Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 121

Thread: Quit Whining

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    3,154
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    None of them were really that far apart from each other between picks 8-12. But the potential of each player was greater than some. I am a big Andre Drummond fan and he should've gone to us. I also think Jeremy Lamb was a better option than Ross.

    I also believe he drafted for BPA in other years. I just don't feel he drafted the BPA this year.

    I think Ross is a solid player and will be good, but he wanted the BPA when we picked.
    BC has said (basically) that he passed on Drummond because he didn't like his head and attitude, probably from a bad interview.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    37,064
    vCash
    1090
    Quote Originally Posted by conway429 View Post
    BC has said (basically) that he passed on Drummond because he didn't like his head and attitude, probably from a bad interview.
    I can understand why he passed on him. But by passing on Drummond, BC didn't draft the BPA.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    5,824
    vCash
    2633
    Sine I started the BPA discussion I'll chime in.

    Bargs was not BPA, just about everyone thought Aldridge was the best player, but we had Bosh. And most projected Bargs as a C at the time.
    Derozan was not BPA, Jennings was thought to have been a top 5 pick had he gone to college instead of Europe, his upside was incredible, but we had Calderon. And a desperate need for a 2.
    Davis was the best player, and had fallen so far you had to do it.
    Valanciunas was BPA, but also filled a need so that's a wash.
    Ross was not BPA, Drummond was, but we have Val. And Ross was supposed to fill a need for a 3 pt shooter. And as we all know, 2s and 3s are very interchangeable in the NBA, we needed a wing player.

    People won't all agree with my assessment, but I think stacking assets is the right way to go, even if you're duplicating positions. There are lots of examples of this on successful teams in the league.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    37,064
    vCash
    1090
    Quote Originally Posted by mike_noodles View Post
    Sine I started the BPA discussion I'll chime in.

    Bargs was not BPA, just about everyone thought Aldridge was the best player, but we had Bosh. And most projected Bargs as a C at the time.
    Derozan was not BPA, Jennings was thought to have been a top 5 pick had he gone to college instead of Europe, his upside was incredible, but we had Calderon. And a desperate need for a 2.
    Davis was the best player, and had fallen so far you had to do it.
    Valanciunas was BPA, but also filled a need so that's a wash.
    Ross was not BPA, Drummond was, but we have Val. And Ross was supposed to fill a need for a 3 pt shooter. And as we all know, 2s and 3s are very interchangeable in the NBA, we needed a wing player.

    People won't all agree with my assessment, but I think stacking assets is the right way to go, even if you're duplicating positions. There are lots of examples of this on successful teams in the league.
    A lot thought Bargnani had the higher potential. Same with Derozan over Jennings.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    50,092
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    A lot thought Bargnani had the higher potential. Same with Derozan over Jennings.
    I agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    I can understand why he passed on him. But by passing on Drummond, BC didn't draft the BPA.
    I disagree. It isn't Best TALENT Available, it is Best PLAYER Available. The reasons why BC passed on Drummond are the same reasons he didn't go top 5.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    37,064
    vCash
    1090
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob_at_york View Post
    I agree.


    I disagree. It isn't Best TALENT Available, it is Best PLAYER Available. The reasons why BC passed on Drummond are the same reasons he didn't go top 5.
    I suppose his immaturity issues brought him down. But this guy was basically in the same position as DeMarcus Cousins. Had all the talent in the world but is considered a headcase.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    50,739
    vCash
    1500
    I agree with lots of the above comments. There is a huge difference between being incompetent and having very little work out or come to fruition yet. Some of the players we have were the best available and still have very tantalizing promise. Even the loathed-and-detested Bargnani has a TON of talent. It's just trying to get it all to pay off.

    No we don't have the right combination but I wasn't expecting us to.

    Our weakness at SF is GLARING. For example. The solutions out there are not good.

    I still think the decision to give BC a short term contract was asinine. It brings out his impatient side when what we needed was a longer term plan - a thorough rebuild.
    Last edited by ink; 12-10-2012 at 05:08 PM.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brandon, MB
    Posts
    6,857
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I still think the decision to give BC a short term contract was asinine. It brings out his impatient side when what we needed was a longer term plan - a thorough rebuild.
    You say that it brings out his impatient side but he has never really shown a patient side. It does not seem to matter whether he has a two or a five year contract. And this isnt just with the Raps it was the same thing on the Suns.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    50,739
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bramaca View Post
    You say that it brings out his impatient side but he has never really shown a patient side. It does not seem to matter whether he has a two or a five year contract. And this isnt just with the Raps it was the same thing on the Suns.
    I'm not going to disagree. But given what we know about his impatience, isn't it like giving crack to a coke addict to say "you have two years to rebuild"?

    If ownership wanted a rebuild they were sending out 1. contradictory messages with the contract length, and 2. giving him incentive to do a half-assed job.

    Like you've said many times, he drafts well. So giving him a short contract (which normally signals MAKE THE TEAM WIN NOW) was the stupidest thing that could have been done.

    Not excusing his inability to get the team to improve, just saying that there's a very good case for being pissed off at a stupid ownership group for sending out contradictory messages.

    WE WANT A REBUILD!!!

    YOU HAVE 2 YEARS!!!

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    37,064
    vCash
    1090
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I'm not going to disagree. But given what we know about his impatience, isn't it like giving crack to a coke addict to say "you have two years to rebuild"?

    If ownership wanted a rebuild they were sending out 1. contradictory messages with the contract length, and 2. giving him incentive to do a half-assed job.

    Like you've said many times, he drafts well. So giving him a short contract (which normally signals MAKE THE TEAM WIN NOW) was the stupidest thing that could have been done.

    Not excusing his inability to get the team to improve, just saying that there's a very good case for being pissed off at a stupid ownership group for sending out contradictory messages.

    WE WANT A REBUILD!!!

    YOU HAVE 2 YEARS!!!
    This.

    I've been saying we need to either fire Colangelo or give him a longer contract. It makes no sense to tell him he needs to rebuild but only has 2 years.

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    The Pharcyde of the Moon
    Posts
    10,676
    vCash
    4500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I'm not going to disagree. But given what we know about his impatience, isn't it like giving crack to a coke addict to say "you have two years to rebuild"?

    If ownership wanted a rebuild they were sending out 1. contradictory messages with the contract length, and 2. giving him incentive to do a half-assed job.

    Like you've said many times, he drafts well. So giving him a short contract (which normally signals MAKE THE TEAM WIN NOW) was the stupidest thing that could have been done.

    Not excusing his inability to get the team to improve, just saying that there's a very good case for being pissed off at a stupid ownership group for sending out contradictory messages.

    WE WANT A REBUILD!!!

    YOU HAVE 2 YEARS!!!
    BC supposedly has the long term interests of the Raptors in mind. That's why he drafted Jonas Valanciunas and said that he will be a good "long term" piece for the organization. Not so much expecting him to be a game changer now, although the fans sure hoped for it.

    The thing about BC is that he doesn't know how to manage a team even though he is good at drafting. He's shown to be a good talent scout but a subpar talent manager.
    Raptors Franchise Checklist:
    Rebuild with young players [x]
    Build contending team [ ]
    Host NBA All-Star Weekend [ ]
    Win Championship [ ]

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,552
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ink View Post
    I'm not going to disagree. But given what we know about his impatience, isn't it like giving crack to a coke addict to say "you have two years to rebuild"?
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    This.

    I've been saying we need to either fire Colangelo or give him a longer contract. It makes no sense to tell him he needs to rebuild but only has 2 years.
    it's not a contradictory message in the least. it's a "we don't know if you're as good as we thought message so let's see where we are 2 years from now and we will talk."

    i'm sure if there were more positive signs that would have been more than enough to get him extended.
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    37,064
    vCash
    1090
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    it's not a contradictory message in the least. it's a "we don't know if you're as good as we thought message so let's see where we are 2 years from now and we will talk."

    i'm sure if there were more positive signs that would have been more than enough to get him extended.
    Yes it is a contradictory statement. You want him to do something but you don't give him the time to do it.

    Can't have it both ways. Give him a long contract or forget it.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    50,739
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    it's not a contradictory message in the least. it's a "we don't know if you're as good as we thought message so let's see where we are 2 years from now and we will talk."

    i'm sure if there were more positive signs that would have been more than enough to get him extended.
    People stupid enough to give an impatient GM two years to rebuild a team are not smart enough to tell if the struggling youth movement is on the right track.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    50,739
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    Yes it is a contradictory statement. You want him to do something but you don't give him the time to do it.

    Can't have it both ways. Give him a long contract or forget it.
    Exactly. The clown show starts at the VERY top. Doesn't excuse BCs failings but I'm sick of the simplistic black and white blaming.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •