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

[Nilanka]

How do you convince Gay to play the role of the 3rd option if he's currently the best offensive player on the roster?

[mcHAPPY]

I agree with the first part of the bold, but not the second. I do think Gay is overpaid, but I also think there's no NBA team in the league that would consider giving him the same or more money. The number I'm ok with to re-sign him at, is at most, 10-12 million on a 2-3 year contract. He has the skills you want from a SF, and he performs at a pretty high level. He's not efficient or consistent enough to make franchise player money though.

I think Gay could be the SF on a contender. For instance, I don't think he would've hurt Memphis' playoff run at all this season, and might've been extremely valuable, even as a decoy that the D has to pay attention to, against San Antonio.

The problem with Gay is that he probably can't be in the top 2 players on your team, impact-wise. I think JV will be a better player in terms of impact. I also think the team has pieces to shop for another piece like that. But then in order for it to make sense to keep Gay, he has to take a paycut. This is where a new GM is crucial. There are several options I'd be ok with for Gay. Like I said, for 2-3 years, I might be fine with 10-12 per. I'd also be interested in other options like frontloading it on a longer deal so that he becomes easier and easier to trade. Or maybe a longer deal that just shaves a bit off the yearly average, but still is too lucrative for him to pass up in total dollars over a shorter deal with less security.

4 years is what Gay will be looking for from anyone and will get.

I think 4 years/$48M is fair market. I would aim to structure it as $14/12.5/11/9.5 to coincide with his likely decline in abilities and ending of rookie scale contracts.

[RAPTORNATION]

I'm not comparing him to lebron, durantula, or Carmelo but he's a top sf in this league and I can't think of any team in this league where he would or should be the third offensive option

[slaw]

I'm not comparing him to lebron, durantula, or Carmelo but he's a top sf in this league and I can't think of any team in this league where he would or should be the third offensive option

Thunder, Nuggets, Blazers, Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, Clippers, Warriors, Lakers, Pacers, Celtics, Nets, Heat. There may be others but that's about half the league....

Nothing against Gay, he's a decent player. But he's not worth what they're paying him and he's not a #1 or #2 option on a good team. He's been around for 7 years. This isn't exactly a revelation.

[white men can't jump]

How do you convince Gay to play the role of the 3rd option if he's currently the best offensive player on the roster?

First off, talking top 2-3 players. That doesn't necessarily have to mean offensive options. If somehow the Raptors traded for Rondo, Gay would still be the primary perimeter scorer and probably get more touches than anybody else. Heck, even if it was a PF like Love, Gay would still be in that situation.

Second off, You don't convince anybody of anything. You get the pieces you want. If you get someone who's a better scorer than Gay, and he has a problem with that, you trade him. It's not even a discussion. Gay has to recognize the role he's capable of playing on a successful team. I don't think Gay is blind to this.

*Edit...Successful teams use multiple threats from different points of attack. Will Gay be considered the 2nd option if JV grows into a more productive player? Or will we just call them the top 2 options?....

The lesson? As long as guys play smart and put egos aside, who the #1 option is will never be a problem, because they'll recognize who should be the #1 option depending on opponent and situation. And it is, in fact, easier to be a good team when there is less of a distinction/gap between your top 2-3 options, because if there's a clear #1 guy (like Melo or Durant in these playoffs), it is very easy to gameplan against.

**seriously people talk about stars and big 3s....but a common factor in all championship teams is the putting aside of egos. It doesn't matter if you have a great top 3 if they don't know how to do that and play the game to win instead of for themselves. Think any team, from the always modest Spurs, to the big 3 led Celtics or Heat. The putting aside of egos, in Boston's case to spread the wealth, in Miami's case, for Wade to fully defer to LeBron, was critical.

[white men can't jump]

4 years is what Gay will be looking for from anyone and will get.

I think 4 years/$48M is fair market. I would aim to structure it as $14/12.5/11/9.5 to coincide with his likely decline in abilities and ending of rookie scale contracts.

yeah, I would be totally fine with something like that. It's a paycut, but a gradual one, and I think a fair one. He'll be 29 when he signs it (I think), so by the end of his deal he's unlikely to be worth the same as the start.

[jimmie]

yeah, I would be totally fine with something like that. It's a paycut, but a gradual one, and I think a fair one. He'll be 29 when he signs it (I think), so by the end of his deal he's unlikely to be worth the same as the start.

I think it's fair, too. Which is why I suspect an NBA player would think it's unfair. It's a 30% pay cut for someone who isn't doing anything markedly better or worse than they have for the past 7 years. Why would he expect a pay cut, especially to play for Toronto, who he thought had brought him in to save the day?

My thought: He's going to ask for no less than $15M/4 years as a starting point; his agent would be an idiot not to ask for something in that range. "My client has been paid 16.5M to bring his unique skillset to the table, and under the current NBA fiscal situation, is willing to take a modest pay cut in his next contract, blah, blah, blah..." Toronto offers $12M/3 years. 'Some other team' counters with 12.5/4, or 14/2. 'Some other team' might be closer to championship contention. Gay now has a choice, and a bargaining position. What then?

If you accept that my scenario is a possible play-out, then you have to consider moving him unless you're 100% sure he's going to be a key factor in getting this team to the promised land. Otherwise, it's "losing an asset for nothing" time again, albeit not on the Bosh scale...

[white men can't jump]

I think it's fair, too. Which is why I suspect an NBA player would think it's unfair. It's a 30% pay cut for someone who isn't doing anything markedly better or worse than they have for the past 7 years. Why would he expect a pay cut, especially to play for Toronto, who he thought had brought him in to save the day?

My thought: He's going to ask for no less than $15M/4 years as a starting point; his agent would be an idiot not to ask for something in that range. "My client has been paid 16.5M to bring his unique skillset to the table, and under the current NBA fiscal situation, is willing to take a modest pay cut in his next contract, blah, blah, blah..." Toronto offers $12M/3 years. 'Some other team' counters with 12.5/4, or 14/2. 'Some other team' might be closer to championship contention. Gay now has a choice, and a bargaining position. What then?

If you accept that my scenario is a possible play-out, then you have to consider moving him unless you're 100% sure he's going to be a key factor in getting this team to the promised land. Otherwise, it's "losing an asset for nothing" time again, albeit not on the Bosh scale...

Ok, well he can ask for anything he goddamn wants, doesn't mean he's going to get it. I'd be shocked if another team thinks a 29 year old SF (who still hasn't made a single all-star game) is a 14 million dollar a season piece.

But also...There's absolutely no reason the team has to lose an asset for nothing. With Gay, he could easily be part of a winning core, so he's certainly not a player they should just dump to blow it up. That's what I was getting at. They have 2 seasons to evaluate him and decide how he fits. They should know well before his contract expires whether he figures into their long term plans, and thus have time to explore trade options that make sense. Whether this is because he doesn't fit, doesnt' agree to an extension, or overachieves in the franchise's eyes so that they think he'll get a bigger offer than he deserves...it really doesn't matter what the reason is.

Also, finally, I'd like to point out that the 30% paycut makes sense, because the contract he signed with the Grizzlies was a "potential" contract, where they gave him max money thinking(or hoping) he'd become a legit max player. So the fact that he isn't markedly better is something that will absolutely ensure he makes less money.

[mcHAPPY]

Ok, well he can ask for anything he goddamn wants, doesn't mean he's going to get it. I'd be shocked if another team thinks a 29 year old SF (who still hasn't made a single all-star game) is a 14 million dollar a season piece.

But also...There's absolutely no reason the team has to lose an asset for nothing. With Gay, he could easily be part of a winning core, so he's certainly not a player they should just dump to blow it up. That's what I was getting at. They have 2 seasons to evaluate him and decide how he fits. They should know well before his contract expires whether he figures into their long term plans, and thus have time to explore trade options that make sense. Whether this is because he doesn't fit, doesnt' agree to an extension, or overachieves in the franchise's eyes so that they think he'll get a bigger offer than he deserves...it really doesn't matter what the reason is.

Also, finally, I'd like to point out that the 30% paycut makes sense, because the contract he signed with the Grizzlies was a "potential" contract, where they gave him max money thinking(or hoping) he'd become a legit max player. So the fact that he isn't markedly better is something that will absolutely ensure he makes less money.

You know, I agree with the premise but...... Joe Johnson was in the same boat and we know how that ends. Maybe the new CBA curtails recklessness. Maybe if the Raptors are respectable and on the verge of contending he does what I threw out earlier. But if the Raptors are still a bottom feeder, it will be all about the $$$.

[white men can't jump]

You know, I agree with the premise but...... Joe Johnson was in the same boat and we know how that ends. Maybe the new CBA curtails recklessness. Maybe if the Raptors are respectable and on the verge of contending he does what I threw out earlier. But if the Raptors are still a bottom feeder, it will be all about the $$$.

If the Raptors are still a bottom feeder, you trade him before the deadline, because if they are that in 2 seasons, Gay is clearly not at all capable of having the impact we hope.

*Oh, and also Johnson so far is a 6 time all-star...not quite the same boat

[RAPTORNATION]

RAPTORNATION wrote:

I'm not comparing him to lebron, durantula, or Carmelo but he's a top sf in this league and I can't think of any team in this league where he would or should be the third offensive option

Thunder, Nuggets, Blazers, Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, Clippers, Warriors, Lakers, Pacers, Celtics, Nets, Heat. There may be others but that's about half the league....



Nothing against Gay, he's a decent player. But he's not worth what they're paying him and he's not a #1 or #2 option on a good team. He's been around for 7 years. This isn't exactly a revelation.

Maybe I have the wrong idea in mind when I think of offensive options but the factors I put in when considering it are ball handling time, shots attempts, go to player in clutch time, etc. Many of those teams have elite sgs and sfs in which Rudy would be the second option but not third. Any team Rudy gay is on he will be first or second option because that is where his value is at. He may be a slightly above average defender but teams pay for his offensive ability.

Edit: sorry my phones formatting is messed up I tried to respond to a quote

[wallz]

Thunder, Nuggets, Blazers, Spurs, Grizzlies, Rockets, Clippers, Warriors, Lakers, Pacers, Celtics, Nets, Heat. There may be others but that's about half the league....

Nothing against Gay, he's a decent player. But he's not worth what they're paying him and he's not a #1 or #2 option on a good team. He's been around for 7 years. This isn't exactly a revelation.

He was the top scorer for the Grizzlies, and they were one of the best in the West, even with him

[Mediumcore]

I think it is safe to say Colangelo had some meddling going on with Casey - I have nothing to back that up with other than innuendo and rumours. Colangelo is now gone. I wonder what would have happened had Casey not been the obedient soldier Colangelo expected of him. Also, this last season was a season of inconsistency and upheaval. From "come hell or high water" to "lets clone Jose in to Lowry" to "the trade" the season was uneven at best. Despite this they finished 3 wins out of the playoffs albeit with an #AprilFoolsGold run. I think there has been a lot of confusion from management on down the last 2 seasons about what type of team the Raptors were expected to be with a lot of lip service paid to defense, accountability, and winning culture. With Colangelo no longer running basketball ops the hope I have is consistency, patience towards building, and finding pieces that fit the build/vision.

A lot of good things do need to be right with THIS core. However, if you trade a couple of core pieces for pieces that better fit or obtain other assets suddenly things change. The Raptors have good pieces to work with, all of them don't fit together nicely is the problem.

As for how I see things unfolding, I've laid out numerous hypothetical situations with all have the common thread of obtaining prospects, picks, and expiring contracts for DeRozan, Bargnani, and possibly Lowry.



I don't think Indiana to Detroit is a fair comparison. Position by position the edge goes to the Pistons except SF and on offense at C. Detroit is a bottom feeder because Dumars traded Billups for Iverson and then killed their cap situation with Gordon and Charlie V in free agency.

You example of great players leads us back to the same discussion: you put all your eggs in one basket to get a franchise player at the top of the draft hoping balls line up, talent is available in draft year, and franchise talent is available when you turn to pick comes up then you hope you can make the franchise respectable after years of losing to ensure the talent does not leave at first chance.... no thanks.

I guess it's an agree to disagree situation. I think the Detroit/Indiana comparison is fair. The point I was trying to make is that Detroit was not able to sustain it's championship run the way a team with an elite player to build around is able to do so. Where as teams like San Antonio and the Lakers whom got lucky with talented players that managed to stay healthy for most of their careers were able to sustain it. I fully expect that Indiana will not be able to stay this competetive for a considerable duration.

[Mediumcore]

Another thing to consider about players not wanting to play for a team that consistantly tanks/loses is the Clippers example. Years for bottom dwelling until they hit it big in the draft with Griffin, and they manage to sign Chris Paul, no less after just one year of the Griffin era. I think too much emphasis is being put on players not wanting to play for a team that loses consistantly. Players are like fans, when the the team does well they will always come back like they never left.

[mcHAPPY]

I guess it's an agree to disagree situation. I think the Detroit/Indiana comparison is fair. The point I was trying to make is that Detroit was not able to sustain it's championship run the way a team with an elite player to build around is able to do so. Where as teams like San Antonio and the Lakers whom got lucky with talented players that managed to stay healthy for most of their careers were able to sustain it. I fully expect that Indiana will not be able to stay this competetive for a considerable duration.

I think it depends how long West plays at this level and what his subsequent replacement does. The pacers are young and George is only getting better.