Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raptors really are one of the youngest teams in the league now

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

  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    p00ka wrote: View Post
    imo, you were, and are, being a technically nit-picky about that detail. It doesn't take a big leap to realize they weren't talking about team average age as being young, but referring to what they saw as the young core they were developing and relying upon for the future: DD, ED, JV, Ross, Amir, Fields, Bayless, JJ and you could even include the relative youth of Lowry and that new Knicks guy. They sure as hell weren't talking about all the cheap short term rentals employed at the time: Magloire, AA, Pietrus, Lucas, Butler, etc.. Using them as "he's BSing us, they're not young" is not recognizing what he was talking about, imo.
    Nit-Picky is my middle name.

    Considering JV, ED, and TR were all nailed to bench at one point or another the last 2 years and his insistence that younger players would have been benched had the Raptors been in the playoff hunt (despite with experience down the stretch JV was getting and making the most of it i.e. about 15/8 over last 15 games of season), I think your point is as valid as my own.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I think DanH was just bringing up the point that a more accurate way to compare the relative 'age' of teams would be a weighted-average, based on distribution of playing time. For example, a team with lots of young players who don't see the court could be unfairly labeled "young", or a team with lots of older players who consistently sit in street clothes would be labeled "old". I actually think that would be an interesting league-wide comparison... but I know I don't have the desire or patience to undertake that challenge! lol
    Nor do I.

    I was just using the site/source I gave.

    Whatever comparison you want to make the key is consistency. I think the site/source I gave combined with admitting the * for Richardson is fair enough.

    I would really be interested to see the results DanH seeks.... so how about it, DanH?

    Leave a comment:


  • p00ka
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I don't know. I'm not even sure what you mean with your questions given the context of the post makes the assumption Richardson is waived or traded before opening day. Richardson is never going to wear a Raptor uniform and that is the only reason I excluded him.

    I have said nothing about youth and the impact on the future. The closest thing to that I have said is I'd rather have the end of bench made up of guys with upside/implied youth versus non-commodities/implied fossils.

    You are making a bigger question than my post was meant to be about. The fact is youth has been used as an excuse for two years when the Raptors weren't really that young (league average). Now the Raptors actually are young is my only point relative to the league IF you assume Richardson is not on the roster come opening day.

    At the end of the day though, age is meaningless and talent trumps all. The Raptors have a long way to go in the talent department.

    Maybe I should delete the thread and repost when Richardson is moved?
    imo, you were, and are, being a technically nit-picky about that detail. It doesn't take a big leap to realize they weren't talking about team average age as being young, but referring to what they saw as the young core they were developing and relying upon for the future: DD, ED, JV, Ross, Amir, Fields, Bayless, JJ and you could even include the relative youth of Lowry and that new Knicks guy. They sure as hell weren't talking about all the cheap short term rentals employed at the time: Magloire, AA, Pietrus, Lucas, Butler, etc.. Using them as "he's BSing us, they're not young" is not recognizing what he was talking about, imo.

    Leave a comment:


  • CalgaryRapsFan
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    I don't know. I'm not even sure what you mean with your questions given the context of the post makes the assumption Richardson is waived or traded before opening day. Richardson is never going to wear a Raptor uniform and that is the only reason I excluded him.

    I have said nothing about youth and the impact on the future. The closest thing to that I have said is I'd rather have the end of bench made up of guys with upside/implied youth versus non-commodities/implied fossils.

    You are making a bigger question than my post was meant to be about. The fact is youth has been used as an excuse for two years when the Raptors weren't really that young (league average). Now the Raptors actually are young is my only point relative to the league IF you assume Richardson is not on the roster come opening day.

    At the end of the day though, age is meaningless and talent trumps all. The Raptors have a long way to go in the talent department.

    Maybe I should delete the thread and repost when Richardson is moved?
    I think DanH was just bringing up the point that a more accurate way to compare the relative 'age' of teams would be a weighted-average, based on distribution of playing time. For example, a team with lots of young players who don't see the court could be unfairly labeled "young", or a team with lots of older players who consistently sit in street clothes would be labeled "old". I actually think that would be an interesting league-wide comparison... but I know I don't have the desire or patience to undertake that challenge! lol

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post
    Is there, when discussing the impact the team's youth could have on it's future? Is there a significant difference there? Does OKC suddenly get a lot less "young" because they sign a Q-Rich to a minimum deal to rarely if ever play?
    I don't know. I'm not even sure what you mean with your questions given the context of the post makes the assumption Richardson is waived or traded before opening day. Richardson is never going to wear a Raptor uniform and that is the only reason I excluded him.

    I have said nothing about youth and the impact on the future. The closest thing to that I have said is I'd rather have the end of bench made up of guys with upside/implied youth versus non-commodities/implied fossils.

    You are making a bigger question than my post was meant to be about. The fact is youth has been used as an excuse for two years when the Raptors weren't really that young (league average). Now the Raptors actually are young is my only point relative to the league IF you assume Richardson is not on the roster come opening day.

    At the end of the day though, age is meaningless and talent trumps all. The Raptors have a long way to go in the talent department.

    Maybe I should delete the thread and repost when Richardson is moved?

    Leave a comment:


  • planetmars
    replied
    I don't really pay much attention to age.. A team could be young but if most of the players have already reached their prime and are making more money than they are worth then it's really a moot point, especially if the team is bad.

    It's all about talent in my opinion.

    All this will prove is that Casey has an excuse already handy for his post game interviews.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    There is a difference between on roster but won't play and won't actually ever show up in Toronto.
    Is there, when discussing the impact the team's youth could have on it's future? Is there a significant difference there? Does OKC suddenly get a lot less "young" because they sign a Q-Rich to a minimum deal to rarely if ever play?

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post
    What happens when you go through the other teams' lineups and remove the older guys who won't play on their roster? Seems like a quick way to skew the data. Without that removal we sit at 17th youngest, with it in a three way tie for 6th through 8th. Even with that, you've got two other up and coming teams in the East that are both younger and more likely to make the playoffs this year (CLE and WAS).
    There is a difference between on roster but won't play and won't actually ever show up in Toronto.

    But if you want to include Richardson, go ahead, there was no "guys" removed - just one who everyone knows won't suit up.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    What happens when you go through the other teams' lineups and remove the older guys who won't play on their roster? Seems like a quick way to skew the data. Without that removal we sit at 17th youngest, with it in a three way tie for 6th through 8th. Even with that, you've got two other up and coming teams in the East that are both younger and more likely to make the playoffs this year (CLE and WAS).

    Leave a comment:


  • ceez
    replied
    So this is how MU is going to tank, eh? Inexperience. Crafty bastard.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bendit
    replied
    As others have mentioned in various threads, MU is building "flexibility" into the team as well as a possible increase in asset value which can then be bundled for a more desirable piece. It would be easier/more probable to do this with a younger/cheaper/higher ceiling player than the older/typically more expensive/static one.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    started a topic Raptors really are one of the youngest teams in the league now

    Raptors really are one of the youngest teams in the league now

    Last season one thing that drove me nuts listening to Colangelo/Casey interviews on the Raptors was hearing how young the team was. The reality was the Raptors were average around 14-15 in both years experience and age when compared to the rest of the league.

    Fast forward to today and we can honestly say the Raptors are truly one of the youngest teams in the league.

    http://en.hispanosnba.com/teams/comparison



    When you remove Q-Richardson, because lets be real he'll never suit up for Toronto, the Raptors are on average 25.1 years old with 4.1 years experience.

    That puts the Raptors are tied for 6th with 25.1 with Milwaukee and Houston (although technically 8th by a decimal place) and tied for 8th with 4.1 years experience.

    Novak is the elder statesman at 30 years of age followed by Gray at 28 and a slew under 27 and under.

    JV is the youngest on the team at 21 followed by Acy and Ross at 22.

    When the season opens 10 players on the team will be between 24-27.



    Next year when we hear about how young the team is I know I will be able to hear it without rolling my eyes and doing the jerk off motion. The team really is in the youngest 1/4 of the league next season. Talent is another debate, unfortunately.

    As a somewhat relevant aside, I'm glad to see the roster being constructed as is. I'd much rather see short term manageable contracts to guys with upside (Buycks, Daye, Augustine, Hansbrough) versus past years older veterans (Butler, Carter, Magloire, Anderson).

    I'm not sure if Ujiri did it purposely or not given Casey's history but next season we will not have to watch an older player with a limited future in Toronto take minutes from a player who could stay for years. That gives me reason for hope.



    BTW, this is more of an FYI kind of thing. Never forget that talent wins and age is irrelevant unless you're trying to sell hope and potential to the fanbase.
Working...
X