Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Charles Barkley's preview of the Raptors 2012-13 Season

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

  • #31
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    This is my issue when debating a lot of people with the opposite view of my own. I think it is fairly safe to say and fairly well known I land on the optimistic side of the equation.

    One of the arguments, and I paraphrase, is the Raps have always been bad and/or Colangelo has made mistakes and that is what we can expect in the future. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

    The Raps have been awful far more often than good in the history of the franchise but what does that have to do with where they currently are situated?
    Exactly. "Awful", "terrible", "they suck" analysis are meant for post-season discussions. not for previews.

    Comment


    • #32
      NoBan wrote: View Post
      My point is that I agree with you, they have chemistry issues. But when you say "on paper", doesn't that take all talk of intangibles out of the equation? You wording implied that the Knicks have chemistry issues on paper. Even though this is impossible, I passed over the comment without thinking twice, thus reinforcing just how dysfunctional the Knicks have been since before Zeke.
      hahaha got yah. I did think about it before posting it, if you do take the phrase "on paper" literally, then that does put in question how "chemistry" can be attributed. but what i was gunning for when i said "on paper" was what are the thing "to be considered" -

      on paper - "if something seems good or true on paper, it seems to be good or true when you read or think about it but it might not be good or true in a real situation"

      hehehe

      Comment


      • #33
        NoBan wrote: View Post
        Guys, bashing Barkley for not knowing about basketball is just plain dumb. The dude has more basketball IQ in his foreskin than all message board posters in the world combined.

        I understand he's go an..um.. unique delivery. I understand he's not vigorously reviewing stats and working sources behind the scenes, but the guy knows his shit. He knows what it takes to win in the NBA. He can quickly assess a basketball related situation and determine a valid point of view based on his own unique perspective.

        Chuck is spot on - we don't have the horses to compete in the deepest division in the NBA. His indifference towards the Raps is not something exclusive to him or to the Raps. It's what national media members do to perennial lottery teams. If you are dismissing his point of view because you don't think he's qualified to speak on the subject, then you are kidding yourself.

        What I do agree with is that our spot of last in the division is not a foregone conclusion. However likely it may seem, injuries happen, relationships implode and guys exceed expectations all over the league. Like everyone else here, I'm hoping for a better result than a 5th straight lottery and the Atlantic division cellar. But at the same time, the only realistic response to Chuck here is that he's correct and we've got work to do to prove him wrong.
        We aren't talking about basketball iq. We're talking about his iq in general which is probably lower than the temperature in Toronto in the middle of winter.

        Comment


        • #34
          NoPropsneeded wrote: View Post
          We aren't talking about basketball iq. We're talking about his iq in general which is probably lower than the temperature in Toronto in the middle of winter.
          lol,,, I don't think he's near as dumb as he comes across on TV, where he gets paid good $ to be a bit of a buffoon. I met him in an airport last fall, and had the good fortune to stumble into him when he had a few minutes to chat up a fan. Don't be fooled by his speech impediment either. He's not near as dumb as he sounds on TNT, but he probably spends less time than any of us analyzing NBA teams, and more time on charity golf tournaments, where he's also in demand to play the big clown.

          Comment


          • #35
            p00ka wrote: View Post
            lol,,, I don't think he's near as dumb as he comes across on TV, where he gets paid good $ to be a bit of a buffoon. I met him in an airport last fall, and had the good fortune to stumble into him when he had a few minutes to chat up a fan. Don't be fooled by his speech impediment either. He's not near as dumb as he sounds on TNT, but he probably spends less time than any of us analyzing NBA teams, and more time on charity golf tournaments, where he's also in demand to play the big clown.
            Barkley is paid to be an entertainer who also happens to be a former basketball player. He has given Toronto credit in the past about being an up and coming team (2011 slam dunk). I guess he feels the moves and growth are not enough given the rest of the Atlantic division's growth.






            Last edited by mcHAPPY; Tue Oct 2, 2012, 06:20 PM.

            Comment


            • #36
              The "oh ya, your a big stupid idiot!" response to Chuck isn't really doing it for me here.

              Comment


              • #37
                @Matt52
                yeah, ya gotta look at Chuck as an entertainer and not take anything he says too seriously.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Matt52 wrote: View Post
                  This is my issue when debating a lot of people with the opposite view of my own. I think it is fairly safe to say and fairly well known I land on the optimistic side of the equation.

                  One of the arguments, and I paraphrase, is the Raps have always been bad and/or Colangelo has made mistakes and that is what we can expect in the future. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

                  The Raps have been awful far more often than good in the history of the franchise but what does that have to do with where they currently are situated?
                  Is that not the way trending and projections work? If I'm way off base please tell me, but your projection for Kyle Lowry becoming a star player for this team -- is that not based on his previous track record as a defensive guy and his brief success as a starter in Houston? Are projections not based on what a person has done in the past? If not then what do you base it on -- gut feeling?

                  This also reminds me of a person trying to shake a bad habit, who says 'from now on, I'll stop doing this', and then an hour later they catch themselves doing it and they say 'starting.. now!', and then they do it again and they say 'seriously though, starting NOW!'.

                  At what point do you look at Colangelo's history and say 'from this point on, he has been doing really good work'.

                  Because the way I see it things were beginning to look good again with the hiring of Casey. That was his "starting...now!" moment for maybe the 11th time overall. They went after a defensive guy who had just come off building this awesome defense for the Mavs who had just won a championship. Even JV, despite my reservations was at least in line with the new team building philosophy. They came off a year where their defense was much better than average. They had managed to mold the team in such a way that the culture had changed, not necessarily by winning but by being able to preach defense and the players buying into it. They were building from the ground up, harvesting young talent and adding key veteran leadership in reserve roles in order to ensure young players were learning and growing.

                  Then, they went after Steve Nash which had nothing to do with any of the above. A complete 180 degree turn back to the old ways. A quick fix. Defense.. nah, let's get Steve Nash. Youth? Humbug! Get me Wayne Gretzky on the line! We'll sellout all our games! Then came the Landry Fields accident and subsequently getting Kyle Lowry. This is the "seriously though.. starting NOW!" moment for those in the forgiving mood.

                  And nothing has really transpired since then for me to think that he has turned over a new leaf. Basically all he's done since the latest pressing of the Reset button is sign Kyle Lowry, and that only happened because thankfully the Lakers jumped in and saved the day.
                  Last edited by ebrian; Wed Oct 3, 2012, 10:13 AM.
                  your pal,
                  ebrian

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                    What irks me about guys like Barkley, is that they seem to do so based on their indepth knowledge of the other - American - teams, and then get to 5th place and go "oh ya, and I guess the Raptors will finish last". I don't care where the Raps are picked to finish, as long as the reporter respects us (organization and its fans) enough to properly evaluate and analyze the Raptors.

                    Personally, I think Boston is still the team to beat in our division. After that, I could see any of the other four teams finishing anywhere from 2nd to 5th, given the roster turnover/uncertainty with each team, for a variety of reasons.
                    When you're doing a show about where you think teams will end up, you don't tend to spend a lot of time talking about the team you think will finish last.
                    your pal,
                    ebrian

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      theycallmeZZ wrote: View Post
                      Begone, Charles Barkley! BEGONE!
                      In my defense I was hammered * hiccup* and did no prep work ...
                      "I may be wrong ... but I doubt it"

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        ebrian wrote: View Post
                        Is that not the way trending and projections work? If I'm way off base please tell me, but your projection for Kyle Lowry becoming a star player for this team -- is that not based on his previous track record as a defensive guy and his brief success as a starter in Houston? Are projections not based on what a person has done in the past? If not then what do you base it on -- gut feeling?

                        This also reminds me of a person trying to shake a bad habit, who says 'from now on, I'll stop doing this', and then an hour later they catch themselves doing it and they say 'starting.. now!', and then they do it again and they say 'seriously though, starting NOW!'.

                        At what point do you look at Colangelo's history and say 'from this point on, he has been doing really good work'.

                        Because the way I see it things were beginning to look good again with the hiring of Casey. That was his "starting...now!" moment for maybe the 11th time overall. They went after a defensive guy who had just come off building this awesome defense for the Mavs who had just won a championship. Even JV, despite my reservations was at least in line with the new team building philosophy. They came off a year where their defense was much better than average. They had managed to mold the team in such a way that the culture had changed, not necessarily by winning but by being able to preach defense and the players buying into it. They were building from the ground up, harvesting young talent and adding key veteran leadership in reserve roles in order to ensure young players were learning and growing.

                        Then, they went after Steve Nash which had nothing to do with any of the above. A complete 180 degree turn back to the old ways. A quick fix. Defense.. nah, let's get Steve Nash. Youth? Humbug! Get me Wayne Gretzky on the line! We'll sellout all our games! Then came the Landry Fields accident and subsequently getting Kyle Lowry. This is the "seriously though.. starting NOW!" moment for those in the forgiving mood.

                        And nothing has really transpired since then for me to think that he has turned over a new leaf. Basically all he's done since the latest pressing of the Reset button is sign Kyle Lowry, and that only happened because thankfully the Lakers jumped in and saved the day.
                        You do make a good point, but it actually does not apply to the Raptors, since, the Raptors is a team, a combination of players. Of course you can make assumptions on how a player *may* play for the next season because players tend to stick to habits, style of play but assuming a team will be the same as the previous season when it has almost an entirely different roster for the upcoming season, is inaccurate.

                        I too was actually deterred the first time i heard that the Raps were trying to get Nash. From a basketball perspective, it made little sense to me, but the NBA is not about just basketball anymore. Having Nash here will definitely boom the business side for the Raptors. It would be a feel-good story having a canadian MVP play for a canadian team and having a superstar of Nash's calibre may entice other superstars to explore canada as well.

                        I dont think BC actually made disastrous moves in the past, things just did not work out.

                        I think the current Raps roster could do some good things this season and possible do a bit of damage in the east. If you were expecting BC to have built a contender in a span of one off season then i think thats a bit to over the top.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          NoBan wrote: View Post
                          Guys, bashing Barkley for not knowing about basketball is just plain dumb. The dude has more basketball IQ in his foreskin than all message board posters in the world combined.

                          I understand he's go an..um.. unique delivery. I understand he's not vigorously reviewing stats and working sources behind the scenes, but the guy knows his shit. He knows what it takes to win in the NBA. He can quickly assess a basketball related situation and determine a valid point of view based on his own unique perspective.

                          Chuck is spot on - we don't have the horses to compete in the deepest division in the NBA. His indifference towards the Raps is not something exclusive to him or to the Raps. It's what national media members do to perennial lottery teams. If you are dismissing his point of view because you don't think he's qualified to speak on the subject, then you are kidding yourself.

                          What I do agree with is that our spot of last in the division is not a foregone conclusion. However likely it may seem, injuries happen, relationships implode and guys exceed expectations all over the league. Like everyone else here, I'm hoping for a better result than a 5th straight lottery and the Atlantic division cellar. But at the same time, the only realistic response to Chuck here is that he's correct and we've got work to do to prove him wrong.
                          So you appreciated the level of insight he brought in to that segment did you? I particularly liked the way he jousted with 4 and 5. That was extremely helpful if any preschool children we're watching this instead of Sesame street. Charles is a clown. He's on TV because he's a clown. If he actually cared enough to really sit inside something like this and do the homework necessary to say something of value then of course he could enlighten all of us...but that wasn't the case was it. That segment represented itself as something it wasn't and it made him look like somebody who was more than a bit mentally deficient.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Gman wrote: View Post
                            So you appreciated the level of insight he brought in to that segment did you? I particularly liked the way he jousted with 4 and 5. That was extremely helpful if any preschool children we're watching this instead of Sesame street. Charles is a clown. He's on TV because he's a clown. If he actually cared enough to really sit inside something like this and do the homework necessary to say something of value then of course he could enlighten all of us...but that wasn't the case was it. That segment represented itself as something it wasn't and it made him look like somebody who was more than a bit mentally deficient.
                            You and I both knew what to expect from a Barkley season preview. My point is that he's a great basketball mind, the the fact that he dismisses our team is valid. He understand we are an also-ran and best, and likely a lottery team. That translates into indifference on his part. It's not something we should be getting defensive about and resorting to taking shots a his intelligence.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              NoBan wrote: View Post
                              You and I both knew what to expect from a Barkley season preview. My point is that he's a great basketball mind, the the fact that he dismisses our team is valid. He understand we are an also-ran and best, and likely a lottery team. That translates into indifference on his part. It's not something we should be getting defensive about and resorting to taking shots a his intelligence.

                              How do you know he's a great basketball mind? It can't be because he's on national TV every day. Because Skip Bayless is on national TV and we all know how much he knows about basketball. My point is that Barkley is a part of these basketball talks mostly for his appeal to fans and his ability to create controversies, IMO

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                ebrian wrote: View Post
                                Is that not the way trending and projections work? If I'm way off base please tell me, but your projection for Kyle Lowry becoming a star player for this team -- is that not based on his previous track record as a defensive guy and his brief success as a starter in Houston? Are projections not based on what a person has done in the past? If not then what do you base it on -- gut feeling?

                                This also reminds me of a person trying to shake a bad habit, who says 'from now on, I'll stop doing this', and then an hour later they catch themselves doing it and they say 'starting.. now!', and then they do it again and they say 'seriously though, starting NOW!'.

                                At what point do you look at Colangelo's history and say 'from this point on, he has been doing really good work'.

                                Because the way I see it things were beginning to look good again with the hiring of Casey. That was his "starting...now!" moment for maybe the 11th time overall. They went after a defensive guy who had just come off building this awesome defense for the Mavs who had just won a championship. Even JV, despite my reservations was at least in line with the new team building philosophy. They came off a year where their defense was much better than average. They had managed to mold the team in such a way that the culture had changed, not necessarily by winning but by being able to preach defense and the players buying into it. They were building from the ground up, harvesting young talent and adding key veteran leadership in reserve roles in order to ensure young players were learning and growing.

                                Then, they went after Steve Nash which had nothing to do with any of the above. A complete 180 degree turn back to the old ways. A quick fix. Defense.. nah, let's get Steve Nash. Youth? Humbug! Get me Wayne Gretzky on the line! We'll sellout all our games! Then came the Landry Fields accident and subsequently getting Kyle Lowry. This is the "seriously though.. starting NOW!" moment for those in the forgiving mood.

                                And nothing has really transpired since then for me to think that he has turned over a new leaf. Basically all he's done since the latest pressing of the Reset button is sign Kyle Lowry, and that only happened because thankfully the Lakers jumped in and saved the day.
                                Solid points raised.

                                Every decision BC has made has not been bad. In fact he has made enough good decisions in the past to be a 2x EoY. I probably should have elaborated and stated that. The guy has made bad decisions and good decisions. He has had good years and bad years. Why is the assumption only bad is coming in the future.

                                How do we know Nash wasn't part of another plan that if Nash had come then move x, y, and z were to be made? All we know is Nash was pursued and it did not work out. He then moved on and we are watching what happens.

                                The assumptions made to me are akin to picking up a 1000 page novel and reading page 45, 140, 287, 315, 498, 509, 631, 799, 836, and 900 and thinking you know what the book was all about.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X