BC: "We will be in a unique position with $12 million in cap space before the draft"

[Nilanka]

They won 23 this year on a 66 games season, without Bargs for the most part of the year and with a lot of other significant players injured all season long. On a 82 games season, this is 29 wins. So you think that by switching Amir for JV and Okafor, having Mo Williams instead of Gary Forbes and Kendall Marshall instead of Anthony Carter this team would be lucky to win 30 games next year?

Ok fine, 32 wins

[Nilanka]

its pretty obvious that we lacked any consistant outside scoring which in turn made defences clog the lanes & made it harder for the bigs to score down low & it also makes it harder for the slashers like DD to get to the rim in a half court offence.. the post presence we need is on defence..

It depends on whether you adhere to the "inside out" or "outside in" philosophy to offense.

Do your post players draw double-teams, thus freeing up your 3pt shooters? Or are your shooters such threats that defences wouldn't dare doubling in the post, thus leaving your bigs to work 1-on-1?

Ideally, you'd want threats on the inside AND outside. But we neither have a dead-eye shooter, or a post-threat who demands a double team.

[Mediumcore]

its pretty obvious that we lacked any consistant outside scoring which in turn made defences clog the lanes & made it harder for the bigs to score down low & it also makes it harder for the slashers like DD to get to the rim in a half court offence.. the post presence we need is on defence..

Yeah, the outside shooting was poor, but traditionally both offense and defences are built from the inside out. Defences clogged the lane to make us into a jump shooting team which we aren't good at, but if you have outside shooters and none of them can break down a defender and take it inside then what good is it 'cause defenders will just play man to man and cancel out the perimeter shooters. We need a post presence on the offensive end to keep defenders in the paint thus opening up shots for the perimeter players.

I disagree that the post presence we need is on defence (though I wouldn't say no to signing D. Howard). The Raptors were amongst one of the best teams at keeping teams from scoring in the paint. They did a great job of defending and rebounding by committee this past season.

I think it's a case of we just have a lot of holes to fill, but to me you build a team inside out not the other way around.

[charlesnba23]

its pretty obvious that we lacked any consistant outside scoring which in turn made defences clog the lanes & made it harder for the bigs to score down low & it also makes it harder for the slashers like DD to get to the rim in a half court offence.. the post presence we need is on defence..

Mo??? Emeka???

[DoNDaDDa]

Yeah, the outside shooting was poor, but traditionally both offense and defences are built from the inside out. Defences clogged the lane to make us into a jump shooting team which we aren't good at, but if you have outside shooters and none of them can break down a defender and take it inside then what good is it 'cause defenders will just play man to man and cancel out the perimeter shooters. We need a post presence on the offensive end to keep defenders in the paint thus opening up shots for the perimeter players.

I disagree that the post presence we need is on defence (though I wouldn't say no to signing D. Howard). The Raptors were amongst one of the best teams at keeping teams from scoring in the paint. They did a great job of defending and rebounding by committee this past season.

I think it's a case of we just have a lot of holes to fill, but to me you build a team inside out not the other way around.

with healthy bargs, Jonas,Amir,Ed i think we got more then enough options in the post on offence.. they need to have some room to operate though.. with a lights out shooter or 2 on the floor with these guys they will do just fine.

[DoNDaDDa]

Mo??? Emeka???

NO!
there ok players but they cost way more then there worth..

[Beaverboi]

I love this argument because it credits OKC management with having some sort of genius when the reality is they got ridiculously lucky. You don't think Portland picked potential superstars over the past 10 years? Sacramento? Washington?
You never know if someone will end up like Durant or like Beasley. There is so much luck involved it's not even funny.
l.

There is some truth to that. You think OKC considers themselves lucky for not winning the 'Oden' draft??

[BallaBalla]

There is some truth to that. You think OKC considers themselves lucky for not winning the 'Oden' draft??

Not just the fact that they didn't win so that they had an "easier" decision than Portland, but it is a total package. Durant, Westbrook, Harden, and Ibaka are not only good, they have all exceeded expectations. They fell into a perfect situation where they could each play their game without stepping on their teammates, and on top of all of that, they get along with each other off the court.

If you couple this with the fact that Nick Collison was also drafted by them, you get a list of about 20 things that need to go right which you cannot control to get the result of an OKC.

It is FAR more likely that a team which floats around the bottom of the league for years and collects draft picks will end up like Sacramento. They have a bunch of talented players, who don't know their role, and while they have the personnel to beat good teams, they have no identity and are thus inconsistent individually.

[thead]

They won 23 this year on a 66 games season, without Bargs for the most part of the year and with a lot of other significant players injured all season long. On a 82 games season, this is 29 wins. So you think that by switching Amir for JV and Okafor, having Mo Williams instead of Gary Forbes and Kendall Marshall instead of Anthony Carter this team would be lucky to win 30 games next year?

+100

[golden]

I love this argument because it credits OKC management with having some sort of genius when the reality is they got ridiculously lucky. You don't think Portland picked potential superstars over the past 10 years? Sacramento? Washington?
You never know if someone will end up like Durant or like Beasley. There is so much luck involved it's not even funny.

The bottom line is, the teams that have won championships, with exception of the Spurs, have ASSEMBLED a core group of players because there is less luck involved in that. You put Pierce, Garnet and Ray Allen together, you can be pretty sure you will have a good team.

The Raptors need to go after players that will change the course of the franchise, not JJ Reddick. I agree that this time may not be now, but at some point we will have to make a move and get a proven player who take us to the next level.

+1. Great points. And also remember that OKC moved up from 5th pick to 2nd, so that was like a perfect storm for them to get Durant as a no-brainer. The next best player in the first round is probably Al Horford (#3). Nice player, but nowhere near the franchise cornerstore that Durant is. Swap Durant with Horford and OKC is probably the Atlanta Hawks, at best.

BTW - even the Spurs got "lucky" to draft Tim Duncan, because David Robinson got injured the preceding year and their second best scorer, Sean Elliot, was also out for 1/2 the season. They were coming off a 58 win season and won only 16 that year before drafting Duncan.

[charlesnba23]

Ok fine, 32 wins

Oh c'mon man... I'm sure they would get at least 35 wins with that roster, and that's a minimum, IMO. I'll keep on saying we shouldn't destroy this core. Casey started to build something really solid, why rush it?

Here's a point that I'm really convinced in: To get a guy like Granger, we would need to trade away at least 2 really good young players, let's say our pick and Ed Davis. Granger will be 30 years of age by next season, so we would need to really be in a big win NOW mode. That means getting to our ceiling by 2013. I don't think that's the plan BC and DC hold.

By not doing such a trade and by trading for Emeka and Mo, you have 6 really good players with a lot of potential that are 25 or younger (DeMar, JJ, Ed, Marshall, Bayless, Valanciunas) surrounded by a big bunch of really good young veterans (Bargnani, Calderon, Emeka, Mo, Kleiza, Gray).

Between both scenarios, I'd take the last one anyday of the week. Much safer and much smart, at least IMO, if we want to be competitive long term.

[stefan5301]

Yes, we won what would've been the equivalent of 29 wins in an 82 game system, however you can argue that we won some games due to the schedule. With Emeka and Mo, we'd essentially stay a team thats not good enough to make playoffs and not bad enough for top 5, or maybe even top 8 picks in the draft, stuck in below mediocrity purgatory. The raps would also be unable to move in free agency at all, and a giant glut at the PF and C spots and no wing depth at all. Why would you want this?

That being said, I think if we could trade Ed Davis our two second round picks for 'Reke Evans from Sactown, and sign Courtney Lee, we'd have great backcourt bench, both pushing Demar for his starting SG spot even. Evans could play Pg as well, with Courtney Lee able to spot up shoot, and drive as well. We'd get rid of our PF glut as well. Hopefully Barnes could fall to us as well, although highly unlikely. Then if Bayless isn't offered much we could even possibly keep him.

Jose/Tyreke/Ben Uzoh
Derozan/Lee/Forbes
Barnes/JJ/Kleiza
Bargs/Amir Johnson/JJ/Kleiza
JV/Aaron Gray

[albertan_10]

Has anyone brought up the idea of getting Jason Terry. I believe the team has an option on him this year that they don't expect to use. He is a winning player who has gone through it all. He's also a great 3 point shooter.

[LBF]

Interesting. I don't have a problem with Terry.

I just can't see him outside of dallas like in another uni. It's just not right.

[akashsingh]

if somehow we luck out and have the ability to draft beal, I would be all for swapping iguodala for derozan + something...... I think that would make us a more well rounded team.