Chisholm: What to do about the C position? Forget Tyson Chandler (212)

[Tim W.]

I think its possible to build a team that competes every year and still build a team that wins a championship... its not one or the other. Tanking/developing/cap space/drafting does not ensure a championship team. A team has to be forged in the fire's of the regular season, the franchise needs a winning identity. As a fan if I found out my team was intentionally holding itself back from putting the best product it can on the floor, so we can get a better draft pick ... I would not be happy. I pay because I believe we have a chance to win every game, and if I lose that belief, than I wont pay.

I keep reading this "tanking doesn't guarantee a franchise player/Championship team" as if that's a great argument against. No one has ever claimed it guarantees anything. But it gives the best chance.

The big problem I have with your, and others who argue the same thing, is that your mantra is that you need to build a team that competes so that the young players can develop in a winning atmosphere. Great. The problem is that in 16 years of Raptors history, the team has only made the playoffs 5 times, and only once have they gotten out of the first round. And that was while they WERE trying to build a team that competes. The Raptors had one of the top 15 players in the league and failed to reach the playoffs the last two years with him.

I can't hep but think of the quote, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

It really seems to me that quite a few people here are having a lot of trouble remembering the past.

[SuperRaptor]

You want a GM that builds a team that competes so you can be entertained when you spend your money at the arena. I want a GM that wants to win a Championship. That's the big difference.

I think its possible to build a team that competes every year and still build a team that wins a championship... its not one or the other. Tanking/developing/cap space/drafting does not ensure a championship team. A team has to be forged in the fire's of the regular season, the franchise needs a winning identity. As a fan if I found out my team was intentionally holding itself back from putting the best product it can on the floor, so we can get a better draft pick ... I would not be happy. I pay because I believe we have a chance to win every game, and if I lose that belief, than I wont pay.

[Tim W.]

A PF who averages 21pts/5reb a game in the NBA is not a bad basketball player, infact he is a couple of rebounds away from all star team. That is a fact. Its unfair to blame him for all of toronto's defensive woes, the TEAM is bad defensively but because the C position is so crucial it only made Bargnani's defensive struggles stand out more.

These are the things that will make our defense better this year:

1) Playing Bayless more than Calderon: I don't care what people say about his stats he is a way better defender than calderon is. He can atleast keep guys infront of him. He averaged like 20pts a game as a starter, he has earned starting min. his assist and rebounding numbers are not bad either.

2) James Johnson starts at SF for us: This guy averaged over 9pts/4.7reb/3ast/1.1blk in 28 min. with us last year! How come people arent excited about this guy, averaging over a block a game at the SF position? That's Josh Smithlike. We had guys like Sonny Weems, Linas Kleiza playing too many min. This guy needs to start he is gonna help us defend.

3) Moving Bargnani to PF: Center is too crucial of a position for someone who cannot grasp the concept of help defense.

4) Get Tyson Chandler: Defense, Rebounding, Blocks, Leadership, thats what this guy brings to the table.

The two most crucial positions on the defensive end: The point of attack, and defending the rim. Both could be getting addressed by the Raptors. I think people are underestimating the potential impact that this can have on a team.

I've said it before and I will say it again: "Raptors Are Stacked."

Unfortunately basic stats don't tell the whole story. Yes, Bargnani averaged 21 ppg and 5 rpg. Great. But how was his defense? What effect did he have when he was on the floor? Can he produce on a winning team? The problem is, lots of players can (and have) put up good stats on a bad team, but weren't good enough all around players to be able to do it on a good team. My favourite example is Tony Campbell.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...campbto01.html

His best year, he averaged 23.2 ppg and 5.1 rpg. Sound familiar? So why exactly wasn't he an All Star? Because he did that on a team that only won 22 games (again, sound familiar?). The problem was that Campbell was simply not a good enough all around player to be able to do that on a good team. The better the team he was on, the less his only real skill was needed (scoring) and the less he played.

1) Bayless put up good basic stats when he started last year. But was he able to run a team? Did he make his teammates better? And why is it when stats work in your favour, they're fine, but when they don't you reject them? Bayless is quicker than Calderon and has the physical tools to be a better defender, but that doesn't actually make him a better defender. Bayless has a chance to be a pretty good player, but he's got A LOT to learn before he's even on the same level as Calderon.

2) I like James Johnson and do hope he is able to become a good NBA player, but again, you're getting tripped up on these basic stats. And they're stats that he achieved on a bad team while being force fed minutes. What I liked? He played well at times and showed he could have a positive effect on the team. What I didn't like? He also never seemed to learn when not to shoot (and shot badly when he did) and made as many boneheaded mistakes out there as he made big plays. And while he has the potential to be a good defender, he isn't there yet.

3) You think that PFs don't need to know help defense? In the NBA, sometimes it's the center that's the last line of defense, other times it's the PF. It depends on the play, which side of the ball either one is one, they type of player they are guarding, etc. If a player hurts on defense at center, he's going to hurt you about the same amount at PF.

4) Tyson Chandler would be great if the team were only a player like him away from doing something. But the Raptors are not one or even two players away (unless those players are LeBron and Dwight Howard), Chandler plays a position that is not one of long term need and at best he'll make the Raptors a mediocre team.

If you think the Raptors are stacked, you really need to take a closer look at some of the other teams in the league.

[Tim W.]

You may want to pick up a book on game theory and an actuarial textbook discussing utility functions for a different perspective to "playing the odds".

It may not change your opinion but at least it will show you another way to plan.

Whether you like it or not, building an NBA Championship team is playing the odds. Jerry West played the odds when he traded Vlade Divac for a 16th pick in the draft because he believed a) that Shaq would leave Orlando and sign with the Lakers and b) that that 16th pick in the draft was going to turn out to be something special. He was right in both respects.

You want a GM that builds a team that competes so you can be entertained when you spend your money at the arena. I want a GM that wants to win a Championship. That's the big difference.

[Tim W.]

No, there is also risk/reward to contemplate. If Colangelo feels that a nice additon won't lead to many more wins then he enters the lottery with only a few less balls and could come out with a better team. That's a real scenario that could play out. Of course there is always uncertainty but there are different degrees of uncertainty.

So what do you propose if they don't get their franchise player, Tim? Dump the roster and keep rolling around in the bottom of the toilet until they cling on to something to float to the top? Prepare yourself now for the scenario where they don't get their franchise player because it's very possible. If it happens they're not putting the car in neutral until they trip over a superstar in the draft, you can bet on that. There are other scenario which can play out where they become a legit contender.

Look, I'm not saying they should make a play right now but what I am saying is that I see the scenarios that can play out where it's a good thing. Just because you can't get your own way all the time doesn't mean what best for you won't take place. I think it's short sighted to say 2012 bang or 2012 apocalyptic bust.

Use of the TPE, plus cap space, plus the signing of JV, plus the signing of the next 1st rounder, plus the option on Alabi, plus the qualifying offer on Bayless. A real scenario that could play out.

If they don't get a franchise player in the draft, they'll be in a slightly different, but not necessarily worse position, if they spend money on a free agent and don't get a franchise player. They'll have the ability to go out and either sign a free agent or trade for a player with a bigger contract with the cap space.

And my point is that if you don't spend the TPE or any of the cap space, then you'll have money to spend next summer. But at least then you'll have a better understanding of what exactly you need.

You don't seem to understand that I'm not banking on drafting a superstar. I'm simply saying that with the position the Raptors are in right now, and with the upcoming draft being one of the best in years, it simply makes sense to try give the team the best chance to be able to draft one. If they don't, then they still have all the young players and cap space. In fact they aren't in a much different position they'd be if they did go out and spend money on a free agent and didn't draft a superstar. But at least they'll know that they didn't screw themselves out of the next Tim Duncan because they couldn't wait a year to spend the cap space they had.

[SuperRaptor]

Raptors are reportedly interested in Samuel Dalembert too, and if he can be had for cheaper than Chandler I say go for him. We have a good chance of landing either gasol, nene, chandler, or dalembert reason why is: because this is an incredibly good Free agency period for getting a C. Those guys gotta find homes somewhere .... Dalembert's numbers are very comparable to Chandlers...

"Sam Amick: Other teams 2 watch in relation 2 Dalembert: Denver, Houston, Golden State, Toronto, New Orleans, and Philly if they amnesty Andres Nocioni. Twitter"

Apparently Bargnani lost some weight in the offseason and is moving great...

http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/28...ting-to-get-it

[Nilanka]

I've said it before and I will say it again: "Raptors Are Stacked."

Lol

[SuperRaptor]

Tim - your opinion on Bargnani is well known and warranted. It is still your opinion though. My opinion at this time is he shocks us all in 2011-12 with a defensive C next to him for the reasons I gave in an earlier post:



Historical evidence certainly gives support to your views. However past performance is not indicative of future returns.

Feel free to continue to disagree which, of course, goes without saying.

A PF who averages 21pts/5reb a game in the NBA is not a bad basketball player, infact he is a couple of rebounds away from all star team. That is a fact. Its unfair to blame him for all of toronto's defensive woes, the TEAM is bad defensively but because the C position is so crucial it only made Bargnani's defensive struggles stand out more.

These are the things that will make our defense better this year:

1) Playing Bayless more than Calderon: I don't care what people say about his stats he is a way better defender than calderon is. He can atleast keep guys infront of him. He averaged like 20pts a game as a starter, he has earned starting min. his assist and rebounding numbers are not bad either.

2) James Johnson starts at SF for us: This guy averaged over 9pts/4.7reb/3ast/1.1blk in 28 min. with us last year! How come people arent excited about this guy, averaging over a block a game at the SF position? That's Josh Smithlike. We had guys like Sonny Weems, Linas Kleiza playing too many min. This guy needs to start he is gonna help us defend.

3) Moving Bargnani to PF: Center is too crucial of a position for someone who cannot grasp the concept of help defense.

4) Get Tyson Chandler: Defense, Rebounding, Blocks, Leadership, thats what this guy brings to the table.

The two most crucial positions on the defensive end: The point of attack, and defending the rim. Both could be getting addressed by the Raptors. I think people are underestimating the potential impact that this can have on a team.

I've said it before and I will say it again: "Raptors Are Stacked."

[Hugmenot]

There's ALWAYS uncertainty. No matter what you do. It's about playing the odds. And the odds are simply better if the Raptors try and get a high pick. You COULD get the first pick if you just miss out on the playoffs, but the odds are against it.

You may want to pick up a book on game theory and an actuarial textbook discussing utility functions for a different perspective to "playing the odds".

It may not change your opinion but at least it will show you another way to plan.

[Apollo]

There's ALWAYS uncertainty. No matter what you do. It's about playing the odds. And the odds are simply better if the Raptors try and get a high pick. You COULD get the first pick if you just miss out on the playoffs, but the odds are against it.

No, there is also risk/reward to contemplate. If Colangelo feels that a nice additon won't lead to many more wins then he enters the lottery with only a few less balls and could come out with a better team. That's a real scenario that could play out. Of course there is always uncertainty but there are different degrees of uncertainty.

In this draft, I like the odds of landing a very good player in the top five. And I've heard the argument that you could find a good player lower down in this draft, and that's true. You definitely could. But what is the BEST chance of finding one? If you're looking for a nice woman, you COULD find her anywhere, but there are places that are simply more likely to find one than others. I wouldn't start looking, for example, outside a police station. Again, it's playing the odds. It's hard enough and a lot of you guys seem to want to make it that much more difficult. And I don't understand why.

So what do you propose if they don't get their franchise player, Tim? Dump the roster and keep rolling around in the bottom of the toilet until they cling on to something to float to the top? Prepare yourself now for the scenario where they don't get their franchise player because it's very possible. If it happens they're not putting the car in neutral until they trip over a superstar in the draft, you can bet on that. There are other scenario which can play out where they become a legit contender.

I'm not saying they should make a play right now but what I am saying is that I see the scenarios that can play out where it's a good thing to make a play. Just because you can't get your own way all the time doesn't mean what's best for you won't take place. I think it's short sighted to say 2012 bang or 2012 apocalyptic bust.

I don't understand your point about being stuck close to the cap without a franchise player if they miss out on their player. If they do nothing, they'll have at least $10 million in cap room next summer (after taking into considering cap holds, etc) and even more if they amnesty a player.

Use of the TPE, plus cap space, plus the signing of JV, plus the signing of the next 1st rounder, plus the option on Alabi, plus the qualifying offer on Bayless. A real scenario that could play out.

[Tim W.]

Hugmenot is making a valid point about uncertainty in the draft. Losing a lot doesn't guarantee stars, it simply increases the number of ping pong balls.

There's ALWAYS uncertainty. No matter what you do. It's about playing the odds. And the odds are simply better if the Raptors try and get a high pick. You COULD get the first pick if you just miss out on the playoffs, but the odds are against it.

As I mentioned earlier, there is always the scenario where the Raptors do nothing now, have bad luck in the lottery and miss out on thier guy. Then they're stuck close to the cap without a franchise player and worse off than if they made a play now and hoped for the best in the lottery with potentially less balls. If they're unluicky in the 2012 draft they'll be walking into a situation this summer with less tools than they have right now (cap space and TPE). For this reason I am not totally against them making a run at a good fit for the team during free agency right now. Making a play now could turn out to be a bad move but waiting on the draft and hoping for a lucky break could turn out to be a bad move as well. There is more of an element of luck involved with waiting.

I don't understand your point about being stuck close to the cap without a franchise player if they miss out on their player. If they do nothing, they'll have at least $10 million in cap room next summer (after taking into considering cap holds, etc) and even more if they amnesty a player.

In this draft, I like the odds of landing a very good player in the top five. And I've heard the argument that you could find a good player lower down in this draft, and that's true. You definitely could. But what is the BEST chance of finding one? If you're looking for a nice woman, you COULD find her anywhere, but there are places that are simply more likely to find one than others. I wouldn't start looking, for example, outside a police station. Again, it's playing the odds. It's hard enough and a lot of you guys seem to want to make it that much more difficult. And I don't understand why.

[Apollo]

Hugmenot is making a valid point about uncertainty in the draft. Losing a lot doesn't guarantee stars, it simply increases the number of ping pong balls.

As I mentioned earlier, there is always the scenario where the Raptors do nothing now, have bad luck in the lottery and miss out on thier guy. Then they're stuck close to the cap without a franchise player and worse off than if they made a play now and hoped for the best in the lottery with potentially less balls. If they're unluicky in the 2012 draft they'll be walking into a situation this summer with less tools than they have right now (cap space and TPE). For this reason I am not totally against them making a run at a good fit for the team during free agency right now. Making a play now could turn out to be a bad move but waiting on the draft and hoping for a lucky break could turn out to be a bad move as well. There is more of an element of luck involved with waiting.

Bargnani's defense doesn't look bad because of his teammates. It looks bad because when you watch him it's obvious he's a poor defensive player. And the only player in the starting lineup you mentioned that I have confidence in becoming an above average defender is Ed Davis. Bayless has worse defensive stats than Calderon, DeRozan should improve, but I wouldn't expect sudden miracles. James Johnson certainly has potential, but has shown a penchant for making as many bad defensive plays as good ones. I'm hopeful with all of them, but this is not going to be a good defensive team this year, even if they improve quite a bit. And unless Bargnani is surrounded by elite defenders, he's going to get exposed constantly.

I didn't say his defense was poor due to his teammates Tim. What I said was if his teammates improve their defense it could help to hide his inadequacies. Big difference. I don't care what Bayless' defensive stats are, he's not worse than Calderon and unlike Calderon he has a lot of room for growth on defense. Not to mention Jose is an inferior athlete and that doesn't help.

If Bargnani is surrounded by guys who've improved significantly he will get more help and will be exposed less. He's doesn't need to be surrounded be the all-nba 1st team defense to take a little less pressure.

[Nilanka]

It is interesting to note that Bargnani increased his offensive production while taking on the challenge of being the primary option on a weak offensive team. But that should not even be consideration when evaluating him, because.... because ... because that could be a point that is interpreted in his favor, that's why!

Lol, I never understood how being a number 1 option is considered a detriment for offensive players. If Bargnani is as gifted offensively as everyone claims he is, then he should THRIVE under these conditions, not regress (his scoring increased, but his efficiency decreased). I don't remember LeBron, Wade, Pierce, Garnett, Duncan, Nowitzki, etc. ever struggling as number one options.

But hey, Bargnani deserves the benefit of the doubt.....because......because.....he's Bargnani, that's why! 5 years is apparently equivalent to 5 games when evaluating centers. Oh crap, I mean "when evaluating power forwards".

[Tim W.]

It has to improve a little under Casey. Even if it doesn't, a lot of the other starters will improve under Casey. If Bayless starts along with DeRozan, JJ and Davis then that's a pretty coachable starting squad. If they all improve they'll make Bargnani look better on defense. They need to make sure he gets lots of good looks if they want to get top value on the market. They can control that part, they may not be able to control the big man skills.

Bargnani's defense doesn't look bad because of his teammates. It looks bad because when you watch him it's obvious he's a poor defensive player. And the only player in the starting lineup you mentioned that I have confidence in becoming an above average defender is Ed Davis. Bayless has worse defensive stats than Calderon, DeRozan should improve, but I wouldn't expect sudden miracles. James Johnson certainly has potential, but has shown a penchant for making as many bad defensive plays as good ones. I'm hopeful with all of them, but this is not going to be a good defensive team this year, even if they improve quite a bit. And unless Bargnani is surrounded by elite defenders, he's going to get exposed constantly.

[Tim W.]

The Raptors have drafted 2 franchise players: Vince Carter and Tracy McGrady. The Raptors were not able to retain the services of these two fine gentlemen.

So maybe it's time the Raptors explore a different startegy to attract a franchise player for the long-term?

Let's take a look back in time and recall the 1997 and 1998 drafts.

1997 NBA Draft
1 Tim Duncan
2 Keith Van Horn
3 Chauncey Billups
4 Antonio Daniels
5 Tony Battie
...
9 Tracy McGrady
42 Stephen Jackson

1998 NBA Draft
1 Michael Olowokandi
2 Mike Bibby
3 Raef LaFrentz
4 Antawn Jamison
5 Vince Carter
...
9 Dirk Nowitzki
10 Paul Pierce
32 Rashard Lewis

Drafting a franchise player in the top 5 picks is not as easy as a proposition as some suggest. Drafting a franchise player is a roll of the dice and only in very rare cases - such as Duncan, Shaq, Howard, Olajuwon, Rose - are the odds quite high but even when there are very high, thngs can do wrong (Oden).

It's not clear at this time if any one of the potential 2012 draft entries is significantly more talented than any other prospects. All the top prospects have question marks attached to their scouting report.

Is it really worth tanking this season to increase the odds of drafting a franchise player by a tiny fraction?

Not from my perspective.

I'm not sure I see your point. McGrady left for various reasons (perceived lack of respect by the coach and organization, not wanting to play in the shadow of Vince, etc) and Vince left after 6 years because he had lost faith in the organization (and rightly so, with Babcock in charge- so had I). Even if you count Bosh in that, he stayed for 7 years and left only after the franchise failed to build a good enough team to get even to the playoffs.

Somehow, out of this you believe the Raptors shouldn't try and draft franchise players anymore? Wouldn't it simply make more sense to try and actually manage the team better when you have one? Players generally don't leave a team that they have faith in. No one wants to stay on a crappy team for too long, especially if they have a choice.

And I don't think ANYONE suggesting it was EASY to draft a franchise player even in the top five. Don't know where you got that from. But it's easiER to draft one than trade for one or sign one, especially if you aren't one of the few attractive destinations in the league.

So what are you suggesting? I've at least come up with a plan (as have others) that involves something other than figuring it out as you go. You've stated outright that you just want an entertaining team, so you'd rather not do anything to distract from that, even if it means sacrificing the ability to win a Championship. No offense, but I don't know if you're the best person to be giving advice on how to build a team.

Also, why did you including Stephen Jackson and Rashard Lewis in your list above? They were borderline All-Stars, even during their peak. And the 1997 draft was considered a poor draft and a HUGE dropoff after Duncan. Not every draft is the same. This upcoming draft is considered one of the best in years and with several potential franchise players. Last year, for instance, was not considered a very deep or talented draft, so it wouldn't have made sense to "tank" last year.

As for not "really worth tanking this season to increase the odds of drafting a franchise player by a tiny fraction". What exactly tiny fraction are you talking about?

In the last 30 years, the number one pick went on to become an All NBA player 19 times. And John Wall and Blake Griffin could end up being added to the list. I've already talked about how few non-top 5 drafted players end up making the first and second All-NBA teams. And the lower you finish, the better your odds of getting a top three pick is. I seriously don't understand how you can reasonably say that it only increases your odds "a tiny fraction". It's simply not true.