Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • #46
    I think it can happen but it's a whole lot of hoping. We haven't really had great bargains yet, in most part due to players being half decent but having such a horrible season that it never really mattered.

    Just for the record, after Paul Pierce went down with injury in 2006 and the Celtics went all out on trying to land Durant/Oden. They tanked. There's no question about it and it's well known. They ended up picking 5th though, so it didn't work out and I can understand why people here wouldn't want to take that risk -- however they then turned it around and traded Al Jefferson for Garnettt and Jeff Green (the 5th pick) for Ray Allen.

    The rest (2 finals appearances, one championship and several playoff appearances later) is history. Ironically they have Jeff Green again.

    If the GM "of the day" is good enough to get us a bunch of expiring contracts and draft picks (as a backup plan) to tanking the season and trying to go all out for Wiggins, I would be up for it. I'm not saying what the Celtics did can work for everyone, but if you at least have solid pieces to trade, similar to what Morey did in his failed attempt to get Dwight Howard. It's at least a workable roster as opposed to what we have right now which is leaning heavily for the need for a few "career years" and some really lucky cheap free agent acquisitions. And if all that happens and the stars aligned -- we finish 6th and get bounced in the first round.

    If that's what guys mean by blow it up -- I'm in.
    your pal,
    ebrian

    Comment


    • #47
      ebrian wrote: View Post
      I think it can happen but it's a whole lot of hoping. We haven't really had great bargains yet, in most part due to players being half decent but having such a horrible season that it never really mattered.

      Just for the record, after Paul Pierce went down with injury in 2006 and the Celtics went all out on trying to land Durant/Oden. They tanked. There's no question about it and it's well known. They ended up picking 5th though, so it didn't work out and I can understand why people here wouldn't want to take that risk -- however they then turned it around and traded Al Jefferson for Garnettt and Jeff Green (the 5th pick) for Ray Allen.

      The rest (2 finals appearances, one championship and several playoff appearances later) is history. Ironically they have Jeff Green again.

      If the GM "of the day" is good enough to get us a bunch of expiring contracts and draft picks (as a backup plan) to tanking the season and trying to go all out for Wiggins, I would be up for it. I'm not saying what the Celtics did can work for everyone, but if you at least have solid pieces to trade, similar to what Morey did in his failed attempt to get Dwight Howard. It's at least a workable roster as opposed to what we have right now which is leaning heavily for the need for a few "career years" and some really lucky cheap free agent acquisitions. And if all that happens and the stars aligned -- we finish 6th and get bounced in the first round.

      If that's what guys mean by blow it up -- I'm in.
      With new direction, I am up for blowing it up as I've stated.

      The thing is, and maybe I am naive or blind or back to my rose-coloured glasses way here, I do believe that the Raptors with a solid PF starting (and Amir off the bench), Fields reverting to his rookie season (pre nerve injury - all other aspects of his game other than shooting have remained the consistent), and a back up PG have the talent compete with anyone in the East except a healthy Chicago and Miami. When it comes to the playoffs, you neverr know what can happen especially when it - unfortunately - comes to injuries (Westbrook this year and Rose last year).

      The biggest question for me if those things happen is do the Raptors have the coaching to maximize the talent? I'm not certain on that.

      Comment


      • #48
        ebrian wrote: View Post
        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.
        First of all, I'm not a marketing guy either. My little knowledge is from what I've picked up from hearing/reading and common sense. Just making sure you're not talking to an expert.

        Yes it's as simple as tuning on your TV to the game. The more TV's that are tuned on to the game, the more revenue is generated by the TV station airing the game which in turn benefits the team owner, in this case MLSE. Yes MLSE is paid by the TV station in advance but if MLSE wants to get a similar contract or a better one the next time around, it wants the TV station to do well. Low viewership = Low sales = smaller contract = Low revenue.

        Like you I'm a Raptors first Raptors/Leafs fan. If there's no Raptors related stuff on TV/Radio/Internet, I'm tuned on to the Leafs game. If I'm tuned on, it's one more TV viewing customer for MLSE, the eventual beneficiary.
        Attitude Is A Choice.

        Comment


        • #49
          Matt52 wrote: View Post
          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.
          What i meant was aim for something realistically attainable FIRST, rather than gutting the whole team and building a "contender". Them making the playoffs doesnt mean it stops there, of course being a perennial playoff team is good but management shouldnt be satisfied with "just making the playoffs" year after year. but making the playoffs for this team, IMO is a HUUUUGGGEEEE step.

          Comment


          • #50
            TheGloveinRapsUniform wrote: View Post
            What i meant was aim for something realistically attainable FIRST, rather than gutting the whole team and building a "contender". Them making the playoffs doesnt mean it stops there, of course being a perennial playoff team is good but management shouldnt be satisfied with "just making the playoffs" year after year. but making the playoffs for this team, IMO is a HUUUUGGGEEEE step.
            For sure. Like I've said, I can get behind blowing it up or tweaking roster and changing coaching schemes.

            When looking at roster/payroll, I see:
            $27M on the payroll in duplication (Gay/DD).
            $16M in wasted space (Bargnani/Kleiza).

            I always talk about trading DeRozan because between Gay and DD I see Gay as the better player even though he is overpaid.

            If you can eliminate the duplication and wasted space and replace it with productive assets in an area of need combined with the MLE and amnesty at disposal, the Raptors might become a very competitive team.

            For all the disappointments and let downs of this previous season, I don't think the talent was maximized near to its potential. If you add a couple of pieces that fit much better/address areas of need, then suddenly things don't look nearly as worrisome.

            Comment


            • #51
              Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
              First of all, I'm not a marketing guy either. My little knowledge is from what I've picked up from hearing/reading and common sense. Just making sure you're not talking to an expert.

              Yes it's as simple as tuning on your TV to the game. The more TV's that are tuned on to the game, the more revenue is generated by the TV station airing the game which in turn benefits the team owner, in this case MLSE. Yes MLSE is paid by the TV station in advance but if MLSE wants to get a similar contract or a better one the next time around, it wants the TV station to do well. Low viewership = Low sales = smaller contract = Low revenue.

              Like you I'm a Raptors first Raptors/Leafs fan. If there's no Raptors related stuff on TV/Radio/Internet, I'm tuned on to the Leafs game. If I'm tuned on, it's one more TV viewing customer for MLSE, the eventual beneficiary.
              Okay, well that makes sense except for one thing -- if Colangelo gets fired and the Leafs are still playing playoff hockey, I'm still watching the Leafs game. I might check my phone from time to time while watching, to see if there's a new tweet from Grange or Marc Stein, or Woj, but I'm still watching Leafs.

              And I don't think a single person who was *already* watching Leafs playoff hockey stops watching because Colangelo got fired.
              Last edited by ebrian; Wed May 15th, 2013, 02:51 PM.
              your pal,
              ebrian

              Comment


              • #52
                Matt52 wrote: View Post
                If you can eliminate the duplication and wasted space and replace it with productive assets in an area of need combined with the MLE and amnesty at disposal, the Raptors might become a very competitive team.
                You need perfect trading partners for that, teams that are willing to help you make your team productive in a competitive league. I agree I'd rather have Gay than DeRozan, but who realistically is going to trade for DeRozan? We all love to talk about how Amir Johnson after 2 years making his deal worth it. Now we turn our heads to DeRozan -- who in their right mind will trade for a player that *might* one day be worth his price? And in return you want them to give you a productive starting PF?

                I'm not saying this is impossible, but it's damn well close.
                your pal,
                ebrian

                Comment


                • #53
                  Eric Akshinthala wrote: View Post
                  First of all, I'm not a marketing guy either. My little knowledge is from what I've picked up from hearing/reading and common sense. Just making sure you're not talking to an expert.

                  Yes it's as simple as tuning on your TV to the game. The more TV's that are tuned on to the game, the more revenue is generated by the TV station airing the game which in turn benefits the team owner, in this case MLSE. Yes MLSE is paid by the TV station in advance but if MLSE wants to get a similar contract or a better one the next time around, it wants the TV station to do well. Low viewership = Low sales = smaller contract = Low revenue.

                  Like you I'm a Raptors first Raptors/Leafs fan. If there's no Raptors related stuff on TV/Radio/Internet, I'm tuned on to the Leafs game. If I'm tuned on, it's one more TV viewing customer for MLSE, the eventual beneficiary.
                  As far as I know, it doesn't really work that way.. ratings are gathered from households that have special cable boxes that track what they watch and when. So it's actually a sampling of all households and not every household.

                  I believe the service provider for ratings is called Nielsen. And you need a "Nielsen box" if you want what you watch to be counted in the ratings.

                  This is how I remember it.. it may have changed now that everyone has to have a digital box but it seems to me that it would be an invasion of privacy if that was the case.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    ebrian wrote: View Post
                    You need perfect trading partners for that, teams that are willing to help you make your team productive in a competitive league. I agree I'd rather have Gay than DeRozan, but who realistically is going to trade for DeRozan? We all love to talk about how Amir Johnson after 2 years making his deal worth it. Now we turn our heads to DeRozan -- who in their right mind will trade for a player that *might* one day be worth his price? And in return you want them to give you a productive starting PF?

                    I'm not saying this is impossible, but it's damn well close.
                    That is a very good question. Analytics appears to be taking over the league however I'm sure there are still some old school thinkers out there who feel "potential" might still be a valuable thing as well as a guy scoring 18ppg. I'm not saying there is, I'm just saying there might be. I think DD is movable for something of value but obviously none of us work in the NBA so I have nothing to base this on but an opinion.

                    To answer the question though who might trade for DeRozan? Anyone needing a young, possibly long term SG with a real interest in any destination that is not a great free agent draw. List of potential destinations:

                    Milwaukee (Ilyasova and Jennings connection?)
                    Minnesota (I would LOVE to.... oh never mind)
                    Utah (Millsap S&T?)
                    New Orleans (do they or don't they want to move forward with Gordon?)



                    Attractive free agent spots that might work:

                    Lakers (Gasol somehow? Kobe injured? Maybe coming off the bench behind a healthy Kobe could put DD in a role he would actually flourish in: 6th man).

                    Phoenix (Dudley/Scola. Both guys would fit Toronto very nicely right now, I think.)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Blowing things up at this point is the stupidest thing I have heard all week. Matt52 and myself go back and forth all the time, but my stance is we are a playoff team. Miner tweaks are needed, not some of these whole sale changes that have been discussed. Wether it is the 8th seed, once in the playoffs anything can happen. I don't get into these little childish arguments because it is silly. I will wait for next year see how the team plays and reserve judgement until then. This is part of building, we made a significant jump even though we had a shitty start (last year 22wins this year 36wins). Yes there is room for improvement but thinking that replacing Colangelo with PJ was just going to some how right the ship, I can't see the logic in this. It takes time. I am sure some moves will be made, we will see what they are then go from there.

                      Some people here feel they could do a better job, stop being fantasy GM's go down to mlse and take the rains if you are so good.





                      I would argue that history is against your claim. If you look back at the NBA finals over the past 13 years (2000-2012), building through the draft has only been successful when the team lucked into an absolute superstar, when reaching the finals is the goal.

                      2012 - Miami (superteam) VS OKC (Durant + 2 other top-4 picks)
                      2011 - Dallas (Dirk & vets) VS Miami (superteam)
                      2010 - Lakers (superteam) VS Boston (superteam)
                      2009 - Lakers (superteam) VS Orlando (Howard)
                      2008 - Boston (superteam) VS Lakers (superteam)
                      2007 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Cleveland (LBJ)
                      2006 - Miami (superteam) VS Dallas (Dirk)
                      2005 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Detroit (solid team, not all via draft)
                      2004 - Detroit (solid team, not all via draft) VS Lakers (superteam)
                      2003 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
                      2002 - Lakers (superteam) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
                      2001 - Lakers (superteam) VS Philly (Iverson)
                      2000 - Lakers (superteam) VS Indi (Miller)

                      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).

                      +1

                      Blowing it up after coming this far is neither sensible nor viable. Yes some of BC's moves have been questionable and could have been done differently, but the result of the process of rebuilding is one year away and Raps. should simply stay the course.

                      +1

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Canmanxl wrote: View Post
                        Blowing things up at this point is the stupidest thing I have heard all week. Matt52 and myself go back and forth all the time, but my stance is we are a playoff team. Miner tweaks are needed, not some of these whole sale changes that have been discussed. Wether it is the 8th seed, once in the playoffs anything can happen. I don't get into these little childish arguments because it is silly. I will wait for next year see how the team plays and reserve judgement until then. This is part of building, we made a significant jump even though we had a shitty start (last year 22wins this year 36wins). Yes there is room for improvement but thinking that replacing Colangelo with PJ was just going to some how right the ship, I can't see the logic in this. It takes time. I am sure some moves will be made, we will see what they are then go from there.

                        Some people here feel they could do a better job, stop being fantasy GM's go down to mlse and take the rains if you are so good.





                        I would argue that history is against your claim. If you look back at the NBA finals over the past 13 years (2000-2012), building through the draft has only been successful when the team lucked into an absolute superstar, when reaching the finals is the goal.

                        2012 - Miami (superteam) VS OKC (Durant + 2 other top-4 picks)
                        2011 - Dallas (Dirk & vets) VS Miami (superteam)
                        2010 - Lakers (superteam) VS Boston (superteam)
                        2009 - Lakers (superteam) VS Orlando (Howard)
                        2008 - Boston (superteam) VS Lakers (superteam)
                        2007 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Cleveland (LBJ)
                        2006 - Miami (superteam) VS Dallas (Dirk)
                        2005 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Detroit (solid team, not all via draft)
                        2004 - Detroit (solid team, not all via draft) VS Lakers (superteam)
                        2003 - Spurs (Duncan & 2 great picks) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
                        2002 - Lakers (superteam) VS Nets (solid team, not all via draft)
                        2001 - Lakers (superteam) VS Philly (Iverson)
                        2000 - Lakers (superteam) VS Indi (Miller)

                        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).

                        +1

                        Blowing it up after coming this far is neither sensible nor viable. Yes some of BC's moves have been questionable and could have been done differently, but the result of the process of rebuilding is one year away and Raps. should simply stay the course.

                        +1
                        A few things bolded above:

                        1) This is your 7th post. Not sure we've gone back and forth all the time.

                        2) No one here is arguing. It is a forum for discussion. If you can think of better Raptor conversation pieces, please start a new thread.

                        3) The Raptors won 23 games last season in a 65 game, lockout shortened season. The Raptors won 36 of 82 games this year. Winning percentage increased from .348 to .415.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Matt52 wrote: View Post
                          A few things bolded above:

                          1) This is your 7th post. Not sure we've gone back and forth all the time.

                          2) No one here is arguing. It is a forum for discussion. If you can think of better Raptor conversation pieces, please start a new thread.

                          3) The Raptors won 23 games last season in a 65 game, lockout shortened season. The Raptors won 36 of 82 games this year. Winning percentage increased from .348 to .415.
                          Blowing things up now to go back to being a crap team for another 3 to 4 years makes no sense, this thread was a waste of time. Everyone understands that this is not a championship team, but that is what we are building towards. Why would fans want to endure another 3 to 4 years of crap basketball in "HOPES" that this team will be a championship team magically. As pointed the draft is a crap shoot.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Canmanxl wrote: View Post
                            Blowing things up now to go back to being a crap team for another 3 to 4 years makes no sense, this thread was a waste of time. Everyone understands that this is not a championship team, but that is what we are building towards. Why would fans want to endure another 3 to 4 years of crap basketball in "HOPES" that this team will be a championship team magically. As pointed the draft is a crap shoot.
                            A few things:

                            1) Going back to being a crap team makes no sense to you. That is cool. Others have another view. That is cool too. This was not my thread but it certainly generated discussion and made me think from different perspectives therefore I wouldn't call it a waste of time.

                            2) The problem with keeping the team the same as it is is there are no real opportunities to grow. While blowing it up might not be ideal, building a championship team around a roster with no cap space, expendable and valuable trade assets, and draft pick is hardly ideal either.

                            3) I think fans would rather "HOPE" for three or four years that move forward with no hope. Keeping the roster as currently constructed offers no hope to me personally but I don't think blowing it up is the first choice right now either. Have to see what your assets can yield leading in to the draft and in July before making that decision I think.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              To me it just seems a bit odd to be browsing a Raptors forum with 8 posts under your belt and telling people who are having an intelligent discussion that they're wasting their time.

                              Anyway, that's as far as I'm willing to judge another person.

                              Many of the teams listed there were built, not necessarily with the drafted players, but by trading draft picks. Miami, for example, would never have been able to clear out their cap to acquire Bosh and Wade if not for having draft picks to trade for expiring contracts. Boston Celtics Big 3 wouldn't exist if not for the 5th overall pick tanked for in 2006. I don't really have time to look up the others, but that covers a good chunk of the last 5 championships.

                              Random side note: I had a random thought while watching the Heat tonight. What if Chris Bosh wanted the team to trade Bargnani all along? What if him learning to shoot 3s was his way of saying "Hey guys, I can shoot 3s now. But I'm not super great and blocking shots and defending, so trade that guy for one who can!"? Because he was at least worth something in those days.

                              Matt, the one deal that I think might work is the Millsap one. Utah is literally a DeRozan-type away from being a perennial playoff team again. They already have Favors waiting in the wings, who may not have the motor but certainly has way more talent than Millsap. Thing for me is that if Colangelo is retained, I can't see him trading DeRozan. He's already on thin ice (even if extended) and the average fan doesn't really understand. I think most people would be mad if DeRozan were traded.
                              your pal,
                              ebrian

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                ebrian wrote: View Post
                                Okay, well that makes sense except for one thing -- if Colangelo gets fired and the Leafs are still playing playoff hockey, I'm still watching the Leafs game. I might check my phone from time to time while watching, to see if there's a new tweet from Grange or Marc Stein, or Woj, but I'm still watching Leafs.

                                And I don't think a single person who was *already* watching Leafs playoff hockey stops watching because Colangelo got fired.
                                If Colangelo gets fired and you are still watching Leafs play off hockey, it doesn't affect the Leafs in any way.

                                Not all fans are the same though. They think differently. I wish I could agree with the last sentence in your post but I can't 'cause it's not true.
                                Attitude Is A Choice.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X