Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • #31
    CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I don't see many people choosing to continue 'as is', without at least some retooling. You're the one who seems to keep arguing that the only options are to 'blow it up' or 'stay as is'. If you look at my post (#20), I'm hardly arguing to keep the status quo, I just don't think there's reason to go to the extreme to 'blow it up' this offseason.
    What does re-tooling mean exactly? No cap space, no pick, very little in terms of trade assets unless you're willing to move a major piece yourself. I'd love to hear the avenues to improve this roster over the next two years without the term "organic growth".

    Comment


    • #32
      Nilanka wrote: View Post
      It doesn't make much sense why the Leafs would cause a delay in Colangelo's decision.

      "Can't...conduct...businesss. Watching...hockey"
      "Can conduct business owning hockey".

      A decision on BC during the Leafs play off series would mean attention diverted from Leafs to Raptors as far as fans who follow both teams are concerned, thereby affecting business adversely. Remember, Leafs play offs generates revenue not a decision on Colangelo.
      Attitude Is A Choice.

      Comment


      • #33
        NoBan wrote: View Post
        (Disclaimer: This is not an Andrew Wiggans thread)

        What do you say we become the worst team in the NBA? BCs desperation has left us in NBA no-mans land.:
        • Not good enough to win a playoff series
        • Unlikely to even make the playoffs
        • Still too good to not get an impactful draft pick
        • Too tied up in terms of cap space to sign a star player
        • Not enough players with trade via to improve the team via trade

        We are headed for AT LEAST 3 more years of irrelevancy as currently constructed under this strategy. This thread is about limiting our continued irrelevancy to only 3 years by aggressively tanking and trading away all current assets for terrible players/contracts and draft picks.

        Move 1:
        Trade Rudy and Landry to the Nets for Gerald Wallace, Chris Humphries and a 1st round pick in 2014
        http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ct86vho

        Given that money is no object for the Nets, perhaps they could even pony up some cash for a potential Wallace buy out in 2015. Rudy and Landry are both overpaid, but the Nets do this to get out of the Wallace deal and to add another “star”. Derron/JJ/Rudy/Evans/Brook. That’s a quasi-contender that King can sell to the Russian as a real contender.

        Move 2
        Trade Amir to Phoenix for Beasley and a (protected) first round pick
        http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=chxpgj6

        Not sure we can land their top 5 pick this year for taking Beez off their hands and giving them Amir. But if we protect it like: Top 10 (2013), Top 5 (2014), Top 5 (2015), Top 3 (2016), unprotected (2017), they might bite on the chance to ditch Beez and we’d still get a lottery pick out of it.

        Move 3
        Trade Lowry and Demar to Detroit for Jerebko, Stuckey and their (top 5 protected) 2013 first rounder
        (Note: This trade fails straight-up in the trade machine, but after the first 2 moves, it works)
        http://espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=btjas5p

        Detroit gives up a mid-lotto pick to get out of 2 bad contracts, get a good one back (Kyle) and add a pretty good young piece on the wing (Demar). Kyle and Demar are probably both better than what they’d get at 7 this draft, and it accelerates their rebuild.

        Then we bring back Grey, Anderson and Lucas. Your 2013-2014 Toronto Raptors (!!!!):

        1) Stuckey, Lucas
        2) Ross, Anderson
        3) Wallace, Beasley, Jerebko
        4) Bargnani, Humphies, Acy
        5) Valanciunas, Grey

        Plus a top 10 pick in 2013 from the Pistons (say, MCW). We could provide heavy minutes to a young lineup of MCW/Ross/Jerebko/Acy/Val. Is that bad enough to virtually guarantee a top 3 pick in 2014? I say yes. We might even get a top 3 pick in 2015 with this core. Plus, we get a team with 2 guys named Jonas!

        Then Stuckey and Hump are off the books, and Beez/Wallace/Bargs can be bought out or paid to stay home. That leaves us going into 2016 with:
        • Ross
        • Val
        • Acy
        • Detroit’s 2013 (#7)
        • Brooklyn’s late 2014 first rounder
        • Phoenix’s 2014, 2015 2016 pick (likely #6-10)
        • Our top 3 2014 pick
        • Our top 3 2015 pick
        • 2 high second round picks of our own

        We’d have cap space to fill out the roster with veteran leaders as needed, plus potentially get a star to fill whichever remaining hole is biggest.

        We would need a care taker coach for the next few years before bringing in somebody to guide the team forward – similar to the Carlisimo/Brooks handoff in Seattle/OKC (although they may have misfired with Brooks a little). PJ is available.

        Now that I’ve gone through all this, my questions for y’all are:
        1. Would you be on board with another 3-5 year rebuild if we really, truly committed to bottoming out?
        2. Do you think a massive rebuild like this is even necessary, or do you want to roll with the core as constructed?
        3. What do you think the likelihood of any/all of these moves from the other team’s perspective? Could this actually be pulled off?
        4. Do you have your own ideas of how to tank & rebuild?
        5. Do you think we could embark on a strategy like this without mortally wounding the development of any young guys (Ross/Val/etc)?
        I just think blowing it up is something you kind of fall ass backwards into when a season goes badly.

        If, for example, right out of the gate next year, Rudy Gay gets injured early, and the team struggles to find a rhythm, I would probably try to make one or two GOOD trades. By good, I mean not get low-balled just to tank. Lowry for a veteran role player and a pick, would be a good deal to me. Or DeMar for a young player/pick and some cap relief, for example. Might even make both such trades. If they get a young player and/or a draft pick from another team(s), that's a fairly good haul without really compromising any short-term stability that could hurt the development of JV and our other young players. It might help or hurt the record for tanking depending on the deals...so the emphasis is on maximizing return. In fact, the record could still suffer and become worse, as it's hard to mix pieces, let alone young pieces together midseason.

        But, I think blowing it up just because you don't like the team is a really, really, bad idea that doesn't leave any guarantees. You'd be banking on multiple draft picks being good, or at least one netting us a true franchise player. How's that worked out for Charlotte? Detroit? Sacramento? None of those teams are in a better situation than Toronto, despite having committed to losing for several years. Charlotte is still a total mess. Detroit has 2 good players that line up at the same position. Sacramento got 2 top 5 talents with 2 bottom 5 personalities. The draft is such a mess. If the Raps don't get a #1 pick, or heck, they could end up not even getting a top 5 pick at all with all the moves mentioned in the post (banking on their own picks being high), then they could be stuck in an even worse situation.

        It's still better to make slow adjustments, moving pieces for the right assets (whether that's a pick or a player) rather than just shedding them because things aren't projecting to lead directly to a championship. It also gives the added bonus of evaluating each move one step at a time, in case one move brings an unexpected good fit that really helps the team. I think the next big move the team should make should hopefully bring in another star (Love, Horford, Rondo, etc.). Blowing it up does not lead to contention faster than this, IMO, and may, in fact, stall the team another 4 or 5+ years.

        Oh, and btw...If teams know you're tanking, you will not be able to get all the draft picks mentinoed. It's simply not happening. Really, it's pretty straightforward...when teams know you're trying to get rid of a player(s), they only put in low-ball bids. That's why shit players/contracts are so hard to move. Bargnani is not the only carcass that's failing to bring in good bids....Shit, even Boozer and Gasol can't bring back good packages, or else their names would never be in the same sentence as Bargnani's during rumour season. And a team looking to shed such a piece is usually unwilling to attach an asset to get it done...which is usually what it takes. I don't care if it's Rudy Gay or Andrea Bargnani, if a team knows you're actively getting rid of him, you will not get the package you think for him....As I'm sure Memphis long hoped for a better package than Ed Davis, TayShaun Prince and 2nd rd pick for Gay. Gay is the best player on the Raptors and he couldn't return a 1st rd pick when he was traded...Can't say how likely it would be then that other players could bring back such assets.

        Frankly, of the deals in the post, only the first, with Gay going to BKL, seems like a deal the other team would want (and with the least valuable return, including a likely low draft pick). On the others...Why would PHX want to give up a 1st rd pick for Amir? I love Amir, but he cannot possibly be in their future plans. They won't be good while he's under contract, and if I were him, I'd probably bolt after that. Essentially PHX is throwing away a draft pick here. Why would Detroit, who is nowhere close to being relevant, want DeMar and Lowry and give up a 1st rd pick? To give up bad contracts? And then also get one back that's worse than either? Stuckey expires next year. Jerebko is hardly a "poison" contract at 4.5 million per. IF I were them I wouldn't do this deal. I'd rather keep this year's pick, suck again next year for another high pick, and then be relevant for years after that. By your own logic for what you think Toronto should do, 2 of your deals make absolutely no sense for the other teams involved, who are in a better position to tank than Toronto.

        Basically I think your strategy in no way hastens development and shortens irrelevancy. In fact, I see it as very likely to continue irrelevancy for more than 3 years. Partly because you assume deliberate failure ensures a high chance of success in building through the draft.
        Last edited by white men can't jump; Tue May 14th, 2013, 03:41 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          I'd like the team to "blow it up". Would give me a great excuse to stop being a Raps fan. I'm getting sick of cheering for the team we might have in a few years, if we made this move or that move and if this player can turn out to be this or that. I would have much rathered to be a Bulls, Celts, Hawks or Bucks fan this year. No one thought either had a chance to make a run at it (thanks Miami) but at least they had playoff basketball. And I'd rather cheer for that than another high draft pick.

          If this team had trust, chemistry, hard nosed defense and a actual offensive system based on a TEAM game, we would have something to cheer for. Plus, we would have a better idea going forward of the types of moves we need to pull to make the team a contender. Most of the players on this team are at or near their ceilings (minus JV, Ross, and Acy perhaps) so expecting individual improvements in their games to make a significant difference to the success of the team is ridiculous. This team needs to improve at the team level, as a group. Thats what I want to see going forward.

          Get rid of Bargs, sure up the bench, get the players to buy in to a system and lets see if we can't cheer for a 6th seed next season. I'd be happy with that. This may actually show the the organization is moving in a positive direction which may be appealing to FA's. Or, of course, we could lose on purpose (absurd!) and HOPE for a STUD/s in the draft, and then HOPE that the STUD/s (if we are lucky enough to draft him/them) want to stay here and be part of an organization that has shown very little competitive edge since it's inception.

          Comment


          • #35
            Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
            "Can conduct business owning hockey".

            A decision on BC during the Leafs play off series would mean attention diverted from Leafs to Raptors as far as fans who follow both teams are concerned, thereby affecting business adversely. Remember, Leafs play offs generates revenue not a decision on Colangelo.
            I guess we'll agree to disagree. I personally don't believe the Leafs were a factor in Colangelo's (yet to be) decision. I just don't see how one diverts attention away from the other.

            Doug Smith writing about Colangelo's firing doesn't leave empty seats in the ACC. I would hope that most fans in the city can chew gum and walk at the same time.

            Comment


            • #36
              We don't need to blow it up... what we need is for Lebron to move to the West coast so that a team in the Eastern conference has a chance to get into the finals.

              Boston is done. Brooklyn has over paid vets and have no room for growth. NY is extremely old. Atlanta has cap space and good players, but they have no fan base and if I was on that team I wouldn't give a sh!t. Chicago is cheap and is Rose going to be Rose again? And even if he was back, are they so much better then the Raptors with a few roster changes? Milwaukee is always going to be on the tread mill.. Orlando/Cleveland have potential but will it work out and how long will it take?

              Look I would love to be OKC or San Antonio. They got lucky in the draft, got awesome studs, and built around them. However the last time Toronto got a #1 pick it was a sh!tty draft and we got stuck with Bargnani. I say we just stick with this current mess of a roster and make a few changes here and there until we can become like Indiana, Memphis, Denver or this years version of GSW.

              Just need the right GM to build a real team that has an actual vision. We are not an European team or a Phoenix of the East. Build a team the right way with a proper identity, and that can be done without blowing it up.

              Comment


              • #37
                stats aside, this current team was 4 wins away from playing in the playoffs.

                considering mid-season trades, injuries and rotation changes on almost a game to game basis, i think this team needs stability. give the group a chance to develop chemistry and camaraderie with each other.

                of course tweaks are in order, but we all have to realize that success is gradual, you cant have a non-playoff team and gut it and expect to build a contender. for gods sakes, the team hasnt even been to the playoffs in so many years and people are talking about gutting it and aiming for the future as a contender. i think everybody should just level their expectations a notch down first and think of at least making the playoffs.

                like i said, this current team was 4 wins away from snagging a playoff spot. its easy to think that with a healthy core and training camp and practices, this team is a legit playoff contender.

                Comment


                • #38
                  TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View Post
                  stats aside, this current team was 4 wins away from playing in the playoffs.

                  considering mid-season trades, injuries and rotation changes on almost a game to game basis, i think this team needs stability. give the group a chance to develop chemistry and camaraderie with each other.

                  of course tweaks are in order, but we all have to realize that success is gradual, you cant have a non-playoff team and gut it and expect to build a contender. for gods sakes, the team hasnt even been to the playoffs in so many years and people are talking about gutting it and aiming for the future as a contender. i think everybody should just level their expectations a notch down first and think of at least making the playoffs.

                  like i said, this current team was 4 wins away from snagging a playoff spot. its easy to think that with a healthy core and training camp and practices, this team is a legit playoff contender.
                  Don't forget the #AprilFoolsGold that distorted making the playoffs by just 4 wins.

                  The issue I have is being 'just' a legit playoff contender. To me, and correct me if I misinterpreted, that means they may make the playoffs or they may not.

                  If the Raptors are just going to try and squeak in to the playoffs, then I'm up for radical changes and asset accumulation. I think that is what staying the course implies - again just my opinion and interpretation.

                  I'm willing to cheer along the ride if they can find a legit starting PF and back up PG. Come the playoffs the bench is only 8 deep anyways.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    NoBan wrote: View Post
                    Whoa, big fella. I didnt want to copy paste everything. The context of your stuff exists only a single mouse scroll above.

                    I understand you realized how unlikely your best case scenario was. I felt it necessary to reiterate it as nearly impossible and virtually irrelevant to our discussion of the future of the franchise.

                    My points about Casey & the unlikihood of a Demar/Andrea combo fetching a contributor stand. As does my point about there being no benefit in waitng til the deadline to enact a true rebuilding strategy. As does my point that we are extremely unlikely to hit a homerun with a bargain contract without a second round pick. None of those points are invalidated by any "cherrypicking".

                    There's been plenty of black/white/grey talk here. My question is, why do you want to live in the grey? The grey is where we've been under Colangelo and Babcock before him. The grey got us into our current situation, which you've correctly identified as unacceptable.
                    Firing Colangelo, trading one of DD/Ross and Bargnani, amnestying Kleiza is not living in the grey.

                    That is a full on shift and change.

                    You continue to write from the perspective the only two options are to blow it up or keep the current team - at least that is my interpretation of your stance.

                    I disagree with that. This team has been constructed around Bargnani. So first things first is to remove Bargnani which in and of itself is huge. But just because it is constructed around Bargnani doesn't mean there are not some good pieces there.

                    If the Raptors can obtain a traditional PF then insert Ross as the 5th option at SG (or anyone who can shoot the three - sidenote: Ross actually shot pretty well from my recollection on catch and shoot. His running and curling off screens for 3 point shots was inconsistent but that again comes back to Casey's offense, I digress).

                    If the Raptors are able to obtain another stretch 4 (you know who can actually make the 3 and not just look pretty doing it) then insert Fields as the utility/glue guy he showed he can be this season; if his 3pt stroke returns that is a bonus.

                    We will see how it all plays out but my point is blowing it up and staying the course are not the only two options.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
                      Unless you luck into a superstar, building through the draft alone is hardly a proven recipe for sustainable, championship-caliber success. If you look at the 65 top-5 picks over the past 13 years, I would be willing to bet that there are far more "busts" than there are superstars, which is why I don't fully understand the desire to put all your faith/hope in a few draft picks.

                      First, there's no guarantee the Raptors will even wind up with top-5 picks. Second, there's no guarantee that the Raptors' picks (even if in top-5) will wind up being great players, let alone superstars to build a contending team around. Third, there's not even a guarantee that the new core that's built through the next few drafts will be any better than the current core that has been built through multiple draft lotteries (Bargnani-06, DeRozan-09, Gay via Davis-10, Valanciunas-11, Ross-12).
                      I agree. Don't forget that there are plenty of other teams that are tanking, or will be tanking for the next few years. How can we be sure that the Raptors tanking would yield better results than CLE, ORL, NO, DET, etc, etc.

                      I think a better approach is to have a great coach with a good and consistent system, and build a team around that.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        There was one thing in your cherry picked reply that I would like to address with a cherry pick of my own

                        Matt52 wrote: View Post
                        The luck the Raptors need to be anything more than an 8th seed is guys overachieving, a major coup in a trade, and finding absolute bargains on minimum contracts (Jimmy Butler/productive young players on rookie deals, Danny Green type contracts, Chandler Parsons type contracts - imagine a healthy Fields with a 3 point shot making $2M - that is what I refer to). With so much money tied up in inefficient players (Gay, DeRozan, Bargnani), the Raptors need a real homerun or two from the bargain bin.
                        I meant to refer to anything more than an 8th seed in the context of staying the course with few changes to what is currently on the roster. Not sure if that message came through or not. However your reply, which is below, is not something I agree with.

                        NoBan wrote: View Post
                        That’s not only unrealistic, it’s next to impossible.

                        Guys overachieving? We’ve been hoping for that year after year. And even when they do, other guys underachieve and we wind up still stuck in no-mans-land.

                        Major coup in a trade? I’m sure every single team is hoping for this. Is there anything to suggest this is the slightest bit lucky? NBA teams aren’t going to hand assets to us. Even teams with poor decision making processes (Kings, Nets) aren’t going to hand us something useful just because. Not to get too far off topic, but we all know how this strategy worked out for the Jays. “Major coup in a trade” is off the table.

                        Bargains on minimum contracts? The way to make this happen is to nail a second round pick (or very late first). Not only has that never happened for this organization, we don’t even have a second round pick to use. This option is off the table as well.

                        Somebody else mentioned that we need to find a “diamond in the rough.” Well, thats kinda what AA was if you look at his paycheque vs contribution. Finding another AA, AP or Garbo is not the ticket to a contender (again, like it says in your sig).
                        First part on guys overachieving. I agree we've been hoping for that year after year - in fact 7 years for a certain player. However it doesn't mean it is not impossible and I would also include under this guys developing. I don't think anyone would say JV is a finished product nor Ross. I don't think anyone would agree Fields showed what he is capable of this season unless they believe his forearm injury/nerve damage is permanent. Amir Johnson is a guy who has steadily improved.

                        Second part on major trade coup. Well, yes, that is what every team hopes for in every trade. However sometimes those trades do work out in another team's favour. Do you think Hammond/Bucks are not looking at Tobias Harris in Orlando and saying, "WTF?" Colangelo has managed to find those diamond in the rough in Joe Johnson from the Celtics; Colangelo has also managed to find pieces of shit in the flower bed too. I'm not saying this is likely but I'm not ruling out the possibility of it either. The Blue Jays is a bad example because MLB does not have a CBA limiting salaries in trades. I'm not talking about major contracts getting passed from one team to another, I'm talking prospects or guys with talent who have not been in an ideal situation to show it.

                        Third part on bargains on minimum contracts. More than 2nd round picks can be signed to minimum contracts. Nate Robinson is an example this season. I don't include AA because I don't think he is a bargain (or a diamond in the rough). I think he is what he is: a third string SG who was given more of a role this season than he should have been. Of the 65 games he played this season he only had 13 where he shot more than .500 but 27 games where he shot .333 or less (leaving of course 25 games where he shot between 33.4-49%, 14 of which were less than .400).

                        I'm not seeing any real reason to see why the Raptors could not "luck" in to a good young player in a bad situation buried on another team's bench, a "cheap" free agent, or a bargain minimum contract. The only reason I see in your post why none of that could happen is because your opinion states it is an impossibility.
                        Last edited by mcHAPPY; Tue May 14th, 2013, 07:53 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Nilanka wrote: View Post
                          I guess we'll agree to disagree. I personally don't believe the Leafs were a factor in Colangelo's (yet to be) decision. I just don't see how one diverts attention away from the other.

                          Doug Smith writing about Colangelo's firing doesn't leave empty seats in the ACC. I would hope that most fans in the city can chew gum and walk at the same time.
                          As far as the Leafs are concerned, ACC is sold out no matter what. Hence revenue from ticket sales is not the issue. The other significant sources of revenue are mainly Television and Radio. It's safe to say that at least 10% of Leafs fans are Leafs/Raptors fans. It's also safe to say that 50% of these fans lean towards the Raps. In other words, they are Raptors fans first. If and when an important Raptors announcement is made, radio's and TV's of such fans are switched to gather Raptor news rather than Leafs play off games. This affects play off revenue. Being owners of both teams, MLSE can ensure this does not happen.

                          Can such fans watch Raptors news and have knowledge of Leafs scores(chew gum......)? Of course they can. It does nothing for REVENUE though.
                          Attitude Is A Choice.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
                            The other significant sources of revenue are mainly Television and Radio. It's safe to say that at least 10% of Leafs fans are Leafs/Raptors fans. It's also safe to say that 50% of these fans lean towards the Raps. In other words, they are Raptors fans first.
                            I'm not a marketing guy so can you explain this to me?

                            Lets say 5% of Leafs fans are Raptor fans first. I'm one of them, and I can honestly say that including myself, I don't know any of such people who contribute to the Leafs' playoff revenue. Unless MLSE makes more money if I turn on my TV. Is that how TV works? I flip a switch and the guys offering the programming make more money? What about if I used PVR? Does the money trickle in for each segment I watch between the fastforwarding of commercials? Or do they just not get paid when they detect the pressing of the fast forward button?

                            I'm not privy to this stuff so please explain. My understanding was that MLSE got paid weeks or months before the commercials were aired.
                            your pal,
                            ebrian

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Matt52 wrote: View Post
                              Third part on bargains on minimum contracts. More than 2nd round picks can be signed to minimum contracts. Nate Robinson is an example this season. I don't include AA because I don't think he is a bargain (or a diamond in the rough). I think he is what he is: a third string SG who was given more of a role this season than he should have been. Of the 65 games he played this season he only had 13 where he shot more than .500 but 27 games where he shot .333 or less (leaving of course 25 games where he shot between 33.4-49%, 14 of which were less than .400).

                              I'm not seeing any real reason to see why the Raptors could not "luck" in to a good young player in a bad situation buried on another team's bench, a "cheap" free agent, or a bargain minimum contract. The only reason I see in your post why none of that could happen is because your opinion states it is an impossibility.
                              We could luck out in a good young player like Robinson, but the likelihood of him playing the way he has as a Bull is probably very low. You're looking at a rejuvenated Nate Robinson in a really great system, but you take that guy on our team and he probably just plays the same way he's always played -- which is between average and below-average. I posted these stats in another forum a week ago, forgive me if they're a few games outdated.

                              Nate Robinson Career Averages
                              field goal: 42.5%
                              3-pointers: 35.4%
                              Win Shares: 2.8
                              ORtg: 108
                              DRtg: 111
                              PER: 15.6

                              Last 3 seasons
                              field goal: 42.1%
                              3-pointers: 36.1%
                              Win Shares: 2.0
                              ORtg: 105
                              DRtg: 108
                              PER: 15.0

                              As a Bull
                              field goal: 43.3%
                              3-pointers: 40.5%
                              Win Shares: 5.9
                              ORtg: 108
                              DRtg: 105
                              PER: 17.4

                              Playoff comparisons are even more pronounced (irrelevant if he'd been a Raptor):

                              Career playoff averages
                              field goal: 36.6%
                              3-pointers: 33.3%
                              Win Shares: 0.4
                              ORtg: 106
                              DRtg: 104
                              PER: 17.1

                              Current playoff run
                              field goal: 50.4%
                              3-pointers: 36.6%
                              Win Shares: 0.8
                              ORtg: 114
                              DRtg: 110
                              PER: 20.7

                              As much as I hate saying it, Alan Anderson on the Bulls is likely an entirely different guy. We'd probably be hearing a whole lot about Thibs' use of him and how awesome of a bargain they got on him. On the Raptors, whole different animal.
                              your pal,
                              ebrian

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                ebrian wrote: View Post
                                We could luck out in a good young player like Robinson, but the likelihood of him playing the way he has as a Bull is probably very low. You're looking at a rejuvenated Nate Robinson in a really great system, but you take that guy on our team and he probably just plays the same way he's always played -- which is between average and below-average. I posted these stats in another forum a week ago, forgive me if they're a few games outdated.

                                Nate Robinson Career Averages
                                field goal: 42.5%
                                3-pointers: 35.4%
                                Win Shares: 2.8
                                ORtg: 108
                                DRtg: 111
                                PER: 15.6

                                Last 3 seasons
                                field goal: 42.1%
                                3-pointers: 36.1%
                                Win Shares: 2.0
                                ORtg: 105
                                DRtg: 108
                                PER: 15.0

                                As a Bull
                                field goal: 43.3%
                                3-pointers: 40.5%
                                Win Shares: 5.9
                                ORtg: 108
                                DRtg: 105
                                PER: 17.4

                                Playoff comparisons are even more pronounced (irrelevant if he'd been a Raptor):

                                Career playoff averages
                                field goal: 36.6%
                                3-pointers: 33.3%
                                Win Shares: 0.4
                                ORtg: 106
                                DRtg: 104
                                PER: 17.1

                                Current playoff run
                                field goal: 50.4%
                                3-pointers: 36.6%
                                Win Shares: 0.8
                                ORtg: 114
                                DRtg: 110
                                PER: 20.7

                                As much as I hate saying it, Alan Anderson on the Bulls is likely an entirely different guy. We'd probably be hearing a whole lot about Thibs' use of him and how awesome of a bargain they got on him. On the Raptors, whole different animal.
                                Good post.

                                Could there be a guy out there who would fit perfectly in to what Casey is trying to do? All guys in the NBA are talented. The superstars are what they are regardless. The rest typically are influenced by their situation/surroundings.

                                I don't see why the Raptors can't 'luck' in to a bargain minimum contract or get a surprise player in a trade or sign a bargain free agent. Is it likely? Time will tell. But bringing this back to the context of the discussion, I don't see the reason to blow it up or stay status quo to be the only options. There is talent on this team, more so than in the last five years. Finding a couple of pieces and a change in coaching strategy could have this team competing for the division (big statement I know but I am not sold on BKN, NY, BOS, or PHI moving forward).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X