Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Top GM's To replace BC if MLSE finally Cans Him

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

  • #31
    Tim W. wrote: View Post
    I've seen this argument before, that being drafted #1 has hurt Bargnani's development, and I don't understand it in the least. What Bargnani is doing right now is exactly what I projected him to do five years out. I think he's developed as can be expected. He had no defensive or rebounding acumen when drafted, so there's no reason to think he would somehow acquire it. And he's become the offensive force most thought he would be.

    Bargnani wasn't the best player from that draft, but it's hard to argue there were that many players that are better than him from that draft.
    the bottom line is there is no chance of success with utilizing bargnani the way the raptors do now, as a starting center. I have no problem that he drafted him, everyone makes mistakes, but failing to acknowledge what bargnani DOESN'T bring to the table can hold this franchise back for years, and that is my biggest worry with colangelo.

    Comment


    • #32
      pran wrote: View Post
      the bottom line is there is no chance of success with utilizing bargnani the way the raptors do now, as a starting center. I have no problem that he drafted him, everyone makes mistakes, but failing to acknowledge what bargnani DOESN'T bring to the table can hold this franchise back for years, and that is my biggest worry with colangelo.
      Bear in mind, I never agreed with drafting him in the first place and would trade him in a second if it were up to me. And if he's still with the club by this time next year, I'll be calling for Colangelo's head, but to say that drafting Bargnani was a failure is just plain ridiculous.
      Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
      Follow me on Twitter.

      Comment


      • #33
        If the Raps are to get a new GM, IMO, the GM doesnt have to be just "better" than BC, but also "different". Somebody who would make it their mission to trade Bargs and Jose, coz otherwise, might as well keep BC. I think BC's rep within the NBA is highly respectable, and his relationships with other GMs is pretty solid. I think Pritchard is pretty much the same as BC. A "throw caution to the wind" type GM. Pritchard will probably not trade Bargs and Jose, due to his affinity for big men (aldridge, oden, lafrentz, juwan howard) and to euro/international players as well (sergio, rudy, batum). And Kerr, pretty much carried over the turbo charged offense blueprint from BC's reign.

        Id still like to see what BC's vision is for this team next year. Ive already surrendered to the fact the both Bargs and Jose will still be integral parts of this team come next season. But maybe he has something else planned, and the tools that he has right now (cap space, picks) are certainly exciting building blocks.

        Comment


        • #34
          Tim W. wrote: View Post
          I thought bring in Shaq was a stupid idea that he should have predicted wouldn't have turned out well. Apart from that, though, he certainly was around enough great teams.
          Sarver and Arison, the owners, hashed that deal from my recollection. The GM's had little involvement except tomake the numbers work.

          Comment


          • #35
            tbihis wrote: View Post
            If the Raps are to get a new GM, IMO, the GM doesnt have to be just "better" than BC, but also "different". Somebody who would make it their mission to trade Bargs and Jose, coz otherwise, might as well keep BC. I think BC's rep within the NBA is highly respectable, and his relationships with other GMs is pretty solid. I think Pritchard is pretty much the same as BC. A "throw caution to the wind" type GM. Pritchard will probably not trade Bargs and Jose, due to his affinity for big men (aldridge, oden, lafrentz, juwan howard) and to euro/international players as well (sergio, rudy, batum). And Kerr, pretty much carried over the turbo charged offense blueprint from BC's reign.

            Id still like to see what BC's vision is for this team next year. Ive already surrendered to the fact the both Bargs and Jose will still be integral parts of this team come next season. But maybe he has something else planned, and the tools that he has right now (cap space, picks) are certainly exciting building blocks.
            My memory of things with PHX is a bit different with Kerr. Sarver gave up on D'Antoni's system and wanted more defense. Shaq was brought in. Terry Porter took over as coach before Gentry. Kerr/Sarver tried to get away from D'Antoni's system only to bring Alvin Gentry to the ranks of head coach to bring it back. I guess exciting basketball won out over winning basketball (although they did make West Finals last year).

            I think the draft determines if Jose is starting next year (that is what I assume integral means). I think Bargnani is here for the forseeable future. Personally I'm fine with that. I'd love to see what happens if a Josh Smith style player (or Josh Smith himself!)can be brought in to play the SF and a solid perimeter defender who runs the offense and can score from long range is inserted in to the starting lineup. I will admit the clock is ticking on the Bargnani experiment but I would like to see what BC"s vision for the team is before casting final judgment.

            Comment


            • #36
              Matt52 wrote: View Post
              I think the trading of TJ Ford for O'Neal who was traded for Marion who was signed and traded for Turkoglu who was traded for Barbosa are all admissions of failure.
              +1, i tihnk BC is willing to admit failure but keep in mind that BC is a GM for a reason. Maybe BC doesnt see failure where you some of you see it. besides whats the point in trading Bargnani right now? we're already tanking, he is not really over paid, he likes toronto, can score the ball, and he has been doing slightly better with defense and rebounding lately ( IMO , SLIGHTLY). hopefully this can be improoved on going forward and he will be a more complete player. at this point its pretty pointless in trading him. if the raps could gatther enough talent to make bargs a 2nd or 3rd option then were laughing!
              Last edited by pesterm1; Tue Mar 8, 2011, 06:53 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                pesterm1 wrote: View Post
                +1, i tihnk BC is willing to admit failure but keep in mind that BC is a GM for a reason. Maybe BC doesnt see failure where you some of you see it. besides whats the point in trading Bargnani right now? we're already tanking, he is not really over paid, he likes toronto, can score the ball, and he has been doing slightly better with defense and rebounding lately ( IMO , SLIGHTLY). hopefully this can be improoved on going forward and he will be a more complete player. at this point its pretty pointless in trading him. if the raps could gatther enough talent to make bargs a 2nd or 3rd option then were laughing!
                im not a big fan of that statement right there, what in fact makes him so infallable? What has he been right about that deserves this sort of trust? I think at this point we should be very very very shrewd and look at ALL the facts instead of blindly trusting BC. He has made good pickups, but has struck out on ALL free agent signings,but has traded most bad signings. HE SEEMS to be a big fan of players that do one thing exceptionally well, not well rounded two way players. so I dunno, I think we need to look at all the facts.

                Comment


                • #38
                  The temptation to find the next GM from an established franchise like San Antonio and Utah is tempting. However, unproven people are too risky. Rich Cho seems to be doing a good job in Portland. He's a number cruncher too and looks at analysis very deeply. If BC stays, I'm only hoping for a 2-year deal. Heck, Nate McMillan (an awesome coach IMO), only re-signed for 2 years. That's a good job on Cho's part too because it really gives the team flexibility once Nate hits difficulty with the team somewhere down the line (as the deal is only two years). Either BC gets renewed for just two years OR, the Raps pull a Portland on draft night. It's a tough guess because for example, I like Presti (still do) but the Robinson / Perkins deal is starting to look funky as both players have knee issues. We need a good numbers guy with "outside the box" thinking like Alex Anthopolous. I just don't know enough of the executives roster to make a suggestion.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Balls of Steel wrote: View Post
                    The temptation to find the next GM from an established franchise like San Antonio and Utah is tempting. However, unproven people are too risky. Rich Cho seems to be doing a good job in Portland. He's a number cruncher too and looks at analysis very deeply. If BC stays, I'm only hoping for a 2-year deal. Heck, Nate McMillan (an awesome coach IMO), only re-signed for 2 years. That's a good job on Cho's part too because it really gives the team flexibility once Nate hits difficulty with the team somewhere down the line (as the deal is only two years). Either BC gets renewed for just two years OR, the Raps pull a Portland on draft night. It's a tough guess because for example, I like Presti (still do) but the Robinson / Perkins deal is starting to look funky as both players have knee issues. We need a good numbers guy with "outside the box" thinking like Alex Anthopolous. I just don't know enough of the executives roster to make a suggestion.
                    don't worry, cause it ain't happening

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      pran wrote: View Post
                      im not a big fan of that statement right there, what in fact makes him so infallable? What has he been right about that deserves this sort of trust? I think at this point we should be very very very shrewd and look at ALL the facts instead of blindly trusting BC. He has made good pickups, but has struck out on ALL free agent signings,but has traded most bad signings. HE SEEMS to be a big fan of players that do one thing exceptionally well, not well rounded two way players. so I dunno, I think we need to look at all the facts.
                      A lot of generalitities. Here is his entire GM career.

                      http://hoopshype.com/general_manager..._colangelo.htm

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Matt52 wrote: View Post
                        A #1 pick who is averaging over 20ppg. He might not be what you want or expect in a number one pick but Bargnani has hardly been a failure. He is far from perfect but far from a failure. This line of thinking, in my opinion, is ridiculous.

                        To be sure I am reading the comments correct you have said:

                        Bargnani was and is a failure,
                        BC is a failure for selecting him,
                        BC is a failure for not trading him,
                        BC is a failure drafting a guy who is 15th in the league in scoring despite his flaws,
                        being the #1 pick is hard and not all #1's are franchise players,
                        however, BC is still a failure for selecting him despite all #1's not being franchise players because that is what people expect.

                        If I interpreted this correct, it sounds like neither BC or Bargnani is a failure. It sounds like people's expectations have failed them.

                        If I continue to interpret the line of reasoning correctly, any GM who did not pick the best player or a franchise player with the number 1 pick in a draft is a failure. It could also be reasoned any GM who did not draft the best player available is a failure i.e. you drafted 8 but the guy at 11 is way better.

                        Anyone else seeing the lunacy in this line of thinking?
                        You're raising two issues here, I think. One the one hand, you're defending Bargnani as a player who, I guess, shouldn't be traded? And on the other hand, you're complaining that everyone expected too much of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft.

                        So as to the first issue, I think the Raps are a disastrous team full of mediocre/bad interchangeable players. Bargnani is a big contract who doesn't make a difference on the court. I suppose you think the points he scores, and granted he's a relatively efficient complementary scorer -- basically an above average stretch forward, are crucial to maintain the Raps [winning] ways. I'd prefer a defensive player at his position because most power forwards cannot defend the post against guys like Dwight Howard/Andrew Bynum et al. The thing people often ignore when they evaluate Bargnani is that the things he does well are not usually required of a center. No one complains that Bynum or Howard cannot shoot from the arc. Ball-handling players do that very well. But notice that many knowledgeable fans and critics do complain that Weems and DeRozan (interchangeable swingmen) cannot shoot from long range, because their position demands that skill. In the same way, we can imagine a point guard who can block shots and rebound but cannot dribble the ball, pass it, or shoot it. Such a payer would hurt his team more than he'd help it. Which is how I'd describe Bargnani. I don't think he's more than a seventh man on a winning team.

                        It's true that people shouldn't hold general managers to high standards when it comes to the #1 pick in any draft, but everyone knew the 2006 draft wasn't full of great players. Colangelo could have sold or traded the pick. He could have drafted Aldridge or Rondo (I excuse Roy because of the knees, which everyone knew about). Colangelo could have refused to sign Bargnani to such a large extension (or any extension at all). By his own actions, Colangelo has tied his fate to Bargnani's success. Bargnani and the other large contracts are a stumbling block to adding real talent to the roster.

                        I think the Raptors' complete lack of leadership from the top of the pyramid down to Colangelo is a bigger problem than Colangelo himself, but since Bargnani has to go, BC has to go too.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Brandon wrote: View Post
                          You're raising two issues here, I think. One the one hand, you're defending Bargnani as a player who, I guess, shouldn't be traded? And on the other hand, you're complaining that everyone expected too much of the #1 pick in the 2006 draft.

                          So as to the first issue, I think the Raps are a disastrous team full of mediocre/bad interchangeable players. Bargnani is a big contract who doesn't make a difference on the court. I suppose you think the points he scores, and granted he's a relatively efficient complementary scorer -- basically an above average stretch forward, are crucial to maintain the Raps [winning] ways. I'd prefer a defensive player at his position because most power forwards cannot defend the post against guys like Dwight Howard/Andrew Bynum et al. The thing people often ignore when they evaluate Bargnani is that the things he does well are not usually required of a center. No one complains that Bynum or Howard cannot shoot from the arc. Ball-handling players do that very well. But notice that many knowledgeable fans and critics do complain that Weems and DeRozan (interchangeable swingmen) cannot shoot from long range, because their position demands that skill. In the same way, we can imagine a point guard who can block shots and rebound but cannot dribble the ball, pass it, or shoot it. Such a payer would hurt his team more than he'd help it. Which is how I'd describe Bargnani. I don't think he's more than a seventh man on a winning team.

                          It's true that people shouldn't hold general managers to high standards when it comes to the #1 pick in any draft, but everyone knew the 2006 draft wasn't full of great players. Colangelo could have sold or traded the pick. He could have drafted Aldridge or Rondo (I excuse Roy because of the knees, which everyone knew about). Colangelo could have refused to sign Bargnani to such a large extension (or any extension at all). By his own actions, Colangelo has tied his fate to Bargnani's success. Bargnani and the other large contracts are a stumbling block to adding real talent to the roster.

                          I think the Raptors' complete lack of leadership from the top of the pyramid down to Colangelo is a bigger problem than Colangelo himself, but since Bargnani has to go, BC has to go too.
                          Quick notes: There is only three other players I would have drafted above Bargs. Aldridge, Gay, and Rondo. And Rondo was 21st so a lot of GM's missied out on him and one expected him to be that good.

                          As far as GM's I would want to see. Definitely Kevin Pritchard and I would give Steve Kerr a chance. But mos def Kevin Pritchard.
                          Eh follow my TWITTER!

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Employee wrote: View Post
                            Quick notes: There is only three other players I would have drafted above Bargs. Aldridge, Gay, and Rondo. And Rondo was 21st so a lot of GM's missied out on him and one expected him to be that good.
                            i think including rondo in any discussion as to who 'should have' been picked 1st is ridiculous. NO ONE - not a single person on the planet - projected him as worthy of being a 1st overall pick, even in a draft devoid of a consensus #1, and unless my memory is failing me completely, there really weren't many (any?) pundits who felt he was even a lottery pick.

                            Employee wrote: View Post
                            As far as GM's I would want to see. Definitely Kevin Pritchard and I would give Steve Kerr a chance. But mos def Kevin Pritchard.
                            personally, i'd rather have Mos Def...ok, maybe not, but KP wouldn't be at the top of the heap.
                            TRUE LOVE - Sometimes you know it the instant you see it across the bar.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              yertu damkule wrote: View Post
                              personally, i'd rather have Mos Def...ok, maybe not, but KP wouldn't be at the top of the heap.
                              Explain your reasoning good sir! I know he's a got some attitude problems but he built that Blazers team that's been injury plagued to boot.
                              Eh follow my TWITTER!

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Employee wrote: View Post
                                Explain your reasoning good sir! I know he's a got some attitude problems but he built that Blazers team that's been injury plagued to boot.
                                Well, first of all Mos Def never built the Blazers. Plus, he was REALLY annoying in 16 Blocks, mostly because of his nasally voice. What was the deal with that?
                                Read my blog, The Picket Fence. Guaranteed to make you think or your money back!
                                Follow me on Twitter.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X