Bendit wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
How many losses before it's BLOWN UP!
Collapse
X
-
p00ka wrote: View PostUM can't blow it up until he has willing trade partners. He may decide to after "x" number of games/losses, but we'll likely not know until he can do something that makes sense, which may be only when other teams decide they need to make a move to improve with what he's offering.
NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
Comment
-
Xixak wrote: View PostThis. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.
NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
Comment
-
Xixak wrote: View PostThis. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.
NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
Comment
-
Xixak wrote: View PostThis. People think the NBA is 2K and you can just initiate trades whenever YOU want to.
NO. The other team has to be willing to move those players at that point in time. Even what looks like a fair trade might be of no interest to a team until they've had more time to look at their team.
Nilanka wrote: View PostAll we have to do is change the OP to mean Ujiri's intention to blow it up, and the question is still a valid one.
Comment
-
10 games under .500 at the trade deadline. The Eastern conference has gotten much stronger, and deeper in the past couple years or so. I think the "Eastern Conference is weak" thing is no longer present.
If we were to blow it up, I'd be happy with keeping Gay, Ross, Amir, Acy, Valanciunas on the roster.Twitter: @ReubenJRD • NBA, Raptors writer for Daily Hive Vancouver, Toronto.
Comment
-
-
JawsGT wrote: View PostI don't know if there is a target number of losses which would send us into tank mode. I also don't think MU will send this team into a full on tank situation. His contract is for 3 years, that doesn't give him alot of time to elevate this club, but he has the flexibility going forward to make enough moves to send this team in a better direction and get extended himself. I think MU probably already has and will continue throughout the season to see what he can get for some of our key players. If the right trade appears, I'll think he'll pull the trigger, regardless of our record. I'm convinced MU does not want to ride BC's lineup into the playoffs and wants to put his mark on this club. I don't think playoffs this season is a priority, but if the team seriously over-achieves, MU may just look to add an impact type player somehow and see where that takes us.
Comment
-
I agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.
Comment
-
Jclaw wrote: View PostI agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.
Comment
-
Jclaw wrote: View PostI agree that it's more of a how many games under .500 rather than how many losses. In order for this core to stay together, they have to overachieve. Otherwise you can't count on keeping together a core that includes a free agent pg and a (possible) opt out SF. I'd say, especially given the schedule we had last year, that 40 games is the mark. Have to be at least 3-5 games over .500. 23-17 to 25-15 may seem like a lot but that's what we need to say it's a team worth keeping together. If everyone was under contract for a few years, you could say that .500 is enough of an improvement to keep watching but that's not the case here.
Games over/under .500 is how many losses/wins you would need to be at .500.
3 games over .500 at 40 games played actually isnt possible. 4 over .500 would be 22-18.
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostI think placement in the standings will be a key indicator. They could have an improved record (ie: # of wins, winning %), but still find themselves more in the #9-12 seed, on the outside of the playoff bubble. Or, they could have a losing record but be in the thick of the playoff race (possibly even holding the #7-8 seed). I actually think it depends more on the schedule over the first half of the season and what the team's playoff prospects are looking like, in addition to individual player development (record alone becomes essentially irrelevant).
Comment
-
Xixak wrote: View PostThat's actually 6 and 10 games over .500.
Games over/under .500 is how many losses/wins you would need to be at .500.
3 games over .500 at 40 games played actually isnt possible. 4 over .500 would be 22-18.
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostNo, games over .500 is the same concept as games back in a playoff race. The unit, "game", is the same. And by your definition you can never be 0.5 games back or over .500, which teams often are. A game is a win AND a loss.
Standings
Team #1: 41-40
Team #2: 39-41
Team #3: 37-40
Team #1 - in first place, 1 game over 500
Team #2 - 1.5 games out of first place, 2 games under 500
Team #3 - 2 games out of first place, 0.5 games out of second place, 3 games under 500
Comment
Comment