Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bayless next contract?

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

  • jimmie
    replied
    From what I've seen, honestly, has been enough. I just feel that having seen the Raptors make horrible signing after horrible signing, I am praying to God they are absolutely positively sure about this one before they make another huge mistake.
    Pretty sure we're actually in agreement here. I don't think they should sign Bayless, either. I think anything at or above the Qualifying Offer (anything over $4M) would be way too much for what he's shown he can bring to the table. I like him from a "team guy" standpoint, he seems like he has his head on straight, etc. but he's just not a good enough player (at this point, and my contention is that he likely never will be good enough) to warrant that kind of money, especially since equal or better talent will almost certainly be available for less money.

    As for the nature of online debate, I agree. And I actually saw something on RealGM that was remotely useful (for a change) and almost shared it in the thread where Tim W was getting raked over the coals. It was a really interesting article, and for sure applies to how we deal with each other in a context where few if any of us actually "know" each other...

    http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/08/...etric-insight/ -- if anyone is interested.

    Leave a comment:


  • ebrian
    replied
    jimmie wrote: View Post
    The cons to starting Bayless are also of note. If you have a crappy PG on the floor with 4 other guys you are trying to develop and evaluate, it's going to adversely affect their development and your ability to evaluate them effectively (ie. they won't get the ball in places they should, not having a PG capable of running the system effectively, etc. makes it tough to determine how the others are playing). It's like saying you want to see how good of a receiver Calvin Johnson might be, but then you put Christian Ponder out there throwing to him.
    You had me until your Calvin Johnson analogy. Megatron has been elite receiver for most of his career, and this is only his first year with a "stable" QB. He's been lighting it up with guys like Dan Orlovsky, Daunte Culpepper, Jon Kitna and Shaun Hill throwing to him. But I do get your point. Maybe Bayless doesn't need the minutes. From what I've seen, honestly, has been enough. I just feel that having seen the Raptors make horrible signing after horrible signing, I am praying to God they are absolutely positively sure about this one before they make another huge mistake.

    Having read the remaining parts of this thread and several other threads ending in similar fashion. I learned this from a psychiatrist/marriage counselor but I think it's worth repeating (This message is not directed towards Jimmie, but to everyone):

    Whenever we argue or debate, the first 2 minutes is spent actually arguing, and the remaining time is spent arguing about the way we argue.
    Last edited by ebrian; Wed Dec 21, 2011, 10:33 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey
    replied
    Maleko wrote: View Post
    I would second that and am with you Joey as I also don't see is as confrontational either. HOWEVER I do know from experience (on here as well) not all people take comments the same way and it is more difficult to convey tone in 2 dimensions. Not a criticism at either camp...just to be clear.
    Thanks man.

    You also make a great point.

    Leave a comment:


  • Maleko
    replied
    joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    It was obviously meant as a jest. I cannot deny that, nor should I have too.
    Anyone whos been posting on here for any amount of time knows that I like to joke around.

    But as a means to "push buttons" or be confrontational? Not in the slightest.

    And to be honest, I still don't see it to be of a confrontational nature.
    I would second that and am with you Joey as I also don't see is as confrontational either. HOWEVER I do know from experience (on here as well) not all people take comments the same way and it is more difficult to convey tone in 2 dimensions. Not a criticism at either camp...just to be clear.

    Leave a comment:


  • slaw
    replied
    I posted something similar in the post game thread but it's probably worth repeating here: what is it exactly that Bayless does that makes people so enamoured with him? Is he a great or even good passer? Does the offense look better with him on the floor? Is he an efficient and timely scorer late in the clock? Does he play good defense on opposing PGs? Is he a magician or even a competent ball handler on the break?

    Cause, honestly, I don't get it. To me, he's an inefficient, streaky scorer who doesn't get other involved, can't run an offense, and plays poor to middling defense. Now, maybe he's never really had a chance and maybe he's always been blocked and couldn't get off the bench but then let's find that out this year. No need to give him 3 more years on top of it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey
    replied
    Nilanka wrote: View Post
    I have no reason to take either side, but this sentence does have a mocking tone to it. Whether that was intentional or not, only joey knows.
    It was obviously meant as a jest. I cannot deny that, nor should I have too.
    Anyone whos been posting on here for any amount of time knows that I like to joke around.

    But as a means to "push buttons" or be confrontational? Not in the slightest.

    And to be honest, I still don't see it to be of a confrontational nature.
    Last edited by Joey; Tue Dec 20, 2011, 03:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Nilanka
    replied
    Just because they go against the point that you are trying to make?
    I have no reason to take either side, but this sentence does have a mocking tone to it. Whether that was intentional or not, only joey knows.

    Having said that, it seems like every post on this site has some element of mockery involved, so I suppose it just comes with the territory

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey
    replied
    jimmie wrote: View Post
    We'll agree to disagree on the way you phrased your response to my original post. It comes off as aggressive/confrontational, even on second reading.
    Gladly.
    This was not at all my intent.

    Leave a comment:


  • jimmie
    replied
    joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    "I'm curious as to how the numbers from the end of last season are a Mirage?

    Just because they go against the point that you are trying to make?"


    Is not aggressive at all.

    And once again, I was simply looking for clarification on the 'Mirage' comment.
    Just because I understood it to be your opinion, does not mean I understood the comment itself.
    Hence why I asked.

    I get that my opinion differs from yours. Thats fine.
    This has never been about one opinion vs. another.

    I was just curious as to the thought process that went into saying his numbers were a "mirage".
    And now I'm curious as to how he "lucked into" his numbers as well.

    But I just won't ask.
    You just did (ask, that is). But I already answered. I watched the games; I came out with a different perception from yours. I'm not going to get into stacking up credentials in terms of watching and analyzing basketball games, because that always comes off as smarmy and arrogant. Suffice to say I'm comfortable in my assessment, but quite willing to be proven wrong.

    We'll agree to disagree on the way you phrased your response to my original post. It comes off as aggressive/confrontational, even on second reading. Looks to me like you were pushing buttons, and I don't think I'd be alone in interpreting it that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey
    replied
    jimmie wrote: View Post
    Maybe a better question is: Why the aggressive stance on what was clearly my opinion (which you clearly understood from the outset)?
    "I'm curious as to how the numbers from the end of last season are a Mirage?

    Just because they go against the point that you are trying to make?"


    Is not aggressive at all.

    And once again, I was simply looking for clarification on the 'Mirage' comment.
    Just because I understood it to be your opinion, does not mean I understood the comment itself.
    Hence why I asked.

    I get that my opinion differs from yours. Thats fine.
    This has never been about one opinion vs. another.

    I was just curious as to the thought process that went into saying his numbers were a "mirage".
    And now I'm curious as to how he "lucked into" his numbers as well.

    But I just won't ask.
    Last edited by Joey; Tue Dec 20, 2011, 02:49 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • jimmie
    replied
    Regardless of my opinion, the Raptors need to put in their due diligence before making a decision on what to do with him. No matter how much I dislike him, the Raptors need to give him minutes, and even name him the starter. Aside from showcasing him so we can trade him, do we really, honestly, need to see more Jose Calderon right now?
    I think this has been done to death in other threads, I don't think they need to start Bayless to determine if he's the PG (or even backup PG) of the future. Fans are the ones who "need to see him" in games. The staff sees him in practices, games, and in miles of footage of him from years past. I'm pretty sure they have a pretty decent idea of who he is as a player, and what they consider his potential ceiling.

    The cons to starting Bayless are also of note. If you have a crappy PG on the floor with 4 other guys you are trying to develop and evaluate, it's going to adversely affect their development and your ability to evaluate them effectively (ie. they won't get the ball in places they should, not having a PG capable of running the system effectively, etc. makes it tough to determine how the others are playing). It's like saying you want to see how good of a receiver Calvin Johnson might be, but then you put Christian Ponder out there throwing to him.

    And as for upping his trade value, what if those of us who think he's not good enough are right? Any trade value he has will just go down if he proves he can't run a team.

    Leave a comment:


  • ebrian
    replied
    The only thing I'll agree on that I've seen in this thread is that Bayless needs more minutes.

    I don't think Bayless is the answer based on what I've seen, regardless of those 8 meaningless games where half the starters were injured and he scored a lot of points. When the overall talent dips, of course you're going to look good. I can think of several examples of players looking really good when the talent level on the rest of the team sucked. It helps even more when you're facing teams that no longer give a shit. Plus, we don't need a point guard to score a lot of points. We had Mike James before and that didn't work out.

    Regardless of my opinion, the Raptors need to put in their due diligence before making a decision on what to do with him. No matter how much I dislike him, the Raptors need to give him minutes, and even name him the starter. Aside from showcasing him so we can trade him, do we really, honestly, need to see more Jose Calderon right now? The worst possible thing I can think of happening here is they end up not giving Bayless enough starts and at the end of the year some guy in the back of the room goes "b-b-b-b-but.. what about those 8 games last year?", and they sign him to a 4 year deal worth $20M. BAM, we have another Kapono/Kleiza on our hands.

    Leave a comment:


  • jimmie
    replied
    joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    Much clearer. Thanks.
    Although, I had always figured that to be your opinion. Not sure how it could have been mistaken as fact.
    Also, not quite sure why you need to be rolling your eyes and such.
    Just asked you to clarify a very matter-of-fact statement you had made.

    But anyway, so what you're saying is, I just need to watch more games, and then I'll agree with you? Or what?.. That you've seen more of Bayless than I have?
    Because, y'know, if I had watched more games, I would clearly agree with you.

    Over the last stretch of games last year, when Jose was sidelined, Bayless played extremely well. Stats or no stats.
    In my opinion.
    If he is able to get back to the level of confidence he was paying at last year, he will be a very good Point Guard for many years.
    In my opinion.
    I'm not saying "you" should do anything. I'm saying that "I" watched the games, and I don't think, based on that, that Bayless will ever be a PG or a backup PG on a competitive team in the NBA. That's the conclusion I came to. You don't have to agree; I never suggested you should agree with me. I stated my opinion, no more.

    Your opinion that Bayless played extremely well when Calderon was out is also just that. I'm not arguing against your different perception, just presenting my own. I think he lacks court awareness and essentially lucked into a span of decent assist numbers, that's all. Your opinion that he can be a "very good point guard for years to come" is also just that. I would suggest it's in the minority. You can decide whether that makes any difference to you.

    Maybe a better question is: Why the aggressive stance on what was clearly my opinion (which you clearly understood from the outset)?

    Leave a comment:


  • Joey
    replied
    jimmie wrote: View Post
    Yep, pretty much. (rolls eyes)

    As I said, just watch the games. The numbers don't indicate how poorly he actually played -- and I'll even qualify that with an "in my opinion", if that helps. Is that more clear?
    Much clearer. Thanks.
    Although, I had always figured that to be your opinion. Not sure how it could have been mistaken as fact.
    Also, not quite sure why you need to be rolling your eyes and such.
    Just asked you to clarify a very matter-of-fact statement you had made.

    But anyway, so what you're saying is, I just need to watch more games, and then I'll agree with you? Or what?.. That you've seen more of Bayless than I have?
    Because, y'know, if I had watched more games, I would clearly agree with you.

    Over the last stretch of games last year, when Jose was sidelined, Bayless played extremely well. Stats or no stats.
    In my opinion.
    If he is able to get back to the level of confidence he was paying at last year, he will be a very good Point Guard for many years.
    In my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • e2thed
    replied
    Bayless needs to quit ball hogging and pass the rock first and get his offense game off the defensive end.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X