Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • Fully wrote: View Post
    I never said TT was a rookie? I said he was part of their young core.
    I said Waiters was quietly one of the best rookies last season and he was. Second in rookie scoring, 3rd in assists, 3rd in steals, top 10 in 3PM. He made the first team all nba for rookies. Am I missing something?
    You're missing that he played on a terrible team where he was given the freedom to chuck anything and everything. Averaging 15 points while shooting 41% from the field is nothing to brag about, especially if you come from a sub par draft class. Him making the all rookie first team over JV shows that those all rookies teams don't really matter.

    Comment


    • Hugmenot wrote: View Post
      That is correct - and Zeller is certainly not a stud. However, while I think the Raptors are currently better, I believe the Cavaliers have a higher potential ceiling, key word is potential.

      The Raptors will have to make several moves if they are to become better than just a 1st or 2nd round team. Lots of retooling needed in my opinion and difficult too do so because of their current salary situation.

      The Cavaliers can add players to their core group via the draft (or via trading of these draft picks) and via free agency. I believe that path has more possibilities.

      One thing I like about the Cavaliers is they stuck to the plan.
      I really don't know what you people see in the Cavs. All i see is Irving, Thompson, Varejao and then 2 rookies who shot a combined 42 % from the field. One of them being a freaking 7 footer.

      One more thing. How the heck is the Cavs future more bright than the Raptors?

      Cavs line up:
      Irving*
      Waiters
      Gee
      Thompson
      Zeller

      Raps line up:
      Lowry
      DeRozan*
      Gay*
      Johnson*
      Valanciunas*

      * - Advantage

      You can argue youth and potential. But Waiters and Zeller both look like rotation players to me. They only have 1 sure fire all star and 1 solid starter in Thompson. I think all this losing is getting to peoples heads. Our players don't suck, our team sucks! if we had a real coaching staff this team could really be something special. Hopefully the hiring of Leiweke and Ujiri can solve this problem and turn this team into a truly elite team.

      Oh and we have the one biggest advantage, a 20 year old C by the name of Jonas. I don't think some of you understand the impact of a truly skilled 7 footer. Look at what Roy Hibbert did to miami yesterday. JV is already so much further ahead than Roy Hibbert was at this stage, imagine how good he can be. Possibly the best C in the NBA by his 3rd or 4th season, that is very scary.
      Last edited by NoPropsneeded; Sat May 25, 2013, 12:42 PM.

      Comment


      • Fully wrote: View Post
        I never said TT was a rookie? I said he was part of their young core.
        I said Waiters was quietly one of the best rookies last season and he was. Second in rookie scoring, 3rd in assists, 3rd in steals, top 10 in 3PM. He made the first team all nba for rookies. Am I missing something?
        These rookies made the 1st team after solid rookie seasons...

        -Tyreke Evans 09-10
        -Darren Collison 09-10
        -Landry Fields 10-11
        -Andrea Bargnani 06-07
        -Gary Neal 10-11
        -Al Thornton 07-08
        -Michael Beasley 08-09
        -Ben Gordon 04-05
        -Charlie Villanueva 05-06
        -Jorge Garbajosa 06-07
        -Marc Jackson (not the coach/former PG) 00-01
        -Darius Miles 00-01
        -Drew Gooden 02-03

        Again..these are all 1st team selections. Some had at least a few good years before becoming problem players/contracts (Gordon, Bargs, Gooden). Some washed out pretty fast (though with Garbo it's a special case with his age/injury). Few of them actually had/have promise....Evans can still turn things around. If Fields elbow is good and he can rehab his shot, he should still have a place as a solid role-player for a long time (albeit never again at the crazy contract BC gave him). Collison can still be a fringe starting PG or very good bench player.

        That's not even getting into 2nd teams...in Bargnani's year...the second team was Paul Millsap, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas, Craig Smith, and a 3-way tie with Rondo, Walter Herrman and Marcus Williams.

        Now, I actually like aspects of Waiters' game. But I'm on the fence as to what direction he'll go. He had a pretty inconsistent rookie season. His stats seem nice compared to other rookies....But it wasn't the strongest rookie class in terms of "immediate impact" players. I didn't see a lot of growth in Waiters' game during the season. He looked much like the same player from start to finish. His shooting %s were terrible. His assist numbers (3 apg) probably only rank 2nd because it was maybe the weakest PG draft class of all time. And back to his %s, his made 3 pointers are clearly not because of a high proficiency from long range (31%). He was a thoroughly average player on a (bad) team where he had abundant opportunities.

        Comment


        • "Side A" = Farm team status for years to come

          Here is something I put together the other day. I am saying by no means that it is perfect but it's close enough; this was for my own personal use that I am now sharing so please keep that in mind. Anyone who moved their pick on draft day I tried to exclude and replace with the actual team who had the player at the end of the night:

          Full list - click here

          Below I eliminate a lot of the "noise" and get down to the teams we've been talking about in particular:



          This can help gain added perspective perhaps? Let's get back to the Raptors:
          • 2012: Ross, #8
          • 2011: Valanciunas, #5
          • 2010: Davis, #13
          • 2009: DeRozan, #9


          Those who are suggesting that the Raptors haven't been "sticking to the plan" in terms of developing through the draft as one of the primary sources, please explain to me "the plan"? I don't agree with all that Colangelo has done but here we are and let me explain what the two sides boil down to:

          Side A: Purposely lose in hopes of scoring the #1 or in close approximation to the #1.
          Side B: Move forward building with what currently is here.

          I am telling you that in five years time, riding a losing mentality, this team is more likely to be like a Charlotte or Sacramento than an Oklahoma City. Side A's game plan keeps the Raptors as a farm team unless everything goes just right. I don't like those odds.

          Comment


          • Apollo wrote: View Post
            Here is something I put together the other day. I am saying by no means that it is perfect but it's close enough; this was for my own personal use that I am now sharing so please keep that in mind. Anyone who moved their pick on draft day I tried to exclude and replace with the actual team who had the player at the end of the night:

            Full list - click here

            Below I eliminate a lot of the "noise" and get down to the teams we've been talking about in particular:



            This can help gain added perspective perhaps? Let's get back to the Raptors:
            • 2012: Ross, #8
            • 2011: Valanciunas, #5
            • 2010: Davis, #13
            • 2009: DeRozan, #9


            Those who are suggesting that the Raptors haven't been "sticking to the plan" in terms of developing through the draft as one of the primary sources, please explain to me "the plan"? I don't agree with all that Colangelo has done but here we are and let me explain what the two sides boil down to:

            Side A: Purposely lose in hopes of scoring the #1 or in close approximation to the #1.
            Side B: Move forward building with what currently is here.

            I am telling you that in five years time, riding a losing mentality, this team is more likely to be like a Charlotte or Sacramento than an Oklahoma City. Side A's game plan keeps the Raptors as a farm team unless everything goes just right. I don't like those odds.
            the plan is bottoming out and picking near the top for a few consecutive years, and not 8-14 over and over again. i think all your list shows is that middling lottery picks begets middling talent and bad to mediocre teams. the path to stay irrelevant in perpetuity.

            when we clinched the not-playoffs earlier this year, some writer (i think eric korreen with the post) went through each of the last five seasons and examined the expectations heading into the season. (ahh yes quick google search here it is: http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...y-a-look-back/).

            notice something about that list? the only year we went into it with zero expectations, or rather with the expectation of explicitly sucking to gather talent, we ended up with jonas, who to me is the only thing to be excited about with this franchise. now imagine if we committed to losing a little more, at least having the good sense to not go on these meaningless win streaks at the end of the season, and ended up with two of curry or rubio or barnes or mkg or davis or harden or wall or irving or etc. etc. players that would have been available near the top.

            well we'd be loaded with top talent on rookie scale contracts, and have a squad to truly be excited about.

            what's been most frustrating to me is that management never gave the fan-base the credit to stick through a real re-build. they always went with the quick fixes (retooling not rebuilding) that stuck us in the back end of the lottery, the recipe for irrelevence.

            but reading many of these posts it seems management was right to not give the fan base credit.
            Last edited by chris; Sat May 25, 2013, 02:43 PM.

            Comment


            • also obviously in full agreement with fully, letter n, ebrian, etc. and would take the cavs squad 100 times over, even though i think they totally botched a couple drafts (imagine an irving-val-barnes core? scary)

              but props to cleveland for having the vision and sticking to it.

              Comment


              • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                These rookies made the 1st team after solid rookie seasons...

                -Tyreke Evans 09-10
                -Darren Collison 09-10
                -Landry Fields 10-11
                -Andrea Bargnani 06-07
                -Gary Neal 10-11
                -Al Thornton 07-08
                -Michael Beasley 08-09
                -Ben Gordon 04-05
                -Charlie Villanueva 05-06
                -Jorge Garbajosa 06-07
                -Marc Jackson (not the coach/former PG) 00-01
                -Darius Miles 00-01
                -Drew Gooden 02-03

                Again..these are all 1st team selections. Some had at least a few good years before becoming problem players/contracts (Gordon, Bargs, Gooden). Some washed out pretty fast (though with Garbo it's a special case with his age/injury). Few of them actually had/have promise....Evans can still turn things around. If Fields elbow is good and he can rehab his shot, he should still have a place as a solid role-player for a long time (albeit never again at the crazy contract BC gave him). Collison can still be a fringe starting PG or very good bench player.

                That's not even getting into 2nd teams...in Bargnani's year...the second team was Paul Millsap, Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas, Craig Smith, and a 3-way tie with Rondo, Walter Herrman and Marcus Williams.

                Now, I actually like aspects of Waiters' game. But I'm on the fence as to what direction he'll go. He had a pretty inconsistent rookie season. His stats seem nice compared to other rookies....But it wasn't the strongest rookie class in terms of "immediate impact" players. I didn't see a lot of growth in Waiters' game during the season. He looked much like the same player from start to finish. His shooting %s were terrible. His assist numbers (3 apg) probably only rank 2nd because it was maybe the weakest PG draft class of all time. And back to his %s, his made 3 pointers are clearly not because of a high proficiency from long range (31%). He was a thoroughly average player on a (bad) team where he had abundant opportunities.
                NoPropsneeded wrote: View Post
                You're missing that he played on a terrible team where he was given the freedom to chuck anything and everything. Averaging 15 points while shooting 41% from the field is nothing to brag about, especially if you come from a sub par draft class. Him making the all rookie first team over JV shows that those all rookies teams don't really matter.
                Holy crap guys. I'm not electing Waiters to the Hall of Fame. I just said he was one of the best rookies in the league last year, which he was.

                The list of players who have made all rookie teams to go on and flame out is pointless until we actually know what Waiters becomes. I could post a much longer list of players who made the all rookie teams that went on to have awesome careers and make the same argument, no?

                Yes, he shot 41.2% last season from the floor. Lowry and Ross both shot lower percentages. Rudy Gay was only fractions higher as a vet making $18 million. You both seem to be huge fans of all three of those guys ironically. The reality is that Waiters is a gunner and will never shoot at a crazy high rate. That doesn't make him a scrub. He's a high-ceiling guy making relative peanuts that has true value in this league, whether it's on the Cavs roster or in trade talks.

                And beyond all of that, the reason I envy the Cavs situation goes WAY beyond what I think Waiter's future holds
                Last edited by Fully; Sat May 25, 2013, 02:53 PM.

                Comment


                • chris wrote: View Post
                  the plan is bottoming out and picking near the top for a few consecutive years, and not 8-14 over and over again. i think all your list shows is that middling lottery picks begets middling talent and bad to mediocre teams. the path to stay irrelevant in perpetuity.

                  when we clinched the not-playoffs earlier this year, some writer (i think eric korreen with the post) went through each of the last five seasons and examined the expectations heading into the season. (ahh yes quick google search here it is: http://sports.nationalpost.com/2013/...y-a-look-back/).

                  notice something about that list? the only year we went into it with zero expectations, or rather with the expectation of explicitly sucking to gather talent, we ended up with jonas, who to me is the only thing to be excited about with this franchise. now imagine if we committed to losing a little more, at least having the good sense to not go on these meaningless win streaks at the end of the season, and ended up with two of curry or rubio or barnes or mkg or davis or harden or wall or irving or etc. etc. players that would have been available near the top.

                  well we'd be loaded with top talent on rookie scale contracts, and have a squad to truly be excited about.

                  what's been most frustrating to me is that management never gave the fan-base the credit to stick through a real re-build. they always went with the quick fixes (retooling not rebuilding) that stuck us in the back end of the lottery, the recipe for irrelevence.

                  but reading many of these posts it seems management was right to not give the fan base credit.
                  The one missing element is luck. Charlotte is a perfect example of a team this year who were not trying to be good, ended up 2nd worst, and slipped to 5th. It is tough when you do all you are suppose to do to build through losing only to have the balls bounce to a team not as bad and having them get ahead of you.

                  By the way, only way you are getting 5 of those 8 players (MKG, Davis, Harden, Wall, or Irving - that is 3 #1s, a #2, and a #3) is by lottery luck.

                  I'm not trying to pick a side in this debate. There is more than one way to build a team. It is interesting that Harden is now playing for a team that has gone a totally different route than the Cavs or Thunder of the league. Houston drafted smart, accumulated assets, created financial flexibility, and obtained a franchise talent in Harden who they will certainly flaunt to prospective free agents (i.e. the missing ingredient of the last few seasons).

                  With there clearly being more way than one to build a team (you might prefer one way, but there are different ways to go about it), the key thing is leadership willing to see it through. I think that is the biggest knock on Colangelo and the reason for his failure in Toronto. Like many people, he put himself ahead of the organization. He needed results sooner than later after 2012 season. It was telling when he said in a press conference that Casey won too many games in '11-12. I think he had the vision but when things did not go according to plan he forced the issue (Nash, Fields, Lowry). He went all in on the 2011 and 2012 draft and the 2012 draft did not yield the talent he was expecting/hoping.

                  Comment


                  • Fully wrote: View Post
                    Holy crap guys. I'm not electing Waiters to the Hall of Fame. I just said he was one of the best rookies in the league last year, which he was.

                    The list of players who have made all rookie teams to go on and flame out is pointless until we actually know what Waiters becomes. I could post a much longer list of players who made the all rookie teams that went on to have awesome careers and make the same argument, no?

                    Yes, he shot 41.2% last season from the floor. Lowry and Ross both shot lower percentages. Rudy Gay was only fractions higher as a vet making $18 million. You both seem to be huge fans of all three of those guys ironically. The reality is that Waiters is a gunner and will never shoot at a crazy high rate. That doesn't make him a scrub. He's a high-ceiling guy making relative peanuts that has true value in this league, whether it's on the Cavs roster or in trade talks.

                    And beyond all of that, the reason I envy the Cavs situation goes WAY beyond what I think Waiter's future holds
                    Excuse me? Now I know you're just being a pain, because I was always against acquiring GAy, have consistently said I'm not sold as Lowry as a PG...and well I like things about Ross' game. I am a fan, but only in the sense that he's a cheap player with promising 2-way ability...so I'd rather not trade him unless it's to help bring in a pretty big asset (certainly not going to include him in a deal, for example, just to get rid of Bargs, which has been suggested).

                    All I was saying is that using stats and the all-rookie team as gauges are basically bullcrap. Rookies are all about situations. If I had to pick my top 5 rookies last year it would be Lillard, Beal, Barnes, Davis and JV (homerism, I could also understand Drummond here)....These 5 guys all showed improvement, or improved consistency at least, as well as contributing to team success to some degree, even if 4 (5 counting Drummond) didn't make the playoffs.

                    Again, I was not particularly impressed with Waiters. He seemed very much to be the same player at the end of the season as at the start. I can't say that for the guys I mentioned above. And on top of it, while it's not surprising they didn't make the playoffs....Cleveland's win total in 3 seasons, the last 2 adding multiple high draft picks...19 wins....21 wins...24 wins...Although I'd say that reflects more poorly on Irving than anybody. Again, I'm also not overly impressed with Irving...A PG who so far has not shown good leadership ability, D or getting his teammates involved.

                    Comment


                    • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      Excuse me? Now I know you're just being a pain, because I was always against acquiring GAy, have consistently said I'm not sold as Lowry as a PG...and well I like things about Ross' game. I am a fan, but only in the sense that he's a cheap player with promising 2-way ability...so I'd rather not trade him unless it's to help bring in a pretty big asset (certainly not going to include him in a deal, for example, just to get rid of Bargs, which has been suggested).

                      All I was saying is that using stats and the all-rookie team as gauges are basically bullcrap. Rookies are all about situations. If I had to pick my top 5 rookies last year it would be Lillard, Beal, Barnes, Davis and JV (homerism, I could also understand Drummond here)....These 5 guys all showed improvement, or improved consistency at least, as well as contributing to team success to some degree, even if 4 (5 counting Drummond) didn't make the playoffs.

                      Again, I was not particularly impressed with Waiters. He seemed very much to be the same player at the end of the season as at the start. I can't say that for the guys I mentioned above. And on top of it, while it's not surprising they didn't make the playoffs....Cleveland's win total in 3 seasons, the last 2 adding multiple high draft picks...19 wins....21 wins...24 wins...Although I'd say that reflects more poorly on Irving than anybody. Again, I'm also not overly impressed with Irving...A PG who so far has not shown good leadership ability, D or getting his teammates involved.
                      I am truly not trying to be an antagonist and I apologize if it came off that way.

                      I just find it funny that one of your main sticking points with Waiters was that he shot 41% as a rookie when there are plenty of key players on the current Raptors roster - one that you seem to think we should move forward with, correct me if I'm wrong - that are either below that mark (Ross, KL) or hovering slightly above it (Gay, DD). There seems to be a disconnect in logic there. I also find it ironic that you are a big fan of Ross and not Waiters - considering Ross falls short of Waiters in practically every single measure last season, and actually had his play decline quite drastically in the back half of the season.

                      I can't knock you for liking Beals, Drummond, JV, Lillard or AD over Waiters. I actually would take any of those guys myself. However most of those guys benefitted from having ample opportunities while playing on non-playoff teams too. Beals shot even lower than Waiters last season and Lillard was only marginally higher at 43%. They're rookies. They're all still learning. Waiters included.
                      Last edited by Fully; Sat May 25, 2013, 04:22 PM.

                      Comment


                      • I've been paying a lot of attention to Indianna this post season because I feel like that's the team we resemble the most. Could strive to become very easily. The one thing I've notice is how much better they've played without the wing duo of Granger/Goerge. They've replace Granger with Stephanson. How is more of all around player. That's made a lot of defiance in their whole approach on offense and defense. It just seems like their way more complimentary to eachother. No one is stepping on anyone feet.

                        With that said I've become a avatator of Landry Fields starting next to Rudy. I believe that Landry Fields is a great clue guy to have in a starting line up. That will do all the little things that will help you win basketball games. He doesn't need to score to be productive. DD has to score to be productive unfortuantely. There wont be that many shots to go around in the first unit with JV getting better.

                        I wouldn't want DD to come off the bench. I'd rather see him just be traded all together. I would really like to see him go to LA with AB for Gasol back. DD has been extremely loyal to Toronto. It would be a nice gesture to send him home. That way we would only see him twice a year too. If know me I'm a big DD fan. His the only raptor I've ever met but, I just feel like this team would just be better that way.
                        @Chr1st1anL

                        Comment


                        • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                          The one missing element is luck. Charlotte is a perfect example of a team this year who were not trying to be good, ended up 2nd worst, and slipped to 5th. It is tough when you do all you are suppose to do to build through losing only to have the balls bounce to a team not as bad and having them get ahead of you.

                          By the way, only way you are getting 5 of those 8 players (MKG, Davis, Harden, Wall, or Irving - that is 3 #1s, a #2, and a #3) is by lottery luck.
                          the other most obvious example of this is the toronto raptors in 2010-2011, when they finished with the 3rd worst record in the league and slid all the way to 5th, and drafted jonas valanciunas.

                          oh wait.

                          you create your own lottery luck. if you finish in the bottom five odds are overwhelming that you'll pick in the top five. if you pick in the top five in multiple years you'll either have a young, cheap core with solid starters to all stars to franchise players.

                          or you'll have busts and disappointments. at which point you can re-evaluate the gm and scouting department because it's guaranteed that they missed (there is always an all-star or near all star level talent in the top five). the plan didn't fail. the plan was fucking solid.
                          Last edited by chris; Sat May 25, 2013, 05:31 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Fully wrote: View Post
                            I am truly not trying to be an antagonist and I apologize if it came off that way.

                            I just find it funny that one of your main sticking points with Waiters was that shot 41% as a rookie when there are plenty of key players on the current Raptors roster - one that you seem to think we should move forward with, correct me if I'm wrong - that are either below that mark (Ross, KL) or hovering slightly above it (Gay, DD). There seems to be a disconnect in logic there. I also find it ironic that you are a big fan of Ross and not Waiters - considering Ross falls short of Waiters in practically every single measure last season, and actually had his play decline quite drastically in the back half of the season.

                            I can't knock you for liking Beals, Drummond, JV, Lillard or AD over Waiters. I actually would take any of those guys myself. However most of those guys benefitted from having ample opportunities while playing on non-playoff teams too. Beals shot even lower than Waiters last season and Lillard was only marginally higher at 43%. They're rookies. They're all still learning. Waiters included.
                            There's no disconnect in logic. I never said any of their FG%s were impressive. I don't like Gay as a scorer. Nor do I like DeMar, though I'd still only trade one to get a better player, not to dump them. As for Ross, his overall % is lower, but his 3pt % is higher. He showed flashes to fill exactly the role he was drafted for: a 3 and D guy with great athleticism. Granted I wish his 3% was a bit higher, but yes, he and all the others are rookies, and we hope they can learn to be better.

                            However I also look at things in terms of "what can this guy be elite at?"....And when I look at Waiters, I see nothing to answer that question. Maybe above average in a few areas, but that's it...and he needs the ball a lot. As often gets said about DeMar, inefficient wings with decent athleticism are a dime a dozen. He reminds me a lot of Randy Foye...which makes me think he'll be traded before his rookie contract is up. I can't say the same for Ross. I can see him becoming an elite or near-elite shooter and defender at SG. This makes him a guy who could fit in as a starter or bench player on pretty much any type of winning roster.

                            Basically, though there's no way to find this out, I wouldn't be surprised if Ross' value is higher than Waiters'. I'm more confident that Ross fits into whatever team is being built going forward, and I feel like any team shopping for a young SG would thus be more likely to target a player like Ross than Waiters. Right now, Cleveland is building around two ball-dominant shoot-first guards. I find nothing wise about that, I don't care how good a scorer Irving is. He reminds me too much of Iverson (obviously less crazy), and that's a hard type of player to build around.

                            To mix things up, I would also take Washington over Cleveland. They have added numerous high picks, but also sprinkled in veterans (Okafor, Nene), who though overpaid, have solid value both on the court and as potential trade assets. Instead of two ball-dominant guards, Wall is a natural PG...still learning, but when he is knocking down shots he is a legit elite PG. Beal is also a very nice piece beside him, already starting to show elite outside shooting (.386% 3pt is pretty great for a rookie). Webster is a nice young vet, and someone who fits well with what they're doing. They have another high pick coming in this year.

                            THey have a pretty nice situation, where they are developing players at the same time as adding pieces to help improve in the short term. The fact that they have added vets and spent some money has not compromised anything going forward. They have many movable assets but a budding core THAT FITS TOGETHER. Now if only they can make sure management doesn't knock things off course.

                            Cleveland's team is messy. Nothing looks like surefire pieces that fit together moving forward. This is also a problem in Toronto. And you can't really speculate that draft picks/capspace is a better situation moving forward, because you could also argue that the surest way to add talent is by trading, and the Raptors have more assets stockpiled to get that done. I like the control Toronto has in dictating the moves they make moving assets they already have but don't fit very well. I don't like that Cleveland is depending on the luck of some ping-pong balls or the chances that a young, rich 20-something man is going to decide to spend his prime years there, and that they don't have many assets currently assembled if this doesn't work out as hoped.

                            Again though, this is just opinion, and so much in Toronto's case depends on the competence of the new GM, and so much for Cleveland depends on sheer luck. So maybe if BC were still our GM I'd take Cleveland's situation, but hoping the new guy knows what he's doing, I'll pick Toronto's.

                            Washington has the best of both worlds, having acquired veterans while continuing to stockpile young pieces, starting with a PG that is a consistent jumper away from being a legit franchise player. They have the freedom to keep adding young pieces, while also having other assets to move if they feel that's the better option for improving their team...and somehow, they haven't destroyed their cap situation. It's funny, for most of the season Washington looked like a train wreck, but they look like they're in a pretty good spot now that the dust has settled. After a few rough years, they look like they're on the right track.

                            Comment


                            • chris wrote: View Post
                              the other most obvious example of this is the toronto raptors in 2010-2011, when they finished with the 3rd worst record in the league and slid all the way to 5th, and drafted jonas valanciunas.

                              oh wait.

                              you create your own lottery luck. if you finish in the bottom five odds are overwhelming that you'll pick in the top five. if you pick in the top five in multiple years you'll either have a young, cheap core with solid starters to all stars to franchise players.

                              or you'll have busts and disappointments. at which point you can re-evaluate the gm and scouting department because it's guaranteed that they missed (there is always an all-star or near all star level talent in the top five). the plan didn't fail. the plan was fucking solid.
                              oh wait...

                              What happens if JV did not have the contract situation? That is an external force that acted upon the situation to Toronto's favour - some might call that external force luck. Toronto did not create that luck, they just were lucky enough to take advantage and have the situation play out in their favour. It was well documented that JV was likely to be/assumed to be/predicted to be the 2nd best talent in the draft but the fear of a Rubio situation scared off Minnesota and Cleveland (JV's buyout was not arranged prior to draft).

                              For shits and giggles, lets look at the last 10 drafts:

                              2012:
                              1 NOH Anthony Davis
                              2 CHA Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
                              3 WAS Bradley Beal
                              4 CLE Dion Waiters
                              5 SAC Thomas Robinson

                              2011:
                              1 CLE Kyrie Irving
                              2 MIN Derrick Williams
                              3 UTA Enes Kanter
                              4 CLE Tristan Thompson
                              5 TOR Jonas Valanciunas

                              2010:
                              1 WAS John Wall
                              2 PHI Evan Turner
                              3 NJN Derrick Favors
                              4 MIN Wesley Johnson
                              5 SAC DeMarcus Cousins

                              2009:
                              1 LAC Blake Griffin
                              2 MEM Hasheem Thabeet
                              3 OKC James Harden
                              4 SAC Tyreke Evans
                              5 MIN Ricky Rubio

                              2008:
                              1 CHI Derrick Rose
                              2 MIA Michael Beasley
                              3 MIN O.J. Mayo
                              4 SEA Russell Westbrook
                              5 MEM Kevin Love

                              2007:
                              1 POR Greg Oden
                              2 SEA Kevin Durant
                              3 ATL Al Horford
                              4 MEM Mike Conley
                              5 BOS Jeff Green

                              2006:
                              1 TOR Andrea Bargnani
                              2 CHI LaMarcus Aldridge
                              3 CHA Adam Morrison
                              4 POR Tyrus Thomas
                              5 ATL Shelden Williams

                              2005:
                              1 MIL Andrew Bogut
                              2 ATL Marvin Williams
                              3 UTA Deron Williams
                              4 NOH Chris Paul
                              5 CHA Raymond Felton

                              2004:
                              1 ORL Dwight Howard
                              2 CHA Emeka Okafor
                              3 CHI Ben Gordon
                              4 LAC Shaun Livingston
                              5 WAS Devin Harris

                              2003:
                              1 CLE LeBron James
                              2 DET Darko Milicic
                              3 DEN Carmelo Anthony
                              4 TOR Chris Bosh
                              5 MIA Dwyane Wade

                              Yes, there are always all-star to near all-star talent in the top 5 but getting it is never a guarantee. From 2003-2009, there are 35 players selected in the top 5 but only 15 are all-stars today and 12 are either on their way out of the league if not already there. I am not arguing a top 5 pick is not the best way to get all-star talent either. But the only way your logic works without fail is if you get the #1 pick and don't make a wrong choice (i.e. are perfect). Imagine not getting the #1 pick in 2004. Imagine if Durant went #1 in 2007. Imagine if Memphis kept Love (thereby not getting Mayo) and selected Harden (thereby not selecting Thabeet)? What fall out for today. There are a ridiculous amount of variables that do not exist in a vacuum that go in to the draft.

                              Then you have all sorts of other issues once you are lucky enough to get the talent: What happens if you don't get a franchise talent - just a couple of borderline all-stars? What happens if your star player becomes a prima donna and wants to go to a larger market? What happens if your all-stars aren't good enough to win on their own and bolt to join up with other all stars to win (or if they become UFA and just want to leave)? What happens if injuries destroy what you have built before it ever gets a chance to reach its potential? What happens if you max out your two all-stars and you don't have enough role players to field a winning team? What happens if you have a million dollar talent with a five cent attitude/work ethic? What happens if your NCAA-1st team, National Player of the Year is just not good enough to make the step to the NBA despite being hailed from all media and scouts as a can't miss? What happens if your star players don't gel on or off court? What happens if the player you draft never improves either through already maximizing talent or poor work ethic? What happens if the talent becomes a different person with millions at their disposal? What happens if it takes the player 5-6 years to put it all together?



                              So in the end your theory is draft in top 5 for 2-3 seasons, get franchise talent, and voila championship contender. If this doesn't work, then it is the GM's fault then fire him (and the whole front office) and bring in someone else. I cannot begin to describe how simple minded and short sighted I think this is. If there was a cookie cutter approach to winning, everyone would do it.

                              I am not saying what you are advocating is impossible. What I am saying is there is more than one way to build a championship contending team and no way is a sure thing even with the best management. The hilarious thing in the NBA right now there are 4 teams who all were built in different manners competing for the title (San Antonio: injury "luck" leading to #1 pick combined with the best management in the game; Miami: free agency collusion among players; Indiana: a team built through 10-17 draft picks and a key free agent signing in West (a #18 draft pick!); and Memphis: one top 5 pick currently playing and trades/mid-level to lower tier free agents). The one team built in the manner you suggest is knocked out of the playoffs because CBA issues arose resulting in trading Harden and then an injury occurred to Westbrook.


                              **There is an article out there with the premise of why there will never be another OKC. Does anyone know where it is? I can't find it. I think it was Grantland**

                              Comment


                              • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
                                I've been paying a lot of attention to Indianna this post season because I feel like that's the team we resemble the most. Could strive to become very easily. The one thing I've notice is how much better they've played without the wing duo of Granger/Goerge. They've replace Granger with Stephanson. How is more of all around player. That's made a lot of defiance in their whole approach on offense and defense. It just seems like their way more complimentary to eachother. No one is stepping on anyone feet.

                                With that said I've become a avatator of Landry Fields starting next to Rudy. I believe that Landry Fields is a great clue guy to have in a starting line up. That will do all the little things that will help you win basketball games. He doesn't need to score to be productive. DD has to score to be productive unfortuantely. There wont be that many shots to go around in the first unit with JV getting better.

                                I wouldn't want DD to come off the bench. I'd rather see him just be traded all together. I would really like to see him go to LA with AB for Gasol back. DD has been extremely loyal to Toronto. It would be a nice gesture to send him home. That way we would only see him twice a year too. If know me I'm a big DD fan. His the only raptor I've ever met but, I just feel like this team would just be better that way.
                                Welcome to the dark side.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X