Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will the Raptors make the playoffs, end up in no-man's land, or get a top pick?

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

  • Will the Raptors make the playoffs, end up in no-man's land, or get a top pick?

    Rudy is gone! IMO the Raptors are actually improved by the deal and will likely be competing for the top spot in the Atlantic division or a low seed in the playoffs. Rudy is an ok defender but if you take his 18.6 shots and redistribute them to guys like Johnson and Lowry, the offense is going to be a lot more efficient. I think we end up in the playoffs either as the fourth or seventh seed. What sayeth you?
    26
    In the playoffs.
    19.23%
    5
    In no man's land.
    15.38%
    4
    In the top 5 of the draft.
    65.38%
    17

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by hateslosing; Mon Dec 9th, 2013, 10:44 AM. Reason: spelling
    "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."

    -Churchill

  • #2
    I don't mean to repeat myself, but Dwane Casey is still coaching this team. I have no fear of any improvements with Casey manning the clipboard

    Comment


    • #3
      Realistically I see this team with a top 8 pick.
      Twitter - @thekid_it

      Comment


      • #4
        I think at least one of the New York teams gets straightened out a bit, whether it's by getting healthy, a roster shake up, coaching change, or just snapping out of the haze that they've played the first month and a half of the season in.

        I can't say for sure that the Raptors will land in the top five of the draft, but I think they'll be in the conversation no doubt. The writing is on the wall for Lowry to be moved before too long, and everyone else on the roster is probably in play as well. Those moves will hurt the Raptors chances of winning in the short term.

        I trust Masai when he says that the team will not end up in no man's land, and since they are still nowhere close to being a contender, I'd say the tank is on.

        Comment


        • #5
          Nilanka wrote: View Post
          I don't mean to repeat myself, but Dwane Casey is still coaching this team. I have no fear of any improvements with Casey manning the clipboard
          They'll be a scrappy team though and will limit opponents to less than 100 ppg conceivable for the rest of the way. If the team sheds Lowry and Derozan, could be top 3. BTW, you know who's our new tank commander? Landry Fields. Dude is "out-of-this-world" BAD.
          “The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.” - Martin Luther King

          Comment


          • #6
            As is, i think we'd finish like... 9th?

            I'm pretty sure they're going to trade Lowry and maybe Demar too though. So top 5 is possible.
            @sweatpantsjer

            Comment


            • #7
              the problem is how terrible the east is. we could easily blunder into a 7/8 seed.
              @sweatpantsjer

              Comment


              • #8
                Before this question is answered I think you have to know if Masai is done dealing.

                It would appear not.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ceez wrote: View Post
                  the problem is how terrible the east is. we could easily blunder into a 7/8 seed.
                  Given the east to date, its true.

                  However, there are still plenty of ways for this team to lose more games. For example a starting line up of Val/Patterson/Fields/Ross/Stone could easily be worst in the league bad.

                  The question comes down to risk - how much are Masai/TL/MLSE willing to risk to get out of "no mans land"?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Craiger wrote: View Post
                    Given the east to date, its true.

                    However, there are still plenty of ways for this team to lose more games. For example a starting line up of Val/Patterson/Fields/Ross/Stone could easily be worst in the league bad.

                    The question comes down to risk - how much are Masai/TL/MLSE willing to risk to get out of "no mans land"?
                    answer should be everything
                    @sweatpantsjer

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Matt52 wrote: View Post
                      Before this question is answered I think you have to know if Masai is done dealing.

                      It would appear not.
                      Assume no deals are forthcoming. This is a purely hypothetical discussion.
                      "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."

                      -Churchill

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        http://tracking.si.com/2013/12/07/mi...infected-knee/

                        Infected knee doesn't sound good and I'm sure the 76ers wont rush him back. No word yet if the Doctors are investigating his tiny head yet.
                        Heir, Prince of Cambridge

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

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I answered with the assumption of what happens by the end of the year. I don't buy that we're better without Gay. We may play more "fundamentally sound" basketball, but that doesn't mean we'll win more games.

                          I already said this in another thread, but I remain unconvinced on how losing talent and not really gaining any notable talent results in winning more games. What about the Lakers game? Well, what about when Matt Flynn threw 6 TD's against the Detroit Lions in 2012? If Amir Johnson averages 32 ppg for the rest of the season, then I'll change my mind.

                          You may not like it, but Gay was one of if not the best defender on the team. So no matter how "scrappy" this team is going forward, teams are going to score more against us than they did before. It certainly doesn't help that Tyler is out. As far as offense goes, Rudy averaged 19 ppg. He shot horribly, sure, but that you can't deny he didn't draw double and triple teams. That simply won't happen for anyone else on this team, not to the consistency that Gay saw every time that moron dribbled down the court and looked for his own shot.

                          Those extra 18.6 shot attempts per game? Sure, 39% was terrible. But Lowry shot 42%, DeRozan 43%, Ross 41%. That's not a whole lot better and that was while Gay was getting double teamed. And the guy who benefits most from the Gay trade? Landry Fields is shooting 37% this year.
                          your pal,
                          ebrian

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            ebrian wrote: View Post
                            I answered with the assumption of what happens by the end of the year. I don't buy that we're better without Gay. We may play more "fundamentally sound" basketball, but that doesn't mean we'll win more games.

                            I already said this in another thread, but I remain unconvinced on how losing talent and not really gaining any notable talent results in winning more games. What about the Lakers game? Well, what about when Matt Flynn threw 6 TD's against the Detroit Lions in 2012? If Amir Johnson averages 32 ppg for the rest of the season, then I'll change my mind.

                            You may not like it, but Gay was one of if not the best defender on the team. So no matter how "scrappy" this team is going forward, teams are going to score more against us than they did before. It certainly doesn't help that Tyler is out. As far as offense goes, Rudy averaged 19 ppg. He shot horribly, sure, but that you can't deny he didn't draw double and triple teams. That simply won't happen for anyone else on this team, not to the consistency that Gay saw every time that moron dribbled down the court and looked for his own shot.

                            Those extra 18.6 shot attempts per game? Sure, 39% was terrible. But Lowry shot 42%, DeRozan 43%, Ross 41%. That's not a whole lot better and that was while Gay was getting double teamed. And the guy who benefits most from the Gay trade? Landry Fields is shooting 37% this year.
                            Mat Flynn is actually pretty good, he's just not Rogers.

                            Anyway, this isn't based on the Lakers game. This is based on the rediculously low assist numbers we've had this year. Plus we actually shore up the back up point guard spot with this deal and add a couple good pieces at the 3 and 4.

                            I agree that moving a player for nothing almost never makes you better, but his isn't a deal where we got back a bunch of useless pieces. Every player we got back can play basketball well and most are improvements to what we have now:

                            We are now significantly better at the 1, to the point where we Vasquez could take the starting point form Lowry.

                            We have another great option at the 4 with Patterson. He can make threes and will be a great guy to spread the floor.

                            I think we are about even at the three. You are right that Rudy drew doubles, but he had no idea how to negotiate them. We didn't actually make anything good happen off of them so they didn't actually improve anything. Now I don't think Salmon's or Fields are better than Gay, far from it. In fact, in the right team I think Gay will actually be a lot better than he is given credit for. Put him on a squad where they have good dicipline and a very rigid offense and I think he'll be a star.

                            The issue is that Rudy Gay with Demar Derozan is a bad combination because neither of them pass all that well and both of them play the same kind of game. Replacing Gay with guys who play in a different area and who don't need as many touches can pnly help the offense.

                            I am worried about the defense, but hopefully we can make the necessary adjustments. This is going to put a lot of pressure on Jonas to become the help defender we all hope he can be.
                            "Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."

                            -Churchill

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              hateslosing wrote: View Post
                              We are now significantly better at the 1, to the point where we Vasquez could take the starting point form Lowry.

                              We have another great option at the 4 with Patterson. He can make threes and will be a great guy to spread the floor.

                              I am worried about the defense, but hopefully we can make the necessary adjustments. This is going to put a lot of pressure on Jonas to become the help defender we all hope he can be.
                              Lowry is still better than Vazquez. Vasquez isn't a true starter, but he is a great back-up and good spot starter. Hopefully this team has a new PG like Exum or Smart anyway.

                              I like Patterson but he's not a great option. He can fit a role.

                              Defence isn't likely to change. Gay didn't defend well.
                              Heir, Prince of Cambridge

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

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X