Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debate settled......

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

  • CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    For anybody believing that the tank may not (or is not) be on, I would suggest watching the news conference from yesterday, where it was abundantly clear that MU was focused on the future. Everything he talked about was with regards to the future, with practically no mention of the current season. When mentioning the 4 players acquired in trade, he referred to the future flexibility they provided, without saying anything resembling a positive impact they'd have in the ongoing quest for playoffs this season.

    Prior to this trade and that press conference, I could understand how avoiding no man's land could mean tanking or going all-in for playoffs. However, after the trade and press conference, it's beyond me how anybody could believe that MU is seriously concerned with the playoffs this season. He's worried about the future, starting with cap space and draft positioning for this upcoming offseason.
    Oh, I agree completely. There's no chance in hell Ujiri's pushing for the playoffs this year.

    Comment


    • p00ka wrote: View Post
      You're absolutely correct. Wise "build properly", which fits perfectly well with what some, if not most, of us "anti-tankers" as we've been labeled, are in full support of. What this move is, and I've detailed how it doesn't fit the tanking scenarios that keep getting pounded on (but nobody is answering), and what MU said, despite what some choose to read/speculate into it, is not tanking. At least, not on it's own. So, why the calling out of people who disagree with "the tank concept".

      Another question: Is the definition of "tank" changing yet again? Us anti-tankers need to know just what the hell it is we're arguing against, and the tankers keep changing it,,,,,,,, if this is being called "proof" of a tank underway.
      Is it the tankers who keep moving the target?

      Because I could have swore that you berated plenty of posters over the summer, myself included, for claiming that this was a "34 win team" and that the Raptors were bound to be in the playoffs this year. Now that they've traded Rudy Gay for a pu pu platter of miscellaneous pieces from one of the worst teams in the league... you are claiming that this is what you and the rest of the "anti-tankers" wanted all along?
      Last edited by Fully; Tue Dec 10, 2013, 03:42 PM.

      Comment


      • Fully wrote: View Post
        Is it the tankers who keep moving the target?

        Because I could have swore that you berated plenty of posters over the summer, myself included, for claiming that this was a "34 win team" and that the Raptors were bound to be in the playoffs this year. Now that they've traded Rudy Gay for a pu pu platter of miscellaneous pieces from one of the worst teams in the league... you are claiming that this is what you and the rest of the "anti-tankers" wanted all along.
        There is literally post after post after post on these boards explaining exactly what the "tankers" mean. Pooka's read many of them. I'm not sure why he keeps regurgitating this nonsense that drives the discussion back to square 1 while pretending to be interested in moving the discussion forward.
        "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

        Comment


        • S.R. wrote: View Post
          There is literally post after post after post on these boards explaining exactly what the "tankers" mean. Pooka's read many of them. I'm not sure why he keeps regurgitating this nonsense that drives the discussion back to square 1 while pretending to be interested in moving the discussion forward.
          Well, his point was reasonable: that this was not a tanking move.

          I think it is more of an indication of the moves that will be forthcoming.

          MU's talk was more tank heavy than this trade.
          "Bruno?
          Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
          He's terrible."

          -Superjudge, 7/23

          Hope you're wrong.

          Comment


          • S.R. wrote: View Post
            I'm not about to attempt to convince you of anything. There are posts within this thread, and dozens more besides that directly address all of your points - and you've read most of them. That you're still raising the same "arguments" at this juncture shows you're not interested in "discussion" or adjusting any of your opinions. You're here to gloss over others' points and repeat yourself ad nauseam.

            For example, my "smart ass" point is a satirical take on your own. Satire is one of the most useful and oldest forms of criticism. But you're not really interested in interacting with anybody at any kind of depth - you'd rather stand on the top of the play structure and yell at all the other kids. The irony of you tossing around the "chest thumping" label just shattered the scale.
            Bold 1: Always a good thing to know you're limitations.

            Bold 2: No point I made in that post is anything I've said before, but if such bs makes you feel better, good boy.

            Bold 3: kid, you want to play a smartass game, and think you're wearing big boy pants? I'm game. I can be a major asshole, just as well or better than you can.

            Comment


            • stooley wrote: View Post
              Well, his point was reasonable: that this was not a tanking move.

              I think it is more of an indication of the moves that will be forthcoming.

              MU's talk was more tank heavy than this trade.
              I'll reiterate again that I think people are greatly overestimating what we will get from the Sactown guys. Hayes is on his last legs. Salmons is not far behind. Patterson is mildly intriguing but has been a below average NBA player for his entire career and Vasquez projects as a career back up if put on the proper team. We got three below average players and one decent player from a 5-13 team.

              Comment


              • p00ka wrote: View Post
                Bold 3: kid, you want to play a smartass game, and think you're wearing big boy pants? I'm game. I can be a major asshole, just as well or better than you can.
                Nobody doubts you
                Heir, Prince of Cambridge

                If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

                Comment


                • Fully wrote: View Post
                  I'll reiterate again that I think people are greatly overestimating what we will get from the Sactown guys. Hayes is on his last legs. Salmons is not far behind. Patterson is mildly intriguing but has been a below average NBA player for his entire career and Vasquez projects as a career back up if put on the proper team. We got three below average players and one decent player from a 5-13 team.
                  Gay really wasn't a positive wins guy in my opinion though. Obviously I don't expect Amir to beast-mode every game, but he got 71 touches on Sunday as oppposed to his average of 40. I think redistributing Gay's touches will improve our offence. On defense, Landry should be able to take over Gay's role and compensate with better effort.
                  "Bruno?
                  Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
                  He's terrible."

                  -Superjudge, 7/23

                  Hope you're wrong.

                  Comment


                  • p00ka wrote: View Post
                    Bold 1: Always a good thing to know you're limitations.

                    Bold 2: No point I made in that post is anything I've said before, but if such bs makes you feel better, good boy.

                    Bold 3: kid, you want to play a smartass game, and think you're wearing big boy pants? I'm game. I can be a major asshole, just as well or better than you can.
                    I was about to write a new reply, before realizing the post you quoted is the perfect response for everything you've just written. It's almost like you're trying to show everybody just how right I am. I want you to know I appreciate that.
                    "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

                    Comment


                    • p00ka wrote: View Post
                      lmao, but maybe one should wait until further moves before getting snotty and pounding one's chest. Amazing how some are so stuck on stu............ um stuck on their tank plans that they read stuff into MU's words and action that aren't there.

                      In this deal alone, there is absolutely nothing that fits into any scenario I've seen touted here as a tank plan. In general it's been stated dozens, if not hundreds, of times that the whole tank "plan" is:

                      1. Unload what talent there is, except JV, for prospects and picks. Neither of which was done with this trade. Neither Salmons or Hayes can possibly be called prospects. Patterson may have been considered one at some point, but if the tankers think DD isn't a prospect worth keeping at barely 24, Patterson at 5 months older is even much less developed. Vasquez, at almost 27 (and older than Amir btw, is Jose-lite with much less of a 3 pt shot.
                      Unloading Gray and Acy hardly fits in with unloading talent either.

                      2. Get worse over short term to enable getting better long term.
                      Hmmmm, MU got rid of the consensus team killer, between his very high TO rate, incredibly bad decision making, and historically bad shooting efficiency, a very good argument can be made that this move makes the better!
                      - whether that 1 game with out him is short-lived or not, it would only be guessing by anybody, but we saw more ball movement and more playmaking, and more use of all talents on the floor, than any game this year. That can hardly be seen as getting worse.
                      - Vasquez, despite his weaknesses, especially defense, is an instant upgrade on our backup PG spot. He ADDS to the ball movement and set up teammates concept we saw in LA.
                      - Hayes, an experienced and very savvy defensive big, is certainly an upgrade over street cloths wearing Acy.

                      So, we got rid of a toxic "talent" that was playing very poorly, and got upgrades in two areas. How exactly is that getting worse? (to get better later)

                      What this trade is?

                      1. unloading a crippling salary, especially with the uncertainty of whether he was what he was going to do with his upcoming option, for a handful of much more moveable contracts, all but one ending at the end of the season. Wise financial management, but that hardly makes it a "tank" move.

                      2. unloading a wasted "talent" that was hurting this team's play, and chances to win, in virtually every game, coupled with upgrading at both the PG and bigs depth.

                      Save the pompous chest-thumping until there is actually a "tank" trade that actually fits your proposed ideas of tanking.
                      I agree with your last points about what the trade was. I don't really see a tank move as yet. What I see by this trade are:
                      - Depth at PG. The play of the back up guards was hurting the team when Lowry was out and at the rate he was going he would be injured sooner than later
                      - Freeing up minutes and shots for JV and Ross
                      - No drop off at SF considering how poorly Gay was playing
                      - Additional rebounders and interior D
                      - Flexibility

                      Another thing I found interesting is that by getting someone like Salmons, whom can handle the rock and Patterson that can shoot, it takes a lot of the pressure off DeMar. Almost like they were shaping the roster around DeMar. Will need time to tell if that theory has any validity to it.

                      Comment


                      • stooley wrote: View Post
                        Gay really wasn't a positive wins guy in my opinion though. Obviously I don't expect Amir to beast-mode every game, but he got 71 touches on Sunday as oppposed to his average of 40. I think redistributing Gay's touches will improve our offence. On defense, Landry should be able to take over Gay's role and compensate with better effort.
                        Agreed. Plus there is no doubt that Vasquez will run the 2nd unit better than DJ/Stone/Buycks. Overall there should be a net positive by using more pnr and better ball movement.
                        Heir, Prince of Cambridge

                        If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

                        Comment


                        • p00ka wrote: View Post
                          Bold 1: Always a good thing to know you're limitations.

                          Bold 2: No point I made in that post is anything I've said before, but if such bs makes you feel better, good boy.

                          Bold 3: kid, you want to play a smartass game, and think you're wearing big boy pants? I'm game. I can be a major asshole, just as well or better than you can.
                          I also want to reiterate that I'm on your side and I'm not sure why you feel the need to bring your soiled colon into the conversation.

                          This team is moving towards the playoffs. Sacramento Kings castoffs will definitely get us there. MU now has the assets in place to assemble a championship calibre core by trading Lowry's expiring contract for a perennial all-star, drafting a real game changer with the 14th pick, and then signing another all-star next summer. All the pieces are here. Let's go Raps!
                          "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

                          Comment


                          • Fully wrote: View Post
                            Is it the tankers who keep moving the target?

                            Because I could have swore that you berated plenty of posters over the summer, myself included, for claiming that this was a "34 win team" and that the Raptors were bound to be in the playoffs this year. Now that they've traded Rudy Gay for a pu pu platter of miscellaneous pieces from one of the worst teams in the league... you are claiming that this is what you and the rest of the "anti-tankers" wanted all along.
                            Don't know what to say. Not only do some of you change the definition of tanking to suit whatever the narrative flavour of the month is, but here you use the commonly used change-the-subject deflection technique.

                            PLEASE, somebody actually, you know, respond to the points I made, or are you all really at a loss to explain how this trade fits the basic "tank plan" that S.R. and others are now shouting from the tree tops is proof of the tank being in progress. I made some points, none of which have been refuted, and merely suggested that people ought to wait until there's actual evidence before shouting victory. So the gang is swarming like flies to put down evil p00ka, none of you have a damn thing to say that refutes my points. Oh well, and S.R. says i don't want discussion, lol.

                            Comment


                            • p00ka wrote: View Post
                              Don't know what to say. Not only do some of you change the definition of tanking to suit whatever the narrative flavour of the month is, but here you use the commonly used change-the-subject deflection technique.

                              PLEASE, somebody actually, you know, respond to the points I made, or are you all really at a loss to explain how this trade fits the basic "tank plan" that S.R. and others are now shouting from the tree tops is proof of the tank being in progress. I made some points, none of which have been refuted, and merely suggested that people ought to wait until there's actual evidence before shouting victory. So the gang is swarming like flies to put down evil p00ka, none of you have a damn thing to say that refutes my points. Oh well, and S.R. says i don't want discussion, lol.
                              There are 407 posts in this thread: http://www.raptorsrepublic.com/forum...-Track-Edition

                              "I demand answers! No, I don't want to read your answers! I want to demand answers! Now, dammit!"

                              This conversation is stellar.
                              "We're playing in a building." -- Kawhi Leonard

                              Comment


                              • p00ka wrote: View Post
                                Don't know what to say. Not only do some of you change the definition of tanking to suit whatever the narrative flavour of the month is, but here you use the commonly used change-the-subject deflection technique.

                                PLEASE, somebody actually, you know, respond to the points I made, or are you all really at a loss to explain how this trade fits the basic "tank plan" that S.R. and others are now shouting from the tree tops is proof of the tank being in progress. I made some points, none of which have been refuted, and merely suggested that people ought to wait until there's actual evidence before shouting victory. So the gang is swarming like flies to put down evil p00ka, none of you have a damn thing to say that refutes my points. Oh well, and S.R. says i don't want discussion, lol.
                                I believe I already did, for one. Nilanka as well.

                                Looking at this trade in a vacuum, without any commentary, your assessment was fine. It very well could be addition-by-subtraction and simply wanting to remove such an albatross of a contract.

                                However, I think BC was right in his assessment also, when saying in a vacuum Gay was the most talented player involved in the trade. Obviously, there are many more factors at play than talent (ie: talent VS production VS salary), whether it's a tanking trade or not.

                                For me, there were two reasons this trade had a tanking feel to it. First, Gay was the most talented player and none of the players received are going to threaten the starting lineup, with Vasquez being the only sure-thing to even make the team's 2nd string (Patterson likely will simply because the team only has 3 bigs). Second, MU's post-trade press conference. As I mentioned in my previous post, I believed it was abundantly clear that MU is focused in the future and doesn't care one way or another about this season. MU sounded like a man just beginning a process, not just finished one, meaning there are more future-facing moves coming.

                                I've been a 'pro-tanker' whose definition of tanking has remained constant: sacrifice this season for the betterment of next season and beyond (ie: drop deadweight players/contracts, acquire prospects/picks, improve positioning of TOR's own draft picks, build the team efficiently/effectively using the draft, free agency and trades with long-term sustainable success in mind). I perceive this trade to favor the future and, more importantly, I believe everything MU said at his press conference supports the 'future VS present' narrative. To me, it adds up to the definition of 'tanking' I've been a proponent of since the offseason (really since the moment JV was drafted, but that's another story).
                                Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Tue Dec 10, 2013, 04:10 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X