Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rebuild or Re-tool? (thread merge in post #358)

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

  • Apollo wrote: View Post
    You're right, no one is saying that but what some frequent posters are suggesting is that tanking is the only way to get there. Do they explicitly say that? Probably not but reading their words one only can come to that conclusion as all other suggestions are shot down.



    I can guarantee you that it also doesn't help the team's reputation across the league as being a loser franchise that no one wants to play for.
    I certainly don't get that impression. I'm willing to bet that has alot more to do with perspective (pro tank vs anti tank) than whats actually being argued.

    And people as quickly shoot down the tanking option. (And do it with reasoning that applies to all forms of team building) So whats the difference exactly?


    This is the reality:

    The single biggest argument for tanking - it gives this team valuable assets (draft picks, rookie scale contracts, cap space). What the team can do with those valuable assets is the question.

    The single biggest argument against it - this team has valuable (enough) assets (players, cap space, picks, etc). Will those valuable assets be enough.

    I, and others, see #2 as the most unlikely of the two options. Its that simple.

    Has nothing to do with luck (or any more luck than any other way), nothing to do with guarantees, or anything to do with it being the only option.

    Comment


    • What I want to know, is for the guys who don't think a proper rebuild is the way to go -- what do you think we should do?

      We're paying luxury tax this summer and we'll be over the cap for the next two seasons.

      I've read some interesting arguments, but let's hear some fresh ideas! Brainstorm away!
      your pal,
      ebrian

      Comment


      • ebrian wrote: View Post
        What I want to know, is for the guys who don't think a proper rebuild is the way to go -- what do you think we should do?

        We're paying luxury tax this summer and we'll be over the cap for the next two seasons.

        I've read some interesting arguments, but let's hear some fresh ideas! Brainstorm away!
        I'm ambivalent but I would suggest that people who want to compete sooner rather than later may want to look to the Houston model. The Rockets had no superstar to deal, they didn't tank, and they didn't do it through free agency. They made some shrew draft picks and trades and put themselves in a financial position to do a big trade (Harden) and sign another max FA when the situation was right.

        You can argue Morey walked into the perfect storm but he put himself in a position to capitalize on it.

        Comment


        • Matt52 wrote: View Post
          Maybe a different slant on the topic: what happens if through any of various reasons the raptors never get desired franchise player?

          Looking though last 10 drafts, in the top5 there really is only 1 franchise altering talent per year.
          They don't have to get a "desired franchise player". If they get a top 5 pick great but tanking guarantees a good pick, not a great one. To get a good player at least, the draft must be a good one. The 2014 draft promises to be one.

          Even if we get a Gay caliber player, Raps. will get him at a Rookie scale contract which will be at least 10 mil. less than what Gay is being paid. The cash at their disposal will enable them to pursue free agents who command contracts like 5 yr/60 mil as opposed to players like L Fields, Jack, Klieza etc, not that we don't need such players. Not specifically them but examples of such players are Nene, Millsap, Jefferson and Gallinari. The only such free agent they were able to sign was Turkoglu who unfortunately did not work out.
          Last edited by Eric Akshinthala; Tue May 28, 2013, 12:14 PM.
          Attitude Is A Choice.

          Comment


          • Hinging on the perceived right place and right time X 2 or 3

            Tanking involves dumping current assets whether it be via trades for expiring contracts or letting said contracts expire.

            Craiger wrote: View Post
            The single biggest argument for tanking - it gives this team valuable assets (draft picks, rookie scale contracts, cap space). What the team can do with those valuable assets is the question.
            What team can do with those valuable assets? I suppose any team that just gave away the farm.
            The Thunder dealt for a top five lotto pick(Jeff Green) by giving up an established star in the final years of his prime, along with a prospect with no certainty of being an impact player. As far as I can tell the Raptors have assets in the same valued ball park right now. Did you read something somewhere that suggested the Raptors were incapable of dealing for a lottery pick if the right player was available?(As opposed to blindly slashing in the hopes of getting the right pick, at the right time, to luck into drafting the right guy?)

            Craiger wrote: View Post
            The single biggest argument against it - this team has valuable (enough) assets (players, cap space, picks, etc). Will those valuable assets be enough.
            Enough for what? To make further moves to better the team by being patient and capitalizing on opportunities created via other teams' impatience and/or misfortunes? Sure.

            Craiger wrote: View Post
            Has nothing to do with luck (or any more luck than any other way), nothing to do with guarantees, or anything to do with it being the only option.
            Sure it has more to do with luck. One way you're dumping current assets in a hope that, first, the balls bounce your way. Second, the guy on your board is available when you pick and then finally that the guy works out. Oh and let's not forget this has to be repeated multiple times before you have the team you're expecting from such an investment in time, money and customers.


            ebrian wrote: View Post
            What I want to know, is for the guys who don't think a proper rebuild is the way to go -- what do you think we should do?

            We're paying luxury tax this summer and we'll be over the cap for the next two seasons.

            I've read some interesting arguments, but let's hear some fresh ideas! Brainstorm away!
            Ujiri had a lot of success by being opportunistic and utilizing the assets on hand as opposed to throwing those away in an effort to clear cap to get draft picks and get into a bidding war for other players in FA. You can rebuild by using some of the current players on roster who fit the plan and by also moving those who don't for others that do when the opportunity presents itself.

            Using losing as a gateway to success only leads to more losing unless you get a lot more lucky breaks. I think the Raptors are more likely to remain a loser by striving to lose...

            Comment


            • Craiger wrote: View Post
              I certainly don't get that impression. I'm willing to bet that has alot more to do with perspective (pro tank vs anti tank) than whats actually being argued.

              And people as quickly shoot down the tanking option. (And do it with reasoning that applies to all forms of team building) So whats the difference exactly?


              This is the reality:

              The single biggest argument for tanking - it gives this team valuable assets (draft picks, rookie scale contracts, cap space). What the team can do with those valuable assets is the question.

              The single biggest argument against it - this team has valuable (enough) assets (players, cap space, picks, etc). Will those valuable assets be enough.

              I, and others, see #2 as the most unlikely of the two options. Its that simple.

              Has nothing to do with luck (or any more luck than any other way), nothing to do with guarantees, or anything to do with it being the only option.

              I think a big reason why so many "quickly shoot down the tanking option" because none of the 4 teams remaining before last night (minus SA 16 years ago) tanked to get where they are.


              Here is another so called reality, if we all get to determine reality:

              If option #2 is so unlikely, then what would make one think the Raptors current assets can return such valuable assets as draft picks, rookie scale contracts, and expiring contracts/cap space?


              I think the bigger reality is nothing is as cut and dry with the current Raptors situation to think that staying the course, blowing it up, or tinkering will ensure success. Each path has its own perils. The 2011-12 attempt to tank is a good example of this: the Raptors ended up 1 spot out of a desired draft pick because other teams tanked better and harder.

              Comment


              • Apollo wrote: View Post
                Tanking involves dumping current assets whether it be via trades for expiring contracts or letting said contracts expire.



                What team can do with those valuable assets? I suppose any team that just gave away the farm.
                The Thunder dealt a top five lotto pick(Jeff Green) for an establish star in the final years of his prime, along with a prospect with no certainty of being an impact player. As far as I can tell the Raptors have assets in the same valued ball park right now. Did you read something somewhere that suggested the Raptors were incapable of dealing for a lottery pick if the right player was available?(As opposed to blindly slashing in the hopes of getting the right pick, at the right time, to luck into drafting the right guy?)



                Enough for what? To make further moves to better the team by being patient and capitalizing on opportunities created via other teams' impatience and/or misfortunes? Sure.



                Sure it has more to do with luck. One way you're dumping current assets in a hope that, first, the balls bounce your way. Second, the guy on your board is available when you pick and then finally that the guy works out. Oh and let's not forget this has to be repeated multiple times before you have the team you're expecting from such an investment in time, money and customers.
                and there we go again - right back to the circle of luck. Always luck. The fail safe of luck. And now its 'more lucky'... sigh.

                (you do realize those two ideas I posted were rhetorical right?)

                Comment


                • If we want to tank, we're not going to be the only team that does that. It's gonna be a tanking fight.

                  I think it's high time that the lottery system is changed. Each year you have about 25% of the league trying to tank, probably more at the end of the season. It's not good for a competitive league.

                  For all the discussion here about tanking or not and the worth of tanking, I don't think there is even a slight chance that this will be the plan that Leiweke and the new gm will come up with, after five years of not making the play-offs. They will want some results, so another route will be taken. It's just not going to happen.

                  Comment


                  • Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
                    Considering everything that's going on(new GM, probably new management team, probably new Coach etc) and considering the 2014 draft(deep in talent), this is a good time to tank. Yes it doesn't guarantee a franchise player but finishing as low as possible guarantees a good(if not great) pick and helps create financial flexibility. The team as it's composed now may not appeal to the GM anyway(not his team), so might as well strip it down, create some cap space and accumulate picks as much as possible. We've waited this long anyway, might as well wait another year. It'll be worth it.

                    If any year is a good year to tank, this is.
                    Completely agree with this. Keep JV, and any other good contracts and purge the rest for cap space and picks.

                    Comment


                    • slaw wrote: View Post
                      I'm ambivalent but I would suggest that people who want to compete sooner rather than later may want to look to the Houston model. The Rockets had no superstar to deal, they didn't tank, and they didn't do it through free agency. They made some shrew draft picks and trades and put themselves in a financial position to do a big trade (Harden) and sign another max FA when the situation was right.

                      You can argue Morey walked into the perfect storm but he put himself in a position to capitalize on it.
                      Houston may not have done a proper rebuild, but if that isn't a blow-up, I don't know what is.

                      -traded Chase Budinger and a future 2nd rounder for a first round pick (Terrence Jones)
                      -drafted Jeremy Lamb
                      -drafted Royce White
                      -traded Samuel Dalembert and the 14th pick for the 12th pick
                      -traded Lowry for our first round pick
                      -traded Camby for Toney Douglas and 2 2nd round picks
                      -signed Jeremy Lin
                      -signed Omer Asik
                      -traded Courtney Lee for another 2nd round pick
                      -signed Carlos Delfino
                      -traded Kevin Martin, Jeremy Lamb, two future 1st round picks, a second rounder James Harden

                      Basically from the starting lineup from one season to the next, only Chandler Parsons survived.
                      your pal,
                      ebrian

                      Comment


                      • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                        I think a big reason why so many "quickly shoot down the tanking option" because none of the 4 teams remaining before last night (minus SA 16 years ago) tanked to get where they are.


                        Here is another so called reality, if we all get to determine reality:

                        If option #2 is so unlikely, then what would make one think the Raptors current assets can return such valuable assets as draft picks, rookie scale contracts, and expiring contracts/cap space?


                        I think the bigger reality is nothing is as cut and dry with the current Raptors situation to think that staying the course, blowing it up, or tinkering will ensure success. Each path has its own perils. The 2011-12 attempt to tank is a good example of this: the Raptors ended up 1 spot out of a desired draft pick because other teams tanked better and harder.
                        I actually disagree with Memphis/Indy. I think they are perfect examples of tank, draft and rebuild.

                        memphis traded Pau Gasol for Marc + an expiring. Spent years in the lottery.

                        Indiana tore their team down. Added picks, Spent years in the lottery.

                        They still tanked and rebuilt, only to add their final peices once they had a rebuilt core. What they did, as I see it anyways, is precisely tank and rebuild. Not with a superstar, but still a successful tank and rebuild.


                        And just for sake of argument, the Raps still landed in a great spot to land a top talent (Drummond) yet chose not to, in my opinion, because Colangelo was never really tanking (or at best half assing it)

                        Just my 2 cents

                        Comment


                        • Craiger wrote: View Post
                          and there we go again - right back to the circle of luck. Always luck. The fail safe of luck. And now its 'more lucky'... sigh.
                          I'm sorry but aren't "lotteries" and "luck" synonymous?

                          Either way you go, you're going to require some good bounces. Go research any successful entrepreneur and you'll see luck had a role in it... Usually those professionals tried to keep as much control in their hands as possible though.

                          The lotto requires parking all your chips in one spot and hoping for the best results; giving yourself up to the draft. Then, if you get the desired result, you're hoping that the player works out.

                          Wouldn't it be a better idea to manage a good team, get those players working well together and producing? That way you have truly marketable that you can move to capitalize on teams interested in moving out of the lottery in instances where the player you want is there are the pick you can get?

                          Let me put it this way, Indiana Pacers players in general are at an all-time high right now in terms of market value. There is a buzz about them If you took a couple of those guys and had them on the Raptors squad this season I assure you they would not have the same market value right now because:
                          1. They would not have been utilized properly
                          2. Would not be in the right system to shine
                          3. Would not be recognized/understood for what they are so that they could be properly identified in relation to #1 and #2.


                          And I'm not relating the Pacers' playoff success to the players' value(although that helps too). The fact that they were so good at fitting the pieces and knowing what they had on roster had a hand in that success no doubt though.

                          Comment


                          • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                            I think a big reason why so many "quickly shoot down the tanking option" because none of the 4 teams remaining before last night (minus SA 16 years ago) tanked to get where they are.


                            Here is another so called reality, if we all get to determine reality:

                            If option #2 is so unlikely, then what would make one think the Raptors current assets can return such valuable assets as draft picks, rookie scale contracts, and expiring contracts/cap space?


                            I think the bigger reality is nothing is as cut and dry with the current Raptors situation to think that staying the course, blowing it up, or tinkering will ensure success. Each path has its own perils. The 2011-12 attempt to tank is a good example of this: the Raptors ended up 1 spot out of a desired draft pick because other teams tanked better and harder.
                            I think this is a good point. Nothing is ever guaranteed, and it goes for both tanking or keeping the team together for the most part.

                            Now what I would say in this particular situation of the 2011-12 season, is that if the Raptors truly had a plan to tank they would have done it correctly and ended up with a selection they wanted. Also, if their intention was truly to tank that season to get a specific player, they would easily have traded up to get either Lillard or Barnes by including their pick along with some sort of asset. However, BC just didn't/doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing. There never seems to be a plan for what he wants to acheive each season. Just a mentality of lets head into the season and see what happens.

                            Comment


                            • If we are going to tank and rebuild, who are we going to keep?

                              Comment


                              • Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
                                They don't have to get a "desired franchise player". If they get a top 5 pick great but tanking guarantees a good pick, not a great one. To get a good player at least, the draft must be a good one. The 2014 draft promises to be one.

                                Even if we get a Gay caliber player, Raps. will get him at a Rookie scale contract which will be at least 10 mil. less than what Gay is being paid. The cash at their disposal will enable them to pursue free agents who command contracts like 5 yr/60 mil as opposed to players like L Fields, Jack, Klieza etc, not that we don't need such players. Not specifically them but examples of such players are Nene, Millsap, Jefferson and Gallinari. The only such free agent they were able to sign was Turkoglu who unfortunately did not work out.
                                My interpretation of people advocating tanking is getting a Durant/LeBron/Harden/Wade type talent. From what you are saying that is a lot of losing for just a good player.

                                Getting a Gay calibre player would be extremely lucky in the draft. How many rookies or 2nd year players come out as 20ppg scoreres?

                                Guys who command 5 year/60M (btw max contract now is 4 years) are looking to go somewhere to win. They are 28 year old-ish (i.e. coming off their 2nd contract) and unrestricted. That is part of the problem with tanking: you become known as a loser and who wants to play for a loser? Who wants to be the guy in his prime to try and turn a franchise around?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X