|
On June 22 2013 08:40 DystopiaX wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 04:40 Holcan wrote:
Typical how the off season thread dips right into toronto hopefuls, for a year from now. Someone said how toronto isnt cleveland? Yea cleveland has had success in the past decade and their #1 picks have been worth max contracts. Lolz So their Toronto success hinges on tanking hard enough to land Andrew Wiggins, hoping he is what everyone says he is and he doesn't get injured and he really is the next Lebron? Everyone and their mother will be trying to get Wiggins next year, and no matter how hard they tank there are going to be teams with a better shot, like the Bobcats or any Western conference bottom-feeder, since they play more good teams a year.
Well, still a lot better game plan than relying on Gay, Demar, Ross and Valanciunas to become anything but fringe starters.
|
On June 22 2013 09:10 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 08:40 DystopiaX wrote:On June 22 2013 04:40 Holcan wrote:
Typical how the off season thread dips right into toronto hopefuls, for a year from now. Someone said how toronto isnt cleveland? Yea cleveland has had success in the past decade and their #1 picks have been worth max contracts. Lolz So their Toronto success hinges on tanking hard enough to land Andrew Wiggins, hoping he is what everyone says he is and he doesn't get injured and he really is the next Lebron? Everyone and their mother will be trying to get Wiggins next year, and no matter how hard they tank there are going to be teams with a better shot, like the Bobcats or any Western conference bottom-feeder, since they play more good teams a year. please. we all know bobcats will never get #1 pick + Show Spoiler +
He retired doe
|
On June 22 2013 09:26 Holcan wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 08:40 DystopiaX wrote:On June 22 2013 04:40 Holcan wrote:
Typical how the off season thread dips right into toronto hopefuls, for a year from now. Someone said how toronto isnt cleveland? Yea cleveland has had success in the past decade and their #1 picks have been worth max contracts. Lolz So their Toronto success hinges on tanking hard enough to land Andrew Wiggins, hoping he is what everyone says he is and he doesn't get injured and he really is the next Lebron? Everyone and their mother will be trying to get Wiggins next year, and no matter how hard they tank there are going to be teams with a better shot, like the Bobcats or any Western conference bottom-feeder, since they play more good teams a year. Well, still a lot better game plan than relying on Gay, Demar, Ross and Valanciunas to become anything but fringe starters.
Most of Toronto's guys are overpaid but they're not just fringe starters...Ross and valanciunas at least are young rookies, so you don't know how that's gonna turn out, there's still hope for Demar. And the Rudy Gay backlash has been a bit too strong imo. He's not an allstar like we thought he would be but he's not terrible either. He's at least a solid starter. ofc he is being paid a bit too much but still, it's not like he's terrible.
Although it's unlikely (assuming unfixed draft) I do hope that Wiggins lands in Toronto, if only for a hometown hero kind of thing like Rose has in Chicago.
|
wiggins to toronto would alteast make for good fanfare for eventual nba allstar game toronto 2016
|
On June 22 2013 01:07 lamprey1 wrote:
the Raptors should intentionally tank and get Wiggins first over all.
Coach Casey should stare straight into the camera every week and say "its all about development. we are developing our younger players and experimenting with some new sets to make our players well rounded basketball players"
If they keep playing Andrea Bargnani, they won't have to. Seriously. He may be the worst starter of all time. Rudy Gay isn't too hot either: trade him to the Knicks.
I would really like to see the Raptors return to relevance, and their best way to do that is through the draft. It's just reality.
|
Looking forward to what happens in the Central Division this year. Chicago/Indy/Cleveland should be very interesting.
|
On June 22 2013 08:40 DystopiaX wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 04:40 Holcan wrote:
Typical how the off season thread dips right into toronto hopefuls, for a year from now. Someone said how toronto isnt cleveland? Yea cleveland has had success in the past decade and their #1 picks have been worth max contracts. Lolz So their Toronto success hinges on tanking hard enough to land Andrew Wiggins, hoping he is what everyone says he is and he doesn't get injured and he really is the next Lebron? Everyone and their mother will be trying to get Wiggins next year, and no matter how hard they tank there are going to be teams with a better shot, like the Bobcats or any Western conference bottom-feeder, since they play more good teams a year.
Certainly is probably the best prospect since Durant, but he looks a lot more like the next T-Mac than the next LBJ. LBJ's ability to involve all of his teammates and his court vision were already apparent back in his HS days, and are not talents that a player can just develop (Wiggins certainly hasn't shown much in those areas). However, considering T-Mac, along with Durant, are arguably the most talented offensive players of the past 20 years, Wiggins is still a pretty massive catch.
Also, what sets LBJ apart from the rest is his body and longevity. Wiggins looks far more prone to injury than LBJ (like T-Mac), and we all know that injury is the #1 superstar killer.
|
Also Dwight to rockets plz
|
T-Mac is definitely not in the top tier of offensive talents in the past 20 years. Not even close.
|
On June 22 2013 12:14 Ace wrote:
T-Mac is definitely not in the top tier of offensive talents in the past 20 years. Not even close.
Concur. T-Mac's Offensive Win Shares for his career place him 84th All-Time. PER: 28th. Offensive Rating: 249th. Not a good argument.
|
Offensive Win Shares doesn't mean anything. Individual ORating likewise doesn't mean much either (this is affected a hell of a lot by teammate composition and ignores role usage too much). T-Mac's team O-rating on/off over a season and individual offensive performance over time in terms of basic stats and TS% can reveal most of what went on.
That said his 2003 season was MVP levelish from an offensive standpoint. But the reason he isn't a top tier offensive talent has a lot to do with individual drop offs and efficiency issues. I think part of it is injury, and another part the way he played and the teams he was on. His Orlando stint would have looked a hell of a lot more dominant with Grant Hill around. Still wouldn't make him an offensive juggernaut though as those guys tend to be efficient one man wrecking crews no matter who is around them.
|
On June 22 2013 13:18 Ace wrote:
Offensive Win Shares doesn't mean anything. Individual ORating likewise doesn't mean much either (this is affected a hell of a lot by teammate composition and ignores role usage too much). T-Mac's team O-rating on/off over a season and individual offensive performance over time in terms of basic stats and TS% can reveal most of what went on.
That said his 2003 season was MVP levelish from an offensive standpoint. But the reason he isn't a top tier offensive talent has a lot to do with individual drop offs and efficiency issues. I think part of it is injury, and another part the way he played and the teams he was on. His Orlando stint would have looked a hell of a lot more dominant with Grant Hill around. Still wouldn't make him an offensive juggernaut though as those guys tend to be efficient one man wrecking crews no matter who is around them.
Taken in isolation they aren't comprehensive no but a top 20 offensive talent would be represented in those rankings, as in a trend would be evident.
|
oh ok I agree with that. There would be some correlation to show for it. Any names popped out in both rankings that we would be surprised about?
|
|
|
On June 22 2013 13:49 Ace wrote:
oh ok I agree with that. There would be some correlation to show for it. Any names popped out in both rankings that we would be surprised about?
Tons of good stuff in there...How would you feel if I told you T-Mac has the 12th highest career PER? Whoops, just realized the filters were screwed up... I've got to edit the original T-Mac post....gimme a sec.
|
Not surprised since he's always been good at stuffing the box score.
|
Naw, my originals were right, I meant he has 12th highest career playoff PER...I was admittedly surprised at that.
|
yes...thats what PER measures, the boxscore 
And T-Mac was a very good all around player.
|
On June 22 2013 13:58 Ace wrote:yes...thats what PER measures, the boxscore And T-Mac was a very good all around player.
LOL. Yeah, I know. It also favors inefficient scorers as well (odd for a term containing efficiency but nevertheless). I found this very interesting: Chauncy Billups has a higher career Offensive Win shares than Tim Duncan and Paul Pierce (among actives)
|
holy shit. How is that possible when Duncan's teams have such high winning %? Maybe Duncan's minute load going down over the years?
very strange though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.midwestsportsfans.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Stern-Booed-at-Draft.jpg)
