Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raptors on the Rise?

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

  • delman21
    replied
    I know people have been talking about the Pacers model and, were moving towards that. But didn't we draft Roy Hibbert and trade him. I believe we did, as far a George and lance go. Well for one: no stat formula or what ever else analyzing tool people use can predict heart, which is what Paul George is, getting a chance and rising to the occasion, something that can't be measured in the combine. We have a guy that has some similar traits in DD but I am not arguing he George by any means. And as for Lance, well to get a chance at a top 5 all American high schooler, much of what people go on about here, in the second round is a no-brainer to take a chance on. Larry knew he could help reign him in and it worked, or is working. And as for the big guy, I believe we drafted him and traded him did we not.

    So for the Indy model a lot of luck, for sure not a real model. After they had the core they look for the vet presence to bring it all together. There is no way they knew what Paul George was going to turn into because they would of traded granger along time ago.

    I am excited for the future and know there will be brighter days ahead.

    But we don't need 2-3 superstars to be a very good team. And the league has put a premium on money so having the 2-3 superstars only hinders the team from and adding the key pieces.They are what put you over the top so to speak. Look at LAC they will never win period. Blake can't hit the jumper and doesn't play d. They have so to speak 3 all stars, and 2 super stars and there screwed come play off time cause blake is soft, and the conference finals and finals are where teams will prey on that kind of stuff.

    Leave a comment:


  • stooley
    replied
    KazanTheMan wrote: View Post
    Off topic: looks like Pistons are gonna beat the Pacers tonight
    also went to ot with portland last night after being up the entire game. things are starting to click over there.

    Leave a comment:


  • KazanTheMan
    replied
    Off topic: looks like Pistons are gonna beat the Pacers tonight

    Leave a comment:


  • JimiCliff
    replied
    magoon wrote: View Post
    You're missing where I said that it's not the same as OKC, I repeat, because GS knows what's coming. OKC couldn't know what was coming with the new stiffer luxury tax that came into play right before Harden was set to sign his re-up and couldn't plan accordingly, which meant that they had to trade Harden in the first year that the new CBA was enacted to avoid the tax. GS has another two full years of Barnes before they have to consider a trade, plus time to sign David Lee at a lower rate if need be. They're not going to have to take the best pupu platter someone offers for Barnes because they have time to get the best trade they can find or rejigger their roster to fit him.
    You're right that they definitely have time. But when that time comes, I don't see how they could possibly keep Curry, Thompson, and Barnes. All will, I think, be getting max money, and having a team with three smalls on max contracts would be insane. So, at that point, I bet they trade either Barnes or Thompson.

    That was my point: that they will have to make a trade. Just like OKC had to. And, OKC didn't have to trade Harden when they did - they could have waited another season. They didn't get a pupu platter, they got a deal that Presti liked.

    Leave a comment:


  • magoon
    replied
    JimiCliff wrote: View Post
    No, it's pretty much the same thing, in that it's borderline impossible for any team to pay max contracts for three smalls. Pre-cba or post-cba doesn't make a difference here. Actually, if anything, it's even harder to do this post-cba because of the stiffer tax penalties.
    You're missing where I said that it's not the same as OKC, I repeat, because GS knows what's coming. OKC couldn't know what was coming with the new stiffer luxury tax that came into play right before Harden was set to sign his re-up and couldn't plan accordingly, which meant that they had to trade Harden in the first year that the new CBA was enacted to avoid the tax. GS has another two full years of Barnes before they have to consider a trade, plus time to sign David Lee at a lower rate if need be. They're not going to have to take the best pupu platter someone offers for Barnes because they have time to get the best trade they can find or rejigger their roster to fit him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chr1s1anL
    replied
    @JLew1050: 1/4 into the season: two Eastern Conf teams are above .500 (Pacers, Heat), three have a positive point differential (Pacers, Heat, RAPTORS)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Leave a comment:


  • p00ka
    replied
    iblastoff wrote: View Post
    actually a lot of people here have been saying this. some posters have been suggesting to keep the current roster and attempt a full playoff run because this magical 2 game winning streak has somehow convinced people this team is actually good.

    and if it doesn't work out, we'll get a mid-range 1st round pick because historically there have been some good picks from that range, therefore it should be fine. yes, that is seriously one of the anti-tank arguments presented (many times) on this board.



    um didn't you just contradict yourself here? so we're on the rise because we beat some shitty teams/teams in distress but we can't make that call when they actually play GOOD teams in the west?
    I probably shouldn't respond to this cherry picking response, as it derails the collection of points, but oh well.

    Your Point 1: Show me where anybody has suggested that they'll be anything but middling "AS IS". Making the playoffs this year, as is, does not mean stuck with current roster long term, nor does it mean MU is thinking that, as was suggested in the post I responded to. In any case, not being contenders "as is" is in no way any kind of reasoning for putting down the thought that they are on the rise. "Anti-tank arguments"???? For heaven's sake, can we have one thread that doesn't get hijacked into a tank/no tank discussion?

    Your point 2: No contradiction at all. Despite being seriously undermanned, they played much better ball than any previous games this season, and had a better record than any previous 4 game stretch. If you don't see legitimate positives in that whole package, I'm sorry for you. Does it mean they're contenders? Hell no,,,,, no more than it means they're not on the rise because they don't come home with a winning record on that very tough Western road trip against GREAT (not "good") teams, back-to-back, to say nothing of what bottom feeders getting wins against bottom feeders, over that 1 week, has to do with it whether the Raps are on the rise or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Don Carlos
    replied
    While I'm extremely anti-tank, I'll also say that the Raps were never in a good position to tank. The leading tankers (Utah, Orlando, Philly) threw down the tank gauntlet early. Orlando's been tanking since D12 left, Utah dumped a ton of assets for the corpse of Richard Jefferson. I just can't see how MU could say, yeah, give me a quarter of a season to figure this out, then I'll catch up to these other losers.

    We talk about taking a long-view. Trust me, next year's draft is not a long view. It's mid-term at best. So who are the next Wiggins, Parker, Randle? When will they be available? Some people have used the term asset collector, and I can get behind that. Trading for veterans, good locker room presences that can be repackaged into other assets, judiciously collecting draft picks from teams with the potential to be bad in the years that those drafts occur, having the cap flexibility to be involved in blockbuster trades and make a big signing, as long as it's right for the team in place.

    If this path to organic growth is taken, I really don't think the Raps are too far away. The problem with Colangelo is that he'd get an itchy trigger finger and want to make a splash without seemingly looking at all ramifications of the deal. MU seems patient enough to never get the bad end of a deal.

    So, a Denver Nuggets style team for now that increases the value of its components through team play, with those inflated-value components parlayed into winning trades that set the Raps up down the road into a younger, better team, that can then attract superstars? I can get on that ride.

    Leave a comment:


  • ball4life
    replied
    iblastoff wrote: View Post
    actually a lot of people here have been saying this. some posters have been suggesting to keep the current roster and attempt a full playoff run because this magical 2 game winning streak has somehow convinced people this team is actually good.

    and if it doesn't work out, we'll get a mid-range 1st round pick because historically there have been some good picks from that range, therefore it should be fine. yes, that is seriously one of the anti-tank arguments presented (many times) on this board.



    um didn't you just contradict yourself here? so we're on the rise because we beat some shitty teams/teams in distress but we can't make that call when they actually play GOOD teams in the west?




    .

    Leave a comment:


  • iblastoff
    replied
    p00ka wrote: View Post
    You've got me on ignore, but I've got to respond to this sad example of sour grapes toward what is currently going on with our team.


    - " If he thinks the team has opportunities to get out of the middle as is,......" Nobody has suggested such a thing, nor does anyone think MU has any such wishful thinking in mind. Everyone expects MU to make moves, wise ones, when they are available, so it's hard to imagine where this point comes from.
    actually a lot of people here have been saying this. some posters have been suggesting to keep the current roster and attempt a full playoff run because this magical 2 game winning streak has somehow convinced people this team is actually good.

    and if it doesn't work out, we'll get a mid-range 1st round pick because historically there have been some good picks from that range, therefore it should be fine. yes, that is seriously one of the anti-tank arguments presented (many times) on this board.

    p00ka wrote: View Post
    Your #5: Ummm, what does the record of whole season to-date, and where they place in the standings, have to do with whether or not they are currently on the rise? They're 3-1 since the trade and playing damn good basketball, way beyond what was happening before. If they weren't on the bottom before, there would be no "rise" to be had, would there? The point is about rising from where they were to get to that record, I think.


    Your #6: Seriously? Some judgement of whether or not they're on the rise is going to be made based on their W/L on a 3 games in 4 nights Western road trip, ending with a back-to-back against the Spurs and OKC? Because during this ONE week of the season, other weaker are playing other weaker teams and some will get wins? ONE WEEK????? A convenient week indeed to make such a point, lol, but would we have seen a similar assessment if those teams were playing tough Western teams and the Raps were playing bottom feeders?
    um didn't you just contradict yourself here? so we're on the rise because we beat some shitty teams/teams in distress but we can't make that call when they actually play GOOD teams in the west?

    Leave a comment:


  • delman21
    replied
    Pooka I feel you my man. I think the MU way will be to keep acquiring and making the right moves as opposed to the top 4 pick thing, I am sick of hearing this, and the dam trade machine that makes everything work on paper.

    It's hard to even look on here to find viable links to possible trades.

    The style of play is a lot better to the point my 7 year old even notices the difference and she doesn't even watch ball. If this is a glare of the bright things to come I am sorry to say to all the tankers we will be close to the playoffs with assets to unload if need be to gain quality assets. And hopefully socking some people just like DD is doing by improving his assists numbers, and overall play.

    Leave a comment:


  • p00ka
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Here is why I don't think Raps are on the rise:

    1) I believe Ujiri when he says Raptors will not be stuck in the middle. No timeline was given but sticking with this team as is for the near future means the Raptors are stuck in the middle. If he thinks the team has opportunities to get out of the middle as is, more power to him, and I look forward to seeing how he does it.

    2) 3 of 4 Raps opponents have had serious issues of late. Lakers bring back Kobe and huge disruption. Philly minus MCW and while they won, couldn't put the 76ers away convincingly.... again. Chicago is starting Teague and rolling with Augustine as backup... you know, DJ? The guy Raps just cut? Only solid team they played smoked Raps.

    3) Raps had a major shake up. They will be scouted. Teams will adapt.

    4) Lowry has his bags packed with open ticket in hand. Vasquez is looking great backing up Lowry who is playing great. What happens when Vasquez is starting with Buycks/Stone combo for back up? While Vasquez might put up impressive numbers, his D is suspect and the teams he has started for have hardly excelled (see: NOP last year; SAC this year). Don't get me wrong, I'm interested in keeping Vasquez long term at the right price..... as a backup.

    5) The Raptors are sitting in 7th place in the east.... and just 2 wins out tied for 3rd worse in the LEAGUE (and 3 wins for 2nd worst, 4 wins for tied for WORST).

    6) This week's schedule:
    Monday: Philadelphia at Brooklyn, Washington at New York, Orlando at Chicago
    Tuesday: Sacramento at Charlotte
    Wednesday: Utah at Orlando, Detroit at Boston, Washington at Brooklyn, New York at Milwaukee
    Friday: Brooklyn at Philadelphia, Milwaukee at Cleveland, Charlotte at Detroit
    Saturday: Washington at Boston, Sacramento at Orlando, Utah at Charlotte, Cleveland at Chicago, Philadelphia at Milwaukee
    Monday 23rd: Milwaukee at Charlotte, Detroit at Cleveland, New York at Orlando

    Teams are going to win these games. There are a lot of weaker teams adding wins this week, one way or another. I don't consider Charlotte an easy task for Toronto and then they face Dallas, OKC, and SAS.

    Someone quote this next Tuesday and we'll see how things are looking then.


    7) A high draft pick does not require the worst record in the league. Finishing with 4th worst record, which is easily 'attainable' with this team with another trade, give Raptors an 83% chance of a top 4 pick.
    You've got me on ignore, but I've got to respond to this sad example of sour grapes toward what is currently going on with our team.

    Your #1: I don't know what any of that has to do with any argument of whether they are currently on the rise or not, but:
    - "sticking with this team as is for the near future means the Raptors are stuck in the middle.". Hasn't all the "important" talk been about "long term", and has anyone come close to suggesting that MU will, or should, stick with "as is" for any length of time?
    - " If he thinks the team has opportunities to get out of the middle as is,......" Nobody has suggested such a thing, nor does anyone think MU has any such wishful thinking in mind. Everyone expects MU to make moves, wise ones, when they are available, so it's hard to imagine where this point comes from.

    Your #2: Lakers: ummmmm, getting Kobe,,,,, KOBE,,,, back is a bigger disruption to them than the Raps suddenly being down 5 players a couple of hours before game time? Seriously, you're so stuck on........... that you can't even bring yourself to give them credit for that win? Wow!
    SAS: down 5 players, and having to play Novak, Fields, Buycks, Daye,,,,, against the 19-4 Spurs,,, and it's some judgement of them because they got smoked? Hmmm, funny how the opponents' "issues" are reasons they did well, and won, but them being down 5, against the mighty Spurs is no excuse for not challenging them?
    Philly: 3 new players in the rotation, with 1 day of practice, and they had to win convincingly to mean anything? They won, and did it with a style of play that's impressive. Putting it down is nothing but being a sore loser,,,, about winning. Sad
    Chi: They win against one of the top defensive teams in the league, coached by one of the best coaches in the league, with Noah, Boozer, Deng, and Butler in the line-up, playing a beautiful style of basketball, at BOTH ends, and all you've got to say is that the Bulls have issues? Sad.

    Your #3: So what. Does that mean these other teams will suddenly invent a way to stop great ball movement, creating open looks? They're not playing black hole iso ball now, which is easy to scout and stop. In what way do you think this scouting will define the Raps as not on the rise?

    Your #4: Rumours are nothing but rumours, but until you know what's coming back, there can be no assessment of whether the Raps are on the rise or not, until you know what's coming back, based on speculation fueled by NY effing media rumours. Despite your greatest wishes, Lowry hasn't gone anywhere yet.

    Your #5: Ummm, what does the record of whole season to-date, and where they place in the standings, have to do with whether or not they are currently on the rise? They're 3-1 since the trade and playing damn good basketball, way beyond what was happening before. If they weren't on the bottom before, there would be no "rise" to be had, would there? The point is about rising from where they were to get to that record, I think.

    Your #6: Seriously? Some judgement of whether or not they're on the rise is going to be made based on their W/L on a 3 games in 4 nights Western road trip, ending with a back-to-back against the Spurs and OKC? Because during this ONE week of the season, other weaker are playing other weaker teams and some will get wins? ONE WEEK????? A convenient week indeed to make such a point, lol, but would we have seen a similar assessment if those teams were playing tough Western teams and the Raps were playing bottom feeders?

    Your #7: Again, as much as it pushes the overwhelming narrative that's been going on for months, and whatever imaginative trade you think would make it "easy" to get top 4 pick, which I'd love to hear about, what does that have to do with whether the Raps are currently on the rise or not?

    Leave a comment:


  • white men can't jump
    replied
    golden wrote: View Post
    Eric Bledsoe is definitely performing at an all-star level. PER > 22. ORTG > 110. USG > 25%. And his team is winning. That's very similar to the Harden situation - bench player who showed lots of potential to emerge into a star if/when given a more prominent role. If Bledsoe can keep it up, then it is exactly the same situation as Harden, at an even lower acquisition price.
    Not exactly similar. Everyone knew LAC would have to trade Bledsoe because of a positional issue. They had Chris Paul playing ahead of him. There was no point in them extending him, and they had been fielding trade offers for like 2 years prior to the trade (including some from Toronto probably). The Harden trade was out of nowhere, especially since he had already shown all-star level performance in OKC.

    It is similar in that he exploded with his new team and had a year left on his rookie deal. That's where the comparison ends though. He hadn't shown nearly as much as Harden did in OKC, making it a riskier deal. Which is exactly how he fell into PHX's lap, because they didn't care about risk with the possibility they could end up tanking, while other teams were probably reluctant to meet LAC's demands (don't anyone suggest that a frontline of the Morris twins, Plumlee and PJ Tucker was something they realistically thought would help power them to wins). The Clippers couldn't find the ideal trade partner, so they had to settle for a 3 team deal giving them 2 role players. That is not the same asking price OKC had for Harden -> expiring contract that can help now (Martin), a young piece that could help later (Lamb), 2 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder.....compared to Redick and Dudley. But yeah, the trades are like the same.

    And it happened as part of a 3-team deal where Redick was also sent to LAC. So PHX wasn't really in a great position to make a deal, and were greatly helped by Milwaukee willingly stepping in to help. It is also rare that a 3rd team will help you make a deal without also getting a big piece back (ie like Howard/Bynum/Iggy all moving in the same deal).

    Again these trades are extremely rare where you can get a young guy with top tier potential without giving up much (even Bledsoe had not shown as much potential on offence as on D, and while he's scoring the ball well, he's also averaging a terrible ast/TO ratio, and without Dragic their O would look real ugly at times). The fact that you found a single other example that isn't even that similar doesn't really convince me otherwise.

    And just to put in perspective again since these names are in a post a bit up

    ...Deron Williams, Carmelo Anthony, Dwight Howard, even KG and Ray Allen, etc
    All these guys moves happened with them dictating the potential destination(s) (I took out Gay since it was jokes ). Will Toronto ever be in that position?

    **JUst to add something. I don't think Toronto shouldn't try to position themselves to make offers on such players, but that hoping for such a trade is hoping for an even smaller chance to build your team than simply taking a step backward for a year or two to draft one or two possibly great players. In fact doing so can even help your chances of accomplishing such a deal. The more young pieces you have the better, so that making a trade doesn't necessarily gut your team. You don't have to luck into the very top. Even another top 6-8 pick in this draft could greatly help the Raps by adding a piece to either keep or trade.

    Another young piece or two would be putting in Toronto in the best position to make these deals, while also possibly negating the need altogether to seek such a trade if they do get lucky in the draft. As it stands now, the pieces Toronto would have to give up would likely make any trade lateral.
    Last edited by white men can't jump; Mon Dec 16, 2013, 08:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimiCliff
    replied
    magoon wrote: View Post
    The Curry/Thompson/Barnes thing in Golden State isn't quite the same thing because all contracts will be post-CBA and because GS, unlike OKC, knows what's coming. OKC decided that they HAD to trade Harden as a result of the new CBA, and got forced into what was essentially a self-created hostage situation. GS has a few years to decide how they want to handle Barnes, and David Lee's contract expires in that timeframe as well so GS will be in a better place than OKC was.
    No, it's pretty much the same thing, in that it's borderline impossible for any team to pay max contracts for three smalls. Pre-cba or post-cba doesn't make a difference here. Actually, if anything, it's even harder to do this post-cba because of the stiffer tax penalties. G-State will have to choose only 2 of the 3, which means there will be an excellent wingman available very soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • KHD
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Looks to me like it has been sitting out on the table for days.

    It is lukewarm and mediocre at best relative to other glasses of water.

    Hey! Kind of like the Raptors relative to the NBA!
    Ideal response.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X