Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything 2016/17 NBA Draft Thread aka Thank Nation 2.0

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

  • DanH wrote: View Post
    Yep! If you can keep this core together, you do so.

    If Lowry walks though, that's a whole other conversation.

    Still, I would not be a fan of bailing on this team as constructed, and would hope that Masai finds a way to keep as many of the key pieces as possible.
    I still believe Masai tears it down if Lowry walks. He did not sound like it in those last interviews. But really if he were to say 'oh we have to evaluate our direction again if Lowry leaves in FA' it sends a bad message to Demar right now about what the organization thinks of him. Why do that when you can avoid it. Especially IF Lowry does resign there may be a bad vibe with Derozan abt how the team looks at him( mind you he's a guy that took SI ranking of 46 to heart and worked his butt off to prove em). As silly as it may sound these are potential issues that MAY arise. Why even leave a little window for that to happen when you can simply say the right thing and go abt business.


    There was no noise abt team changing direction before the gay trade happened. It was quick and was done with it. I still believe a tear down may happen given what happens with Lowry and other FAs.

    Comment


    • ball4life wrote: View Post
      I still believe Masai tears it down if Lowry walks. He did not sound like it in those last interviews. But really if he were to say 'oh we have to evaluate our direction again if Lowry leaves in FA' it sends a bad message to Demar right now about what the organization thinks of him. Why do that when you can avoid it. Especially IF Lowry does resign there may be a bad vibe with Derozan abt how the team looks at him( mind you he's a guy that took SI ranking of 46 to heart and worked his butt off to prove em). As silly as it may sound these are potential issues that MAY arise. Why even leave a little window for that to happen when you can simply say the right thing and go abt business.


      There was no noise abt team changing direction before the gay trade happened. It was quick and was done with it. I still believe a tear down may happen given what happens with Lowry and other FAs.
      I think that if Lowry walks he will work to field a competitive team but set up a house of cards scenario like he did in the Gay-trade year where if the team exceeds expectations they get to run with it, and if they struggle he'll pile on by making midseason trades (like he was about to with Lowry), maybe culminating in a Casey-firing, to dip into the top 10 of the lottery.

      Comment


      • Double Post

        Comment


        • DanH wrote: View Post
          Yep! If you can keep this core together, you do so.

          If Lowry walks though, that's a whole other conversation.

          Still, I would not be a fan of bailing on this team as constructed, and would hope that Masai finds a way to keep as many of the key pieces as possible.
          Another team that has been doing it right all these years is The Memphis Grizzles.

          The Memphis Grizzles have made the playoffs for 7 straight years with pretty much the same core of players: Gasol, Conley and Randolph. All while finding players through the draft or free agency to fill in the rest of the roster. Considering Memphis is a very small city in comparison to Toronto and has difficulty in attracting top free agents or drafting high caliber players due to making it to the playoffs, they are able to maximize their talent potential every season (taking the Spurs with a healthy Kawahi to 6 games was impressive).

          For Memphis to think about tanking might be suicide for the franchise so they are surviving while still putting up a pretty good team and when healthy always kicked Toronto's butt. If they were in East they would be in the top 4 teams.

          Now we don't want to be like the Grizzles but we are in a better position to be better then them and if we continue putting up a winning team and finding the right add-ons every season, the right timing to go for it will be there just like its been for the Pistons in 2004 where they found the right combination to win it all.

          Comment


          • Hotshot wrote: View Post
            The thing is where do you want to go from here?! a partial tear down and its a 40 win team, a more serious tear down and we are looking into a 30 win team and its no guarantee you will pick a superstar stud game changer in the draft (they are usually first overall pick, the rest are crapshoot whether they will indeed develop into a superstar and that first overall pick isn't guarantee either). What it does guarantees is that you will be a losing team for at least a half a decade.

            The best model still is what the Spurs are doing. Stay a 50+ win team for as long as you can (Spurs have gone 7 years between 2007 to 2014 of not winning a title and they didn't buy the whole tear it down thing while maintaining a 50+ win team and winning culture) , buy your time, draft the right players, and with smart trading by managing your assets perhaps land a mid level pick where that raw superstar could potentially slide (Giannis and Kawahi) and then grab them. I think as long as you have assets where if things failed, they still have value where you can flip them to some other value is the way to go.

            Raptors best run this far in its 20 years existence has been this one, and its only been going for 4 straight years. You tear it down and once again you are back to being the NBA joke and all that hard work of attracting free agents will fall flat on its face and we are back in Minnesota, Sacramento territory.
            Yep. I've argued this for a long time. You can rebuild and win at the same time. Develop your own players through internal growth and then flip them, either for established players or high picks. Best example of this: George Hill was drafted 26th and developed well enough to flip for the 15th overall pick, Kawhi, who was developed into an MVP player. Both players far exceeded their perceived potential on draft day.

            The keys are: scouting, internal development and a system that maximizes the potential of both role players and stars.

            I just don't get why people are always so hung up on tanking and tear-downs as the knee-jerk reaction. The worst part of tanking is that it typically lowers the perceived trade value of almost all the players. Look no further than Lowry, who we almost traded for Shumpert and a 2nd round pick, lol. Whereas, we just got Ibaka for Ross, who is perceived as coming from a winning culture. Celtics are obviously another great example of this.

            Comment


            • special1 wrote: View Post
              This is such a sensible post.

              I agree with this totally.

              Why tear down a 50 win team? That's a last resort folks.

              Better to make adjustments/improvements and stay competitive.


              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
              I believe that the stay-the-course crowd is greatly underestimating two things:

              1. The effect of our payroll on future flexibility. Locking into DeMar/Kyle/Ibaka at $80 million is going to really hamper us from meaningful changes going forward.

              2. Significant downside risk due to decline for Kyle and Ibaka. If either one becomes a Caroll situation we are really screwed.

              Keep in mind that a Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka core which includes two MVPs on another level from Kyle/DeMar never made the Finals... They only did so with Harden. So not even no rings, no Finals appearances.

              This is a key decision point for the franchise financially. It is very different from the moment following the Wizards sweep, when Kyle and DeMar were both bargain contracts. We had an opportunity to really go hard after a third piece, and the best we could do was Ibaka. Trying to add another piece now is going to be extremely difficult.

              I don't think the downside risk is so great to warrant tearing everything down, but tanking is being scoffed at without proper recognition of the risks inherent in staying the course.

              It's like working as a store manager at Wal-Mart while living in a very expensive house and supporting a big family. It's stable work and you make a decent living. You might get to have a few nice nights out a year. But if you get injured or run into other difficulties you are in big trouble.

              On the other hand you could live in a small house and go back to school and get an advanced degree. After a painful divorce you wouldn't have anyone to support. You would not have those few nights out, and in general life would be harder for a few years, but you would have the opportunity to build a much greater life for yourself.

              To go one step further, if Dwane Casey is your boss at Wal-Mart, you are never going anywhere. Continuing your career under his leadership is just a waste of time.

              And if your wife leaves you, the decision to start over should be very easy.

              The Spurs were lucky; they went back to school for one year, and got a great job that lasted them 20 years. They also were working for one of the great bosses of all time, one who would guide and shape them to reach their full potential.

              We have neither a great job nor a great boss. Which is why there is not as huge a difference in risk between tanking/not-tanking as some are making it sound. The major difference is in the types of risk.
              Last edited by Scraptor; Sat May 20th, 2017, 03:38 AM.

              Comment


              • golden wrote: View Post
                Yep. I've argued this for a long time. You can rebuild and win at the same time. Develop your own players through internal growth and then flip them, either for established players or high picks. Best example of this: George Hill was drafted 26th and developed well enough to flip for the 15th overall pick, Kawhi, who was developed into an MVP player. Both players far exceeded their perceived potential on draft day.

                The keys are: scouting, internal development and a system that maximizes the potential of both role players and stars.

                I just don't get why people are always so hung up on tanking and tear-downs as the knee-jerk reaction. The worst part of tanking is that it typically lowers the perceived trade value of almost all the players. Look no further than Lowry, who we almost traded for Shumpert and a 2nd round pick, lol. Whereas, we just got Ibaka for Ross, who is perceived as coming from a winning culture. Celtics are obviously another great example of this.
                Another good post right here.


                Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                Comment


                • Everything 2016/17 NBA Draft Thread aka Thank Nation 2.0

                  Scraptor wrote: View Post
                  I believe that the stay-the-course crowd is greatly underestimating two things:

                  1. The effect of our payroll on future flexibility. Locking into DeMar/Kyle/Ibaka at $80 million is going to really hamper us from meaningful changes going forward.

                  2. Significant downside risk due to decline for Kyle and Ibaka. If either one becomes a Caroll situation we are really screwed.

                  Keep in mind that a Durant/Westbrook/Ibaka core which includes two MVPs on another level from Kyle/DeMar never made the Finals... They only did so with Harden. So not even no rings, no Finals appearances.

                  This is a key decision point for the franchise financially. It is very different from the moment following the Wizards sweep, when Kyle and DeMar were both bargain contracts. We had an opportunity to really go hard after a third piece, and the best we could do was Ibaka. Trying to add another piece now is going to be extremely difficult.

                  I don't think the downside risk is so great to warrant tearing everything down, but tanking is being scoffed at without proper recognition of the risks inherent in staying the course.

                  It's like working as a store manager at Wal-Mart while living in a very expensive house and supporting a big family. It's stable work and you make a decent living. You might get to have a few nice nights out a year. But if you get injured or run into other difficulties you are in big trouble.

                  On the other hand you could live in a small house and go back to school and get an advanced degree. After a painful divorce you wouldn't have anyone to support. You would not have those few nights out, and in general life would be harder for a few years, but you would have the opportunity to build a much greater life for yourself.

                  To go one step further, if Dwane Casey is your boss at Wal-Mart, you are never going anywhere. Continuing your career under his leadership is just a waste of time.

                  And if your wife leaves you, the decision to start over should be very easy.

                  The Spurs were lucky; they went back to school for one year, and got a great job that lasted them 20 years. They also were working for one of the great bosses of all time, one who would guide and shape them to reach their full potential.

                  We have neither a great job nor a great boss. Which is why there is not as huge a difference in risk between tanking/not-tanking as some are making it sound. The major difference is in the types of risk.
                  I still think it would be a foolish decision to blow up a 50+ win team, this early and in our circumstance.

                  The Wal-Mart comparison doesn't make much sense to me either.

                  We went to the East Finals last year with an arguably worst team...... We lost to the eventual champions last year and again the Cavs took us out this year and they look even better. The Lebrons just placed an historic beat down on the Celtics! They are playing like champions.

                  Sports is about competition, not cowering. We have to continue to try to get better, continue to try to win.... get over the hump. It's a tough road and this road isn't for softies.

                  Who's to say that we can't tear it down in a couple years if things don't work out?

                  The tear-it-down crowd has been around for years. I'm convinced they all like to play the lottery a little bit more than the rest of us. Every year they tell us that this is the year to tear it down and we'll never get better. I didn't believe them then and I certainly don't believe them now.

                  There are two real championship contenders in this league.....The Cavs and Golden State.

                  However, that doesn't mean that the other 28 teams should just give up and lay down......Its best to try to improve and get better, make shrewd moves and let the chips fall where they may.

                  If we were a late lottery team.... my views might be different. But we're a 50+ win team (even with Lowry missing 20+ games and playing 2/3 of the season without a real Starting PF). This is not the time to tear it down.


                  Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                  • Asked this question in the fire casey thread without any response. IF Masai tears it down, how long before the team can realistically become a title contender?
                    If we knew half as much about coaching an NBA team as we think, we"d know twice as much as we do.

                    Comment


                    • Really coming around on Leaf after doing some reading and film watching. If raps are serious about this change of style than Leaf would be the guy you take at 23. I would still rather with
                      someone like DJ Wilson. Like his versitility on D.

                      Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
                      Last edited by Chr1s1anL; Sat May 20th, 2017, 10:47 AM.
                      @Chr1st1anL

                      Comment


                      • I want the Raps to take a 2 way player. Breakdowns on offense and defense happen when you have to try and hide a guy who is useless on one end of the floor. See: Siakam on offense, Demar/Jonas on defense.

                        Comment


                        • BrydenB wrote: View Post
                          I want the Raps to take a 2 way player. Breakdowns on offense and defense happen when you have to try and hide a guy who is useless on one end of the floor. See: Siakam on offense, Demar/Jonas on defense.
                          Siakim isn't going to be useless on offense for much longer, if he can even be considered that now.

                          Comment


                          • Celtics lost yesterday to the Cavs in an embarrassing fashion much worse then the Raptors did and in all likelihood this will be a 4 games series as well. Yet people in Boston are not panicking and wanting to blow out the team (They have the first overall pick those m#@%%**f#$%&&*).

                            The Cavs with Lebron James is just so much superior then anyone else on the East. It may take another season or two but the Cavs will eventually fall and Boston will be the toughest opponent to beat in the East (Bucks if healthy could be scary too). In the meantime Masai has to figure out staying competitive while looking ahead into the not so distant future ( I do however think that Casey has reached his shelf life as a coach and by that time Masai will hire or promote within a new coach).

                            Comment


                            • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
                              Really coming around on Leaf after doing some reading and film watching. If raps are serious about this change of style than Leaf would be the guy you take at 23. I would still rather with
                              someone like DJ Wilson. Like his versitility on D.

                              Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
                              Interesting. Can you expound further please? Nice to have a draft convo here. I'm not sold on leaf but imo he did legit carry UCLA in spurts. I was impressed with his leadership and maturity for a freshman. I'm not convinced that he's a great player/athlete, especially in the modern NBA. His natural strengths seem more his touch, instincts and presence to me.

                              Comment


                              • lewro wrote: View Post
                                Interesting. Can you expound further please? Nice to have a draft convo here. I'm not sold on leaf but imo he did legit carry UCLA in spurts. I was impressed with his leadership and maturity for a freshman. I'm not convinced that he's a great player/athlete, especially in the modern NBA. His natural strengths seem more his touch, instincts and presence to me.
                                I don't expect to get a great player at 23. Maybe a legit starter but, thats it. I think Leaf could be that. He has great feel for the game. Doesn't need the ball to make an impact on the game. Which is good fit with our guards. Very good vision for a player his size. I think he would be our best passing big from day one. Yak/Bebe might give him a run for his money but, still a very good passer. He has a good handle for his size too. He's not a knockdown shooter but, you just can't leave him. Good athlete not great but, good. Had a 35 inch vertical at the combine. Which is pretty good for 6'10 player.

                                D worries me but, I think he is smart enough too be a good team defenfer/positional defender. He's good on D glass so that will help as well.

                                I think his best case scenario would David Lee w/ more range.

                                Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk
                                @Chr1st1anL

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X