay/DD/Lowry/Amir/Valanciunas are all definitely long-term pieces here that can win a championship 3 or 4 or 5 years down the line, are you? And if you're not, why would you add Boozer to that mix? Another non-permanent piece who might make the team better for one season -- or worse, two, if he stays til contract end -- while simultaneously taking minutes from the guys they need desperately to continue evaluating to see if they can make the team better for longer than one season.

                              And it's not "no change", either. You ignored the bit about trading Bargnani for smaller pieces. As Letter N said, bringing Boozer on board = making him a starter and a big piece of the team. You don't bring in a guy making $16M a year to play 15-20 minutes a game.

                              You trade for Boozer now, you're basically saying that you're willing to take on that massive contract because Boozer is good enough to significantly improve this team. That's crazy talk.
                              How much a guy makes doesn't determine his place on a team. Did you see Rashard Lewis playing 35 minutes a game in Washington? How many minutes per game was Arenas playing in Orlando?

                              You play guys based on production. Boozer is one of the top 3 players on the 5th seed in the west and when one of the top 2 players (Noah) went down during the last 15 games of the season, they did not miss a beat with Boozer being a big reason why.

                              Also, it seems you guys haven't watched the Raptors much this year. They need major changes with or without Boozer (or whoever). They were awful on defense and they were streaky/inconsistent and offense to start the year and dreadful to end.

                              There are 96 minutes among PF/C positions. No reason why you can't see Amir and JV getting 30+ minutes.

                              Finally, you trade for Boozer now because you have an unproductive asset in Bargnani with little to no trade value that the other team wants for financial reasons - it is not a basketball trade. As I mentioned in another post, the cost of Boozer is less than it is going to be to rid with Bargnani + MLE PF signing. The idea of trading Bargnani for smaller pieces is bullshit for the very reason why Raptor fans want him amnestied.

                              Comment


                              • To be honest, I'd be very happy if we trade Bargnani for Kosta Koufus.

                                I just think Boozer's help defense is so bad. Pair him with Jonas Valanciunas as the co-starter, what we'll get is awful defense from our starting front line. Right now, Amir is basically holding Jonas' hands and anchoring our defense. If you take him out of that role, all of a sudden, we won't be getting too many stops which they've lately converted into transition or semi-transition points.

                                Put Boozer on the second line & pair him with Aaron Gray [or even Quincy Acy] -- he's suddenly a HUGE positive piece for this team. Unfortunately, if you acquire a Boozer, he will be considered "all-star calibre forward" & will be inserted into the starting line-up from day 1 -- which will throw off any leverage we have with our starters since he will be personally responsible for giving up points in the paint.

                                I think our starters are fine. They will improve individually & cohesively with time. There's no reason to mess with that line-up unless we're talking about inserting someone [whether a 2 or 4] who provides the same things as DeMar [offense] or Amir [defense] + the things they don't provide on the other end -- in short, a very good 2 way player.

                                You can make the argument that Boozer is a starter for a stingy Chicago Bulls team, but he does play alongside Joakim Noah -- an all-defensive player. He plays alongside Luol Deng or Jimmy Butler. He plays in a Thibs defensive system which overplays the strong side. We don't have that here in Toronto to cover up for his mistakes.

                                I would much rather convert Andrea into a quality piece or 2 off the bench to help our second unit -- and they need a lot of help.

                                P.S. I'm implying that Jonas is -- at this stage in his career -- a pretty bad defender, who uses his length and verticality to make up for his late reactions and shortcomings. I am confident that he will improve as he matures physically and develops his understanding on defense.
                                Last edited by torch19; Thu Apr 18, 2013, 09:48 PM.
                                “I don’t create controversies. They’re there long before I open my mouth. I just bring them to your attention.”

                                -- Charles Barkley

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X