Superjudge wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
2014-2015 Raptors Power Rankings
Collapse
X
-
I've come to terms that it's going to take a while for the Raptors to be seen as legitimate, as reflected by commentary on these rankings. Until they get out on the road and take down some of the Western Conference giants (SAS, LAC, Portland, Houston, Dallas, etc.) there will continue to be an asterisk attributed to our record. Fine - we need to go out there and beat those teams. I think we can do it.
The people who actually pay attention to basketball and have watched a Raptors game or two (and not just highlights) are not shocked. The stats and the numbers paint the picture as to why this team is successful and will continue to achieve success (especially our ability to take care of the ball, our ability to get to the free throw line, and our bench's dominance over most benches in the league).
As fans with in-depth knowledge of our team, we have hyper-critiqued our shortcomings thus far (i.e. rebounding, mediocre assist numbers, lack of an interior presence, Demar's poor shooting efficiency/defense, Vasquez's struggles, etc.), but this Raptors team, in spite of these shortcomings, are playing great basketball. We're not 12-2 by accident. We are hard on this team sometimes forgetting that other teams have weaknesses too. Like those other teams, the Raptors can still win games by maximizing our strengths to compensate for our weaknesses: We're a mediocre shooting team? Well, guess what, at least we don't give teams free points off turnovers and we get a ton of points from the free throw line. Obviously, we need to address our weaknesses before the playoffs, but luckily it's very, very early in the season.
One last thing that the stats cannot capture that will make us successful is our grit. This Raptors team, unlike most Raptors teams of the past, expect to win, are determined to win, and increasingly make the right decisions at periods of time in the game when winning is on the line. Yes, they let Phoenix back in the 4th (more so due to a questionable line up and ridiculously hot shooting from Phoenix), but they found a way to win a close game by (1) clamping down on defense, (2) hussle, and (3) executing at the free throw line. That's exactly what they needed to do. A Raptors team of the past would have lost that game.
I guess I'm writing all of this basically trying to say that I'm not shocked they're not seen as a legitimate team by some yet. But those who are paying attention know they are. The stats and intangibles prove it. I'm not expecting them to maintain this clip of winning, but if they keep doing what they're doing and improving along the way, they will be competitive against the best in the league. Time will demonstrate this.
Comment
-
Our good friend Matt Moore (remember @hardwoodparoxysm?) has posted his power rankings for CBS.com. He's put the Raptors at number 2, which is impressively high. Then he ruins it with this garbage blurb:
Toronto Raptors: Toronto has had to fight for a lot of wins against lesser opposition, and have lucked out with timing (Memphis was out five players because of illness for the Nov. 19 game), but the Raptors have found a way, and there's something to admire about that. The win over Phoenix was probably their best.
Look, the Raptors have objectively played like a top 1 or 2 team in the NBA, and that's taking record out of the equation entirely. Stop pretending they've been lucky to be where they are.
(So why would I only rank them 5th in the NBA? Because my personal preference for power rankings is to lay out the teams in order of how good they are, not necessarily how well they've played. The Raptors aren't better than the Spurs, but they have played better to this point).That is a normal collar. Move on, find a new slant.
Comment
-
Other Scott wrote: View PostOur good friend Matt Moore (remember @hardwoodparoxysm?) has posted his power rankings for CBS.com. He's put the Raptors at number 2, which is impressively high. Then he ruins it with this garbage blurb:
Had to fight for wins against lesser opposition? You mean the team with the highest average margin of victory in the NBA has had to fight for these wins? And by my count, they've lucked out with timing only with Memphis. And the correct answer is the win against Washington was their best. The Phoenix win was a near disaster.
Look, the Raptors have objectively played like a top 1 or 2 team in the NBA, and that's taking record out of the equation entirely. Stop pretending they've been lucky to be where they are.
(So why would I only rank them 5th in the NBA? Because my personal preference for power rankings is to lay out the teams in order of how good they are, not necessarily how well they've played. The Raptors aren't better than the Spurs, but they have played better to this point).The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!
Comment
-
Other Scott wrote: View PostOur good friend Matt Moore (remember @hardwoodparoxysm?) has posted his power rankings for CBS.com. He's put the Raptors at number 2, which is impressively high. Then he ruins it with this garbage blurb:
Had to fight for wins against lesser opposition? You mean the team with the highest average margin of victory in the NBA has had to fight for these wins? And by my count, they've lucked out with timing only with Memphis. And the correct answer is the win against Washington was their best. The Phoenix win was a near disaster.
Look, the Raptors have objectively played like a top 1 or 2 team in the NBA, and that's taking record out of the equation entirely. Stop pretending they've been lucky to be where they are.
(So why would I only rank them 5th in the NBA? Because my personal preference for power rankings is to lay out the teams in order of how good they are, not necessarily how well they've played. The Raptors aren't better than the Spurs, but they have played better to this point).
There were a couple ugly games early on, such as the Boston game.
Having said that, I don't think it's fair to focus on those specific details as an overall evaluation of the Raptors. With Amir seemingly healthy and JJ getting back last night, JV and Ross starting to pick things up after their slow start, and DeRozan still not being anywhere near consistent all-star form, I think assessments like Moore's are incredibly one-sided.
Comment
-
CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View PostNot to knit-pick, but I would consider facing OKC without Durant & Westbrook very fortunate. Washington without Beal was also much better than with Beal.
There were a couple ugly games early on, such as the Boston game.
Having said that, I don't think it's fair to focus on those specific details as an overall evaluation of the Raptors. With Amir seemingly healthy and JJ getting back last night, JV and Ross starting to pick things up after their slow start, and DeRozan still not being anywhere near consistent all-star form, I think assessments like Moore's are incredibly one-sided.
The Boston game was their 4th game in 5 nights on the road. They were allowed to be ugly. The Orlando game before they played Chicago was worse, but that was also pretty predictable.
But this is picking nits, because everybody has games like that. The full strength Bulls came thisclose to losing to the Jazz last night and all I hear today is how great Chicago is when everyone's playing together.
I'm not saying there's an overall double standard, but picking on the Raptors for playing lesser opponents close is really misdirected.That is a normal collar. Move on, find a new slant.
Comment
-
Other Scott wrote: View PostI thought about putting the OKC game on there, but that has too much of a broad application to really be relevant. Everyone who's played OKC so far has played them without Durant and Westbrook. That's like half the league. Meanwhile, the Raptors are like one of 5 or 6 teams to have to play Chicago at full strength.
The Boston game was their 4th game in 5 nights on the road. They were allowed to be ugly. The Orlando game before they played Chicago was worse, but that was also pretty predictable.
But this is picking nits, because everybody has games like that. The full strength Bulls came thisclose to losing to the Jazz last night and all I hear today is how great Chicago is when everyone's playing together.
I'm not saying there's an overall double standard, but picking on the Raptors for playing lesser opponents close is really misdirected.
But I watched the 2nd half. Bulls were up 17 at the half and Utah stormed back.
Utah has a nice core going.
Comment
-
Hollinger Ranking Update: November 26th, 2014
Last Ranking Update (Nov. 24th): 2nd
Today's Ranking: 1st
Last Conference Ranking: 1st
Today's Conference Ranking: 1st
Top 5
Raptors
Warriors
Mavs
Blazers
Spurs
Raptors are now one of the four teams to hold the number one spot: Warriors, Rockets, Mavericks, Raptors.
Raptors are only one of two teams to remain in the top 4 since the rankings first started: Warriors, Raptors.Last edited by ezz_bee; Wed Nov 26, 2014, 05:20 AM."They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee Dec. 2014
"I guess I got a little carried away there" ~ ezzbee Apr. 2015
"We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon
Comment
-
ezz_bee wrote: View PostBOOYA BEACHES!!!
Hollinger Ranking Update: November 26th, 2014
Last Ranking Update (Nov. 24th): 2nd
Today's Ranking: 1st
Last Conference Ranking: 1st
Today's Conference Ranking: 1st
Top 5
Raptors
Warriors
Mavs
Blazers
Spurs
Raptors are now one of the four teams to hold the number one spot: Warriors, Rockets, Mavericks, Raptors.
Raptors are only one of two teams to remain in the top 4 since the rankings first started: Warriors, Raptors.
Comment
-
Raps favourites to win title (at least for today..according to one guy)
Not sure if this is just another way of saying the same thing but...
http://www.tsn.ca/espn-s-hollinger-r...nship-1.144989
Has it really been less than a year?
Comment
-
Jclaw wrote: View PostNot sure if this is just another way of saying the same thing but...
http://www.tsn.ca/espn-s-hollinger-r...nship-1.144989
Has it really been less than a year?
Seems likely.That is a normal collar. Move on, find a new slant.
Comment
Comment