Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything 2017 Off-Season

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

  • Guys, I'm over it. This series is over. So is this team as is. At first I was shocked and in denial. And then I was angry. then I was depressed. Now I accept it. This team can't do it. tweaking schemes, lineups won't work. old coach can't find new ways to coach. Without significant changes to coaching and to the leadership of this team, they won't go anywhere but annual 1st round exits at best. This team is done for good.

    Comment


    • Rand wrote: View Post
      Guys, I'm over it. This series is over. So is this team as is. At first I was shocked and in denial. And then I was angry. then I was depressed. Now I accept it. This team can't do it. tweaking schemes, lineups won't work. old coach can't find new ways to coach. Without significant changes to coaching and to the leadership of this team, they won't go anywhere but annual 1st round exits at best. .
      Uhhh, we've gotten past the first round two years in a row.

      Comment


      • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
        Uhhh, we've gotten past the first round two years in a row.
        They did struggle to do it though, against significantly inferior opposition. And with obvious strategic failures.

        Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • Scraptor wrote: View Post
          Amidst all the Fire Casey talk (which I obviously support) there is one danger that seems somewhat overlooked. What if there are fundamental flaws in the construction of this roster?

          What if we change the coach, go deep into the luxury tax, and discover our ceiling hasn't changed?

          We are only shooting 26.7% on wide open threes in this series. None of Carroll, Ibaka, or PJ is a true shooter; they CAN shoot but are not shooters. DD, CoJo, and Powell are not shooters. Patterson may qualify but has no mental toughness.

          So in a league more dependent than ever on shooting, we find ourselves poised to go deep into the tax with limited shooting. And then it becomes a matter of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, because to improve on one thing means surrendering something else.

          I don't have a strong opinion on this. I'm just curious how others feel. If we pay up and don't see results we could be in for many more years of frustration.
          Not totally sure what you mean when you say a guy CAN shoot, but isn't a 'shooter'. When we say we need "shooters" are we talking about bringing in one-dimensional guys like Kyle Korver and Ryan Anderson? Then we're right back to the knee-jerk BC school of team building where we bring in extreme 1-way guys like Jason Kapono for shooting and then Reggie Evans for rebounding.

          PJ, Carroll and Ibaka all came in as 2-way guys with a knack for defense and that's where Casey has failed the team. Almost every trade or draft pick had some element of defense to it and yet we're defending the Cavs far worse than the Pacers. Casey has failed to build the team's character in his image and publicly stated goal, as a self-proclaimed defensive coach.

          Shooting is high variance by nature. Last night Ryan Anderson went 0-4 from 3 and Eric Gordon went 1-4 (3-10 overall). 3&D Pat Beverley was 3-13. They looked like world beaters in Game 1, but the Spurs, starting 2 old-school relics in the front-court and a rookie PG, held the high octane Rockets to 92 points.

          Strategy matters. You get the results that you practice. And this team has completely gone away from the identity that they practiced all season long. Practiced for 4 years, actually. I see no point in bringing in 1-dimensional 'shooters', until we understand why guys who CAN shoot aren't making their shots in this system. Like you said, it will be just shuffling chairs, because then the losses will be blamed on 'not having defenders'.

          Comment


          • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
            They did struggle to do it though, against significantly inferior opposition. And with obvious strategic failures.

            Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
            If all these teams are significantly inferior, we're not that bad.

            Comment


            • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
              We might want to sign a couple guys that can actually hit open shots.
              Scraptor wrote: View Post
              Amidst all the Fire Casey talk (which I obviously support) there is one danger that seems somewhat overlooked. What if there are fundamental flaws in the construction of this roster?

              What if we change the coach, go deep into the luxury tax, and discover our ceiling hasn't changed?

              We are only shooting 26.7% on wide open threes in this series. None of Carroll, Ibaka, or PJ is a true shooter; they CAN shoot but are not shooters. DD, CoJo, and Powell are not shooters. Patterson may qualify but has no mental toughness.

              So in a league more dependent than ever on shooting, we find ourselves poised to go deep into the tax with limited shooting. And then it becomes a matter of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, because to improve on one thing means surrendering something else.

              I don't have a strong opinion on this. I'm just curious how others feel. If we pay up and don't see results we could be in for many more years of frustration.
              The three people who most define the Raptors team right now are:

              Casey

              Lowry

              Derozan

              I think Casey has the least impact of these three.

              Both Lowry and Derozan have significant and fatal (in terms of winning a championship) flaws as players. One that they share is that I don't think either of them are natural leaders, and I think strong, natural leaders are essential in sports (and especially so in the NBA). Casey isn't a natural leader either, and when the three most important members of a basketball team aren't leaders, I think you're dead in the water before you even begin (and again, this is in terms of winning a title).

              Other flaws for Lowry include being injury prone, not only not being a leader but being a dick, and chronic underperforming under pressure.

              Other flaws for Demar include no 3pt shot, a relatively low Bball IQ for an NBA guard/wing, a poor ability to improvise under pressure, chronic underperforming under pressure, and most importantly, being caught by the salary cap in that he's probably worth what he's being paid, but this means that players like Lebron, Kawhi, KD etc are significantly underpaid, and so the Raptors effectively have $15-$25 million LESS in cap space than teams with truly elite players.

              These are the fundamental problems with the current roster, and a modest (or, likely, significant) increase in 3pt shooting percentage and/or coaching strategy cannot overcome them, imo.
              "Stop eating your sushi."
              "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
              "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
              - Jack Armstrong

              Comment


              • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
                If all these teams are significantly inferior, we're not that bad.
                What?

                Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • Lowry IS a natural leader. Just not when his body (invariably?) goes to shit.

                  Comment


                  • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
                    Lowry IS a natural leader. Just not when his body (invariably?) goes to shit.
                    Disagree, and I think the playoff results of the past four seasons proves it.
                    "Stop eating your sushi."
                    "I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
                    "I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
                    - Jack Armstrong

                    Comment


                    • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                      What?

                      Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
                      I think my point was pretty clear. The only team that has actually beaten us in the playoffs is one of the best ever assembled.

                      Comment


                      • JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                        Disagree, and I think the playoff results of the past four seasons proves it.
                        The evidence tells us a lot of things, but proof is not one of them.

                        Comment


                        • SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
                          I think my point was pretty clear. The only team that has actually beaten us in the playoffs is one of the best ever assembled.
                          Struggling with inferior opponents is not the sign of a good team. In 4 playoff years with home court advantage in the first round, we've lost twice and struggled twice to beat teams that were a lot worse on paper than us.

                          And we got eliminated by BKL, who you could argue was inferior. And WAS we were fairly similar to, but we swept them in the regular season that year but got swept by them in the playoffs. So unless you think those two teams are among "the best ever assembled"...

                          Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                          • Scraptor wrote: View Post
                            Amidst all the Fire Casey talk (which I obviously support) there is one danger that seems somewhat overlooked. What if there are fundamental flaws in the construction of this roster?

                            What if we change the coach, go deep into the luxury tax, and discover our ceiling hasn't changed?

                            We are only shooting 26.7% on wide open threes in this series. None of Carroll, Ibaka, or PJ is a true shooter; they CAN shoot but are not shooters. DD, CoJo, and Powell are not shooters. Patterson may qualify but has no mental toughness.

                            So in a league more dependent than ever on shooting, we find ourselves poised to go deep into the tax with limited shooting. And then it becomes a matter of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, because to improve on one thing means surrendering something else.

                            I don't have a strong opinion on this. I'm just curious how others feel. If we pay up and don't see results we could be in for many more years of frustration.
                            I think MU will look for some players outside of North America to get some shooting. I think he has to in order to find some cheaper players. We need to find some guys like Patti Mills on the cheap.

                            Comment


                            • LJ2 wrote: View Post
                              I think MU will look for some players outside of North America to get some shooting. I think he has to in order to find some cheaper players. We need to find some guys like Patti Mills on the cheap.
                              Bargs is available. smdh.

                              Masai has been blowing assets to bring in Casey guys (defense-first, 2-way players who CAN shoot) for the last 3-4 years and now we need re-tool our roster with some Euro shooters to get us over the hump? Just "getting some shooters" doesn't look like the answer to me, even if it was that easy.

                              What people are forgetting here is that the Raps actually shot a very nice 3P% in the regular season (.363). Better than the Rockets, Celtics and Hawks. The real question here is: why does our shooting (and overall offense) drop off or become wildly inconsitstent in the playoffs vs. the regular season?
                              Last edited by golden; Sat May 6, 2017, 12:41 PM.

                              Comment


                              • white men can't jump wrote: View Post
                                Struggling with inferior opponents is not the sign of a good team. In 4 playoff years with home court advantage in the first round, we've lost twice and struggled twice to beat teams that were a lot worse on paper than us.

                                And we got eliminated by BKL, who you could argue was inferior. And WAS we were fairly similar to, but we swept them in the regular season that year but got swept by them in the playoffs. So unless you think those two teams are among "the best ever assembled"...

                                Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
                                Even making the playoffs is the sign of a good team. And only historically great teams don't struggle to close out their playoff opponents. Playoff series, on average, are dog fights.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X