Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"We Only Want to Bring in Character Guys..."

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

  • #31
    What was MU's role when BC was the GM ???

    Comment


    • #32
      Scout

      Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #33
        IROR wrote: View Post
        Agree with most posters in the thread, and character is a very broad term - hard to define. When thinking about both BC and MU's idea of "character" (I believe they have similar philosophy is this regard) I think the main thing they are looking for is TEAM guys.

        What I mean is men who don't get too high or too low, great in the locker room regardless of minutes played, willingness to be professional and to put the work in to improve and help teammates improve; To put the work in when no one is watching, to show a willingness to be coached and to sacrifice for the team and organization.

        Even looking at our skill guys, they also happen to be great team players - albeit if KLow turned his attitude on a dime this season. All the players BC drafted have those aforementioned traits, and so far all the players MU has acquired have these traits.

        All that said, hopefully these character guys we bring in also have skill. I would like to see Pau Gasol as a Raptor on a one year deal, personally, because of his team based attitude and leadership (and skill, obviously). And he's tight with Mckechnie who could really help him out.
        This is why I hope Tyler Ennis falls to us.
        Twitter - @thekid_it

        Comment


        • #34
          All this talk about "character" (and I concur it is a broad term)....however MU speaks of "laziness" as being the big red flag (which I go along with) but then in the same interview he gushes about Wince and wanting him back. Sorry, there is a disconnect here.

          Carter was never known for his prodigious efforts in training and game improvement and shirked being a leader. Whatever he was came easy to him it was to use a BC term "organic". His elevation and dunks and athleticism was just there. Carter himself confirmed this in his "infamous" interview with John Thompson:

          " when asked by TNT's John Thompson, "Do you think Vince Carter has pushed himself as hard as he should have pushed himself?", Carter replied, "In years past, no. I was just fortunate enough to have the talent....".

          This interview I believe occurred the following year after the trade. Make of it what you may. I'll give MU benefit of the doubt here. He is bowing to Leiweke's wishes on the perceived PR benefits.

          Comment


          • #35
            Vince transformed himself into a good shooter. I think MU refers to players getting better each season. Drummond and Cousins maybe considered players who will never get better. Both are really good but may never fiux their problems

            Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

            Comment


            • #36
              Bynum rehabbing in Spain (while with the Sixers)....


              Comment


              • #37
                OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
                I personally take strong character = "professional'

                Professionals are players who take the sport of basketball seriously and are willing to work hard at doing their best at the craft.

                Even if the player has major question marks off the court (ex Cousins), as long as they are professional they will most likely turn into good basketball players (Cousins is a professional when it comes to basketball). Players who are not professional (ex Beasley) in how they approach the game generally struggle in their pro careers.

                Lilliard is a great example of a young professional
                Part of being a professional and of high character is how you conduct yourself off the court though, as you're always representing the organisation. You can bet GM's highly value this, or you end up with a team like the Jail Blazers. Cousins is a bit different as he just tends to display immaturity on the court, you never hear about him being lazy or doing JR Smith and Beasley type things. Part of Beasleys problems in his approach to basketball are directly linked to the choices he makes in his every day life. Sorry if I'm misreading your point but just disagree with that as long as they work hard hard on their craft, then it's fine.

                Lillard is definitely a professional and by all accounts of high character off the court as well

                Comment


                • #38
                  raptors999 wrote: View Post
                  Vince transformed himself into a good shooter. I think MU refers to players getting better each season. Drummond and Cousins maybe considered players who will never get better. Both are really good but may never fiux their problems

                  Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
                  Curious why you think Drummond could be considered a player who will not get better considering he's a very young center in his second season and already making good strides, whilst playing for a dysfunctional team.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
                    I personally take strong character = "professional'

                    Professionals are players who take the sport of basketball seriously and are willing to work hard at doing their best at the craft.

                    Even if the player has major question marks off the court (ex Cousins), as long as they are professional they will most likely turn into good basketball players (Cousins is a professional when it comes to basketball). Players who are not professional (ex Beasley) in how they approach the game generally struggle in their pro careers.

                    Lilliard is a great example of a young professional
                    I thought it was closer to the other way around. Like BigCamB said, you don't really hear about Cousins doing anything JR Smith or Beasley like in terms of laziness/craziness off the court. He's just immature, volatile and has a lot of growing up to do on the court, and in his approach to play basketball in a way that leads to his team winning. He's got very odd character. He clearly works hard on his bball skills, and doesn't seem to do anything bad off the court...but he's just so batshit crazy on the court. It's like he's intense in all the wrong ways, and lacks some intensity in the right ways....or something...

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Just couldn't think of player's off the top of my head. But Drummond many bwe content grabbing lots of boards and scoring in the paint but never develop another part of his game. Blake Griffin improved in lots of ways he isn't naturally gifted in. Drummond isn't lazy and I love Cousins but they may never get to the next step after they lose athletethism. Like Boozer useful in what he does but never does more. They aren't Lazy like Beasely but not driven like DeRozan. Kobe was driven and Shaq was lazy.

                      Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Talking about character, Dante Cunningham was arrested Friday accused of choking his girlfriend, then arrested again Saturday for making "terrorist threats".

                        Thought I recalled the name and sure enough, back in January Kevin Love had publicly called out a couple of his teammates for not bothering to stand up and join the rest of the team during time outs. One was Barea, the other Cunningham.
                        Last edited by 3inthekeon; Mon Apr 7th, 2014, 12:28 AM. Reason: spelling
                        If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Puffer wrote: View Post
                          Seems pretty evident that character is not an issue with Lowry. It also seems evident that he has banged heads with past coaches and with Casey early in his tenure here. It also seems clear that MU (and Casey?) sat down and had a talk with him. A guy without character wouldn't have turned it around like he did. Attitude is one thing, and attitudes can change more easily than character. I would say Lowry's attitude has changed.
                          That's my point though. If you are steering away from a draft pick because of their reputation without giving them a chance to show you they can correct their previous mistakes then you could be loseing out on a really talented player. Lowry came in with all sorts of red flags...his rep kept him from making it as an All Star this year as a lot of coaches didn't vote for him to get in, but look at what a great team mate he is and his play has been outstanding.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            jpapa wrote: View Post
                            There is an old saying in basketball:

                            "If you want to have a great team, your best players have to be your hardest workers"

                            For years Toronto has suffered being a no-effort team. Even with an entire city willing them on, not since the Garbo days have you had a team leadership that have busted their butts. Even an effort player like DeRozan could not turn it around alone because I think he was regarded by the players as an up-and-comer....not part of the leadership group. i.e. They had no effective leadership group with senior players like Bargs, O'Neil and Turk....I mean who would follow them anywhere as they were terrible examples of "effort" players.

                            Now they have a committed Lowry, who with Johnson and a more senior DeRozan have formed that leadership group. Patterson has been a great addition to this "effort" group and then you have vets like Hayes and Salmons for the young guys like JV and Ross to follow.

                            That leadership group is crucial. If they can kick the door down, the rest will follow them through. It is the character of this leadership group that is essential, and I think MU knows how important it is to preserve this group. If the do not resign Lowry, then they will need a similar character to him.... the team has really adopted his attitude in particular, and I am not sure there too many like him in the NBA. Younger guys coming in, or even players acquired in trades, will feel the pressure to conform to the effort principles of this group ....unless they get some recalcitrant. But then I think MU knows this as well, so he will be vetting possible players carefully wanting to add to this hard-won and long overdue culture, not put it at risk.

                            I keep seeing items on this site wanting marquee trades, but I would hope MU will keep this core group and trust the coaching staff to develop the JV's and Ross's + draft picks into class players. I am not from Toronto, but I get the feeling this city needs an effort team first to reflect its own character. You have one now. Don't trade that away for some " it's all about me" player who puts up good numbers.
                            Welcome to RR. I agree leadership is an important quality and the rest of the team will mimic it's leader. One of the reasons why Toronto will have to overpay Lowry to stay.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Bendit wrote: View Post
                              All this talk about "character" (and I concur it is a broad term)....however MU speaks of "laziness" as being the big red flag (which I go along with) but then in the same interview he gushes about Wince and wanting him back. Sorry, there is a disconnect here.

                              Carter was never known for his prodigious efforts in training and game improvement and shirked being a leader. Whatever he was came easy to him it was to use a BC term "organic". His elevation and dunks and athleticism was just there. Carter himself confirmed this in his "infamous" interview with John Thompson:

                              " when asked by TNT's John Thompson, "Do you think Vince Carter has pushed himself as hard as he should have pushed himself?", Carter replied, "In years past, no. I was just fortunate enough to have the talent....".

                              This interview I believe occurred the following year after the trade. Make of it what you may. I'll give MU benefit of the doubt here. He is bowing to Leiweke's wishes on the perceived PR benefits.
                              It may be that Carter has learned something in the intervening decade. In the "Vince Carter" thread I link to a Point Forward article that lists carter as #86 in the top 100 players of 2014. At 38 you don't make that list unless you are working hard. Crazy athletic ability isn't enough by itself.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Mediumcore wrote: View Post
                                That's my point though. If you are steering away from a draft pick because of their reputation without giving them a chance to show you they can correct their previous mistakes then you could be loseing out on a really talented player. Lowry came in with all sorts of red flags...his rep kept him from making it as an All Star this year as a lot of coaches didn't vote for him to get in, but look at what a great team mate he is and his play has been outstanding.
                                I think attitude is one of the easiest things to turn around. You can learn to look on the positive side of things; you can learn to respect authority; I think it is very hard to learn how to be a hard worker. That requires a certain drive. Same thing with competitiveness. Just my opinion.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X