RealGM

Knicks fan here - you guys probably know more about these two guys better than Toronto & NY fans. Both teams are struggling and the biggest weakness on both teams is defense. So, I'm wondering how close are their basketball philosophies? Should fans be worried about defense or will it mostly be a non-issue once you get the right players? I like Mike D personally, but I don't think we're winning with his system...

Having watched Colangelo for 4 years now, I can safely say that his biggest issues at the moment are two-fold:

1) He has a hard-on for flying in the face of conventional basketball, because he has a vision of a jump-shooting team that scores a lot of points without a dominant defense as being capable of winning basketball games at an elite level. Unfortunately, this is a) untrue and b) not what he should have learned from Phoenix, which had a somewhat different offensive array than does Toronto (which is basically Bosh + shooters and pick-and-pop players).

and

2) He has man-love for Andrea Bargnani and is sacrificing intelligent basketball moves for doing everything humanly possible to develop his little golden boy. And it's ruining our team, will cost us Bosh, and condemning us to irrelevance and mediocrity for years to come (as are the long-term contracts he's got us locked into).

If it weren't for 2, his style of trade-centric, fast turnaround and short-term gains over long-term visions would be at least sensible. If you've got 3 elite individual defenders, one of whom is a good help defender who can guard 3 positions or so, it works. Phoenix was brilliant for 2 years and excellent for another year beyond that. You need rebounding and an average defense to make it work, though, and Toronto has neither.

D'Antoni's offense requires the right point guard. That's the beginning and end of it. He wasn't amazing in 03-04 for various reasons, but aside from the injuries, Marbury wasn't nearly as good a facilitator as is Nash and that made all the difference. Everything Marbury did was based on a style of game fairly similar to Wade's; drive and kick. Nash gets involved in the two-man game through the PnR, is a great transition passer, keeps a live dribble and weaves in and out of a defense with strong handles and a great shot that lets him get past the first defender and beneath the defense.

That is all, really.

BC would be an above-average GM if he didn't love Bargnani so much. He hates the draft, which is irritating, and he loves Euro players who shoot well but don't bring defense or rebounding, which is also annoying.

But he's also made moves to try to add athleticism and bigs. He tried out Jermaine O'neal, but that was a dumb plan, doomed to fail from the start because O'neal is a) frail and b) still thinks he can and should score a lot. And he was never that good at it to begin with. So that didn't work, and he turned it into... Shawn Marion, who actually worked out pretty well. Surprise, surprise.

He turned Marion into Hedo, which is bad, because Hedo's worse and paid more.

He tried and failed to sign John Salmons because JS is crazy (he accepted our offer, then reneged and signed with Chicago because "God told him to"). He purportedly tried to sign Ariza before Hedo. He signed Reggie Evans... who was promptly injured. Evans wouldn't have helped on D, except that he's a great rebounder and that's big-time important.

He traded Charlie V to free up time for Bargs, and in return got Ford. TJ worked out pretty well until our management decided that Calderon was a starter-level player (BIG mistake, worst defender in the league, very uncreative, etc, etc) when Ford got injured.

But you see a lot of quick responses to problems. There will be a trade this year, of that I have no doubt. Whether it will be the RIGHT trade, that's different. But he doesn't sit still when things go wrong (unless it's Bargnani-related).

In any case, as far as the Knicks are concerned, you're not losing because of the offense. Yes, you don't have the point guard to handle it, but your problems stem from lack of sufficient talent, not coaching.

If Jordan Hill gets going, that'll help. If/when Curry starts getting back into the rotation, that'll help. But you need better help defense, better defensive rebounding, you could stand to foul less and you need some better individual defenders a lot more than you need a different offense.

Gallinari cranking out 7 3PAs a game isn't helping you, even though he's hitting a lot of them. You don't draw fouls, you don't have a high-efficiency guy who scores in the paint (be he big man or slasher). I mean, Lee scores a lot on tip-ins and stuff and that's great, but you need an iso option. The big deal is that you're entirely too reliant on the 3, but while that's somewhat the responsibility of D'Antoni, you don't actually have many other options right now.

Again, when Curry comes back, you can plant him in the post and say "score 16+ ppg on 55%+ FG and draw a crapload of FTAs" and he will. And that will be a BIG boost if/when it happens.

So just relax and wait; the Knicks aren't bad because of their coach.

^Thanks for the analysis, I hope D'Antoni has a better grasp on what worked in PHX than Colangelo apparently has. I'm afraid D'Antoni has the same "vision of a jump-shooting team that scores a lot of points without a dominant defense as being capable of winning basketball games at an elite level." Like Colangelo, he goes against conventional basketball wisdom and without any promising results last year or this year AT ALL, I'm currently siding with old-school, conventional basketball wisdom. Without a player equivalent to Nash I don't think D'Antoni will ever duplicate the success he had in Phoenix.

D'Antoni likes early offense, because it gets behind the defense. He wasn't afraid to make use of a post player in Shaq, and he used penetrators and pick-and-roll guys pretty well.

His substitutions were a little weird, but I find that to be true of all coaches once you watch them a while. There are things beyond who's obviously hot that direct their decisions, at times. D'Antoni coached a team that went to the WCFs twice, so he's at least OK in that regard.

He knew how to get half-court offense happening, and he knew the value of using defensive roleplayers. Was he perfect? No, he didn't coach defense very well and didn't do anything to get Amare off his ass and on the glass.

But he definitely knew when some things worked and didn't; he iso'd the crap out of Amare against Duncan in 05, for example, and that worked well in general.

I'm inclined to believe that a Nash-like PG isn't a requirement, but it's very much an offense that lives and dies on the strength of the point guard, which is kind of an old-school mentality.

Again though, you can't view New York without viewing the absence of talent that it has in its active roster, compared to the other really good teams of the league. I think that D'Antoni will look a lot better when he's got better players to work with. He didn't look hot before Nash and before the Suns got healthy, either, and that team wasn't much more talented than the current Knicks.

tsherkin wrote:Having watched Colangelo for 4 years now, I can safely say that his biggest issues at the moment are two-fold:

1) He has a hard-on for flying in the face of conventional basketball, because he has a vision of a jump-shooting team that scores a lot of points without a dominant defense as being capable of winning basketball games at an elite level. Unfortunately, this is a) untrue and b) not what he should have learned from Phoenix, which had a somewhat different offensive array than does Toronto (which is basically Bosh + shooters and pick-and-pop players).

and

2) He has man-love for Andrea Bargnani and is sacrificing intelligent basketball moves for doing everything humanly possible to develop his little golden boy. And it's ruining our team, will cost us Bosh, and condemning us to irrelevance and mediocrity for years to come (as are the long-term contracts he's got us locked into).

If it weren't for 2, his style of trade-centric, fast turnaround and short-term gains over long-term visions would be at least sensible. If you've got 3 elite individual defenders, one of whom is a good help defender who can guard 3 positions or so, it works. Phoenix was brilliant for 2 years and excellent for another year beyond that. You need rebounding and an average defense to make it work, though, and Toronto has neither.

D'Antoni's offense requires the right point guard. That's the beginning and end of it. He wasn't amazing in 03-04 for various reasons, but aside from the injuries, Marbury wasn't nearly as good a facilitator as is Nash and that made all the difference. Everything Marbury did was based on a style of game fairly similar to Wade's; drive and kick. Nash gets involved in the two-man game through the PnR, is a great transition passer, keeps a live dribble and weaves in and out of a defense with strong handles and a great shot that lets him get past the first defender and beneath the defense.

That is all, really.

BC would be an above-average GM if he didn't love Bargnani so much. He hates the draft, which is irritating, and he loves Euro players who shoot well but don't bring defense or rebounding, which is also annoying.

But he's also made moves to try to add athleticism and bigs. He tried out Jermaine O'neal, but that was a dumb plan, doomed to fail from the start because O'neal is a) frail and b) still thinks he can and should score a lot. And he was never that good at it to begin with. So that didn't work, and he turned it into... Shawn Marion, who actually worked out pretty well. Surprise, surprise.

He turned Marion into Hedo, which is bad, because Hedo's worse and paid more.

He tried and failed to sign John Salmons because JS is crazy (he accepted our offer, then reneged and signed with Chicago because "God told him to"). He purportedly tried to sign Ariza before Hedo. He signed Reggie Evans... who was promptly injured. Evans wouldn't have helped on D, except that he's a great rebounder and that's big-time important.

He traded Charlie V to free up time for Bargs, and in return got Ford. TJ worked out pretty well until our management decided that Calderon was a starter-level player (BIG mistake, worst defender in the league, very uncreative, etc, etc) when Ford got injured.

But you see a lot of quick responses to problems. There will be a trade this year, of that I have no doubt. Whether it will be the RIGHT trade, that's different. But he doesn't sit still when things go wrong (unless it's Bargnani-related).

In any case, as far as the Knicks are concerned, you're not losing because of the offense. Yes, you don't have the point guard to handle it, but your problems stem from lack of sufficient talent, not coaching.

If Jordan Hill gets going, that'll help. If/when Curry starts getting back into the rotation, that'll help. But you need better help defense, better defensive rebounding, you could stand to foul less and you need some better individual defenders a lot more than you need a different offense.

Gallinari cranking out 7 3PAs a game isn't helping you, even though he's hitting a lot of them. You don't draw fouls, you don't have a high-efficiency guy who scores in the paint (be he big man or slasher). I mean, Lee scores a lot on tip-ins and stuff and that's great, but you need an iso option. The big deal is that you're entirely too reliant on the 3, but while that's somewhat the responsibility of D'Antoni, you don't actually have many other options right now.

Again, when Curry comes back, you can plant him in the post and say "score 16+ ppg on 55%+ FG and draw a crapload of FTAs" and he will. And that will be a BIG boost if/when it happens.

So just relax and wait; the Knicks aren't bad because of their coach.

Very nice BC analysis, you should post this on the TOR board as well!

You mean the Raptors team forum? Don't touch the place, it's infectious. Too filled with wankers and idiots.

tsherkin wrote:You mean the Raptors team forum? Don't touch the place, it's infectious. Too filled with wankers and idiots.

Picking favorites are we

It's funny, I haven't monitored BC in Toronto much at all. I remember him fondly on the Suns, though. Man, the one I really miss is Jerry Colangelo.

But I do remember that at first, most of us were upset to lose BC to Toronto. It's good to hear the Toronto perspective on that - though I wonder where the Suns organization would have gone had he stayed...no Sarver...

tsherkin wrote:You mean the Raptors team forum? Don't touch the place, it's infectious. Too filled with wankers and idiots.

That may be so, but it is an entertaining read

tsherkin wrote:You mean the Raptors team forum? Don't touch the place, it's infectious. Too filled with wankers and idiots.

and good read

Please, the Raptors board is the same as any other it just is way more popular. But I do agree that this should not be posted there. Not because of the IQ of the posters on it, to the contrary, the reason this should not be posted is because those who you call idiots and wankers have already posted this argument much more intelligently a good 500 times so far this season, so there really isn't much "analysis" here to be shared.

I agree on some of your points, but you have completely missed the mark on Colangelo, and it clearly shows your bias. There is a reason for him liking Bargnani, and that by no means is the reason we may or may not lose Bosh. Also, your notion of Colangelos vision, and your ensuing criticisms are either straight up false, or completely miss the mark. He is a smarter man then you, and he takes into account factors that you clearly do not. There is nothing that he does not see that you do basketball wise, and there is a reason he is a way above average GM, and has already won an exec of the year on his own in TO.

Spartan13 wrote:Please, the Raptors board is the same as any other it just is way more popular. But I do agree that this should not be posted there. Not because of the IQ of the posters on it, to the contrary, the reason this should not be posted is because those who you call idiots and wankers have already posted this argument much more intelligently a good 500 times so far this season, so there really isn't much "analysis" here to be shared.

I agree on some of your points, but you have completely missed the mark on Colangelo, and it clearly shows your bias. There is a reason for him liking Bargnani, and that by no means is the reason we may or may not lose Bosh. Also, your notion of Colangelos vision, and your ensuing criticisms are either straight up false, or completely miss the mark. He is a smarter man then you, and he takes into account factors that you clearly do not. There is nothing that he does not see that you do basketball wise, and there is a reason he is a way above average GM, and has already won an exec of the year on his own in TO.

Please enlighten me. Even though I'm not a Raps fan, a lot of tsherkin's analysis is evident in the moves BC has made in his time as Raps GM and how they play now.

Spartan13 wrote:Please, the Raptors board is the same as any other it just is way more popular. But I do agree that this should not be posted there. Not because of the IQ of the posters on it, to the contrary, the reason this should not be posted is because those who you call idiots and wankers have already posted this argument much more intelligently a good 500 times so far this season, so there really isn't much "analysis" here to be shared.

Ooh, vitriol! I quake in my boots at your attack on my post!

Listen, the Raptors board is huge. Like the Knicks and Lakers boards. Consequently, it's filled with idiots, just from sheer volume. There are numerous posters there who are erudite and insightful. Headliner, Lockdown, TheDoctor, Rooster, there are tons of them.

But I don't find the Raptors board worth my time because it's filled with massively overreactionary fans, many of whom who are under 20 and extremely predictable. It's not a commentary on individuals, so much as what happens when a board is too popular.

I agree on some of your points, but you have completely missed the mark on Colangelo, and it clearly shows your bias. There is a reason for him liking Bargnani, and that by no means is the reason we may or may not lose Bosh. Also, your notion of Colangelos vision, and your ensuing criticisms are either straight up false, or completely miss the mark. He is a smarter man then you, and he takes into account factors that you clearly do not. There is nothing that he does not see that you do basketball wise, and there is a reason he is a way above average GM, and has already won an exec of the year on his own in TO.

You don't know me personally well enough, nor do you know Colangelo well enough, to make commentary on our relative intelligence, nor are you qualified to do such an evaluation even if you had the access. You look at him as infallible, and that's fine. You're wrong. Every GM is fallible.

In any case, you bothering to attack me personally is just silly; if you've got BC love, that's fine. He's a better GM than some... but he's done worse with Toronto than did Glen Grunwald, and if he keeps this up, he's going to leave us worse off than Grunwald did when he was fired.

Naturally, Colangelo has tons of opportunities still to see this team improve and be a big part of that.

Colangleo's a clever guy. He knows how to spot a problem and how to work to try to solve it. He hasn't done a good job managing contracts in Toronto to this point, but he's also shown previously that he can move them. Good, so maybe he'll take the worst defense in NBA history and fix it by moving some guys. One of the guys he needs to move is Bargs, who's the primary reason our defense is so bad. He's even more at fault than Calderon.

There was a clever poster who made a comment not long ago equating Bargnani to Eddy Curry.

Curry was basically a 20/7 player who was terrible on help defense but could stand up to his own man reasonably well, and scored efficiently. That's Bargs, only with a jumper instead of a power post game (and better passing).

He's a solid player. Pretty good second option. Doesn't look hot alongside Bosh, because they both need a really physical, conventional center beside them to be maximally effective. Haywood, Dampier, whoever, no one special, just someone like that. Bargs is a jumpshooter who's nearly 100% useless when his shot isn't falling, and who doesn't help well around the room because he's clueless as to how.

Some of this is explicable, given that he grew up playing SF and SG in Europe. But... he grew up playing SF and SG in Europe and is being asked to play C in the NBA, which just doesn't make sense. That's not really his fault, per se, and he's been a bit better on the defensive glass this year, which is nice, but he's got a long learning curve for anything that isn't related to scoring, and that's not especially promising.

It's possible that Colangelo's opening up Bargs' play to try and build his value as an asset so he can move him, or that he's got that as his backup plan. He's a clever guy who happens to be a good GM. But everything about all the moves that he's made since arriving in Toronto center around adding jump shooters, getting Bargs touches and minutes, and making short-term patches to our team.

Meantime, Bargnani is at the center of a lot of our problems defensively and in terms of our rebounding. He's massively below average as a positional rebounder and he's f*cking awful on the offensive glass... which would be acceptable if he was a better defensive rebounder, because then he'd basically be Dirk on the glass.

In any case, who else is the problem? It's not Bosh, he's playing out of his mind.

Is it Jose? His blase attitude is becoming an issue and he's a bad defender, but it's easier to mask a bad PG defender than it is a bad C help defender. Calderon is better suited to being a reserve, but we can solve that if Jack keeps playing well and bny just playing Jose 30 mpg instead of 34 or 35.

Is it Hedo? Doubt it. He plays decent team defense. He isn't a great rebounder, but he runs our offense pretty smoothly and he's the go-to guy in the clutch, where he performs better than anyone else on the team. Nice passer, good pick-and-roll player, makes good decisions. Bad signing, really, because his value will drop precipitously later in the deal, but he's good right now and not the issue.

Jack isn't the problem, especially of late. It certainly isn't Amir or DeRozan. Evans isn't playing, and that hurts a little, but only a little, because we've had good rotational play out of Rasho and Amir.

Wright and Weems are end-of-rotation players, you can't look at them as issues. Wright is even defending pretty well and Weems looks pretty decent on O. We have fantastic O, really. A little over-reliant on jumpers and that's a problem at times, but it's far from our main problem. We're a little over-reliant on Bosh at times, but that's also OK, because it hasn't been a huge issue to this point.

So what else? We keep coming back to rebounding and defense, and our C is a prime candidate for being The Reason we are an epic-fail defense. Right there, you look at the coach too, because Triano isn't a very good coach, but he isn't making $10M+ on the life of his contract and playing 30+ mpg, now is he?

If Bosh leaves, it'll be because our team is running in place, maybe taking steps backwards, and part of that is the result of overemphasizing Andrea Bargnani in our team. Bargs needs to be more like a 25 mpg player than a 33 mpg player at this point, given his massive deficiency on D. Or, if he's to play minutes, he needs to be playing on a team that has a real defensive center, pushing Bargs to the 4, and then one that has better defenders and a more coherent defensive scheme.

Honestly, at this point, Bargnani isn't playing that much better than Matt Bonner. The Red Rocket isn't getting as many touches, but he's a way better rebounder, defender and hustle player, and his entire offensive game is spot-up jump shooting... and the pump fake to get defenders rushing out at him so he can get under the arc for a closer look.

That's basically Bargs' game, sans the post game Bargs goes to two or three times a game. It's really not a big deal to switch the two of those players at this point.

In any case, you'll think what you want to think.

We're 4 years into BC's time as the Raptors' GM. We won 27 games the year before he got here, the 47, 41, 33, and we're on pace for 31 this year.

You can look to injuries and what-not, but ultimately, the Raptors area basically regressing, and certainly not on track to look like anything like a team that occasionally competes to get blown out of the 7th or 8th seed. That's not something special or above average, that's basically what we've managed over the course of our existence as a franchise.

Colangelo came in with a vision. He came in believing an offense-first team could win a lot of games... and while that's true, he's neglected defense by treating it as an afterthought. He's tried to patch holes to make a fundamentally flawed team into a competitive roster.

In any case, I've said my piece. You clearly have an issue, and that's fine. You need to work on the way you present your argument, because ad hominem attacks are symptomatic of the exact type of poster I choose to avoid in my abstinence from posting on the Raptors board.

Thank you, then, for highlighting my point. I couldn't have done so more effectively myself.

Tserkin, who was it that started with the personal attacks first exactly? You call the Raptors board full of wankers and idiots and claim it is not worth your time so therefore your post is not worthing posting on there. I am a frequent poster on the Raptors board, and I take offense to that. For you to now accuse me of personal attacks against you is very hypocritical, and for you to accuse the raptors board of being to stupid to logically debate your post is completely baseless because your points have already been debated endlessly on there. Furthermore, I find it hilarious that you feel you have the right to point out that I don't know you or Colangelo personally therefore I cannot make intelligence judgements, yet you feel it is entirely logical for you to make claims on what he did or did not learn from his experience in Phoenix. Please don't say I proved your point, when you are a much better example of a "wanker" or "idiot" poster, and your rebuttal of further mockery is nothing but more evidence to my point about you.

The only reason I am even bringing this up, is because you are apparently a global mod, and posters have been warned for saying far less inflammatory things then what you just said. I don't see why you feel you are above the rules. Feel free to breakup my post and respond with further mockery instead of actually apologizing for your inflammatory comments, that will definitely separate you form the "wankers and "idiots" on the Raptors board.

Spartan13 wrote:Tserkin, who was it that started with the personal attacks first exactly? You call the Raptors board full of wankers and idiots and claim it is not worth your time so therefore your post is not worthing posting on there. I am a frequent poster on the Raptors board, and I take offense to that. For you to now accuse me of personal attacks against you is very hypocritical, and for you to accuse the raptors board of being to stupid to logically debate your post is completely baseless because your points have already been debated endlessly on there.

[ ] understands what a PERSONAL attack is

Spartan13 wrote:Furthermore, I find it hilarious that you feel you have the right to point out that I don't know you or Colangelo personally therefore I cannot make intelligence judgements, yet you feel it is entirely logical for you to make claims on what he did or did not learn from his experience in Phoenix. Please don't say I proved your point, when you are a much better example of a "wanker" or "idiot" poster, and your rebuttal of further mockery is nothing but more evidence to my point about you.

[x] good example of a personal attack

Spartan13 wrote:The only reason I am even bringing this up, is because you are apparently a global mod, and posters have been warned for saying far less inflammatory things then what you just said. I don't see why you feel you are above the rules. Feel free to breakup my post and respond with further mockery instead of actually apologizing for your inflammatory comments, that will definitely separate you form the "wankers and "idiots" on the Raptors board.

[x] excellent example of changing the subject to deflect criticism

It's a hugeeee stretch to call a criticism of the Raptors board in general a "personal attack", and it's especially fallacious to then use that as a premise to rant about how tsherkin feels he is "above the law."

lilfishi22 wrote:

Spartan13 wrote:Please, the Raptors board is the same as any other it just is way more popular. But I do agree that this should not be posted there. Not because of the IQ of the posters on it, to the contrary, the reason this should not be posted is because those who you call idiots and wankers have already posted this argument much more intelligently a good 500 times so far this season, so there really isn't much "analysis" here to be shared.

I agree on some of your points, but you have completely missed the mark on Colangelo, and it clearly shows your bias. There is a reason for him liking Bargnani, and that by no means is the reason we may or may not lose Bosh. Also, your notion of Colangelos vision, and your ensuing criticisms are either straight up false, or completely miss the mark. He is a smarter man then you, and he takes into account factors that you clearly do not. There is nothing that he does not see that you do basketball wise, and there is a reason he is a way above average GM, and has already won an exec of the year on his own in TO.

Please enlighten me. Even though I'm not a Raps fan, a lot of tsherkin's analysis is evident in the moves BC has made in his time as Raps GM and how they play now.

tserkins 2 points about BC are completely misleading or just plain baseless.

His first point that alleges BC has a visions "of a jump-shooting team that scores a lot of points without a dominant defense as being capable of winning basketball games at an elite level" is utter nonsense.

BC put together a completely different team under his vision in Phoenix, that did win at an elite level, and in Toronto BC has tried or did make moves for JO, Marion, Ariza, TJ Ford, Jack, Rasho, Garbo, Evans, Johnson, Moon, Derozan, etc etc, that do not fit that mold at all, so clearly BC does have some precedent athleticism and defense. Its just that this current crop of raptors is very offensive minded, but that is more due to the circumstances BC is in, then his crazy in your face vision Tserkin is leading you to believe.

BC's "hard-on" against conventional basketball in Toronto is rooted in far more then tserkins simplistic explanation. It is rooted in business decisions, and trying to see the way of the future in basketball and capitalizing on it. The Raptors have had a lot of European "jump shooting" players for several reasons. First off, Euros are more likely to play in Toronto because they don't have hangups about Canada like many Americans do. Second, there was good talent in Europe that other GM's were failing to capitalize on. BC did capitalize on it, particularly his first year signing Garbo and Parker, and his ability to see the rise of Euro league talent is what mainly led to one of the greatest single season turnarounds in NBA history. Business wise, having intl players absolutely helps market the Raptors in an intl city such as Toronto, and helps you get exposure in Europe, and BC and MLSE are clearly conscious of that. It also makes business sense to have an exciting team offensively, because that is what entertains fans. As an example, San Antonio's finals ratings were pitiful, while PHX got on more national TV games then just about anyone during the SSOL prime. Again, BC is concsious of that as a business man, and strives to put together an entertaining product on the court. This is also the reason why BC is against rebuilding, because it kills your bottom line for a few years, and you don't even have a great chance of winning a title out of that. Instead of choosing to build through the draft (which he also has one of the best draft records in NBA history, not bad for an "average" GM), BC likes to re-tool on the fly, because again you guessed it, it makes business sense. Just ask MLSE, they have been running the Maple Leafs that way for decades.

Tserkins second point about Bargnani is simply just not true. BC had Sam Mitchell coach the Raptors, and Bargnani, on a very short leash for 2 and 1/4 seasons without making a move. BC also in his third year traded for JO, a risk/reward trade that did not pan out for a variety of reasons, but at the least it showed that BC was more then willing to get a defensive minded C and build around him over Bargnani. The problem with that, and the reason why BC lobbied for Bargnani to play more, has nothing to do with his "man-love" for him, it has to do with developing a very good asset. Bargs had a breakout year in 08, so much so that they tried playing him at sf just to give him PT. It became evident though that Bargs deserved to start, and it also became evident that Bargs next to Bosh was not definitevly better/worse then a good defensive C in JO next to Bosh. However, having Bargs start at C enabled him to develop as a player, of which even the ESPN goons have admitted he has. It also conveniently made Bargnani a huge asset, where as before he was considered a borderline bust and had little to no trade value. For some reason, tserkin thinks BC wanting to develop a player from no-asset to all-star calibur 23 year old on a very reasonable contract "ruined" our team.

As for the Argument for Bargs making Bosh leave? Again, BC brought in JO and it didnt help all that much. So this off season, BC brought in Turk and Jack on long term contracts because he wanted to keep Bosh. Did it result in a very soft core? Yes it did. But remember, BC's "vision" included trying to get Ariza, and im fairly confident it included trying to keep Marion here as well, before he ever tried to get Turk. Turk also enabled us to sign Jack, Bosh's friend. These off season moves that resulted in us getting long term contracts and having a **** defensive core, were a direct result of us trying to keep Bosh. We got Turk because it was better then not getting Turk and Jack, since doing nothing and not signing Marion, would have all but guaranteed Bosh leaving. All that has nothing to do for or against Bargnani. If anything, Bargnani is insurance if Bosh leaves, trading him now or even in the offseason would be assinine. You could even argue that going forward Bargnani @10 mill > Bosh @ 20 Mill. Tserkin seems to think that developing an asset and keeping him around in case Bosh leaves = the reason Bosh will leave, and that makes no sense.

the_warden wrote:

Spartan13 wrote:Tserkin, who was it that started with the personal attacks first exactly? You call the Raptors board full of wankers and idiots and claim it is not worth your time so therefore your post is not worthing posting on there. I am a frequent poster on the Raptors board, and I take offense to that. For you to now accuse me of personal attacks against you is very hypocritical, and for you to accuse the raptors board of being to stupid to logically debate your post is completely baseless because your points have already been debated endlessly on there.

[ ] understands what a PERSONAL attack is

Spartan13 wrote:Furthermore, I find it hilarious that you feel you have the right to point out that I don't know you or Colangelo personally therefore I cannot make intelligence judgements, yet you feel it is entirely logical for you to make claims on what he did or did not learn from his experience in Phoenix. Please don't say I proved your point, when you are a much better example of a "wanker" or "idiot" poster, and your rebuttal of further mockery is nothing but more evidence to my point about you.

[x] good example of a personal attack

Spartan13 wrote:The only reason I am even bringing this up, is because you are apparently a global mod, and posters have been warned for saying far less inflammatory things then what you just said. I don't see why you feel you are above the rules. Feel free to breakup my post and respond with further mockery instead of actually apologizing for your inflammatory comments, that will definitely separate you form the "wankers and "idiots" on the Raptors board.

[x] excellent example of changing the subject to deflect criticism

It's a hugeeee stretch to call a criticism of the Raptors board in general a "personal attack", and it's especially fallacious to then use that as a premise to rant about how tsherkin feels he is "above the law."

I don't find it a stretch at all. Those are personality traits, and have nothing to do with basketball discussion. My interactions on this board have only been about basketball, those are personal attacks directed at someone. Whether they are directed at a single person or people in general, it is still an attack meant to bait and demean someone, (see: person) and that goes against the terms of use. I am a frequent poster on the raptors board, and I am also under 20 as tserkin has elaborated to imply thats who he was directing his comments to, so it is not unreasonable for me to assert that he is talking about me at all. If I say your house sucks, and its full of wankers and idiots, and then go on to say that I am talking about the people who look exactly like you and you are a good example of proof, I find that hard not to believe you would not consider it a personal attack.

It is also interesting to point out, that the "personal attack" tserkin took issue with, was me saying in the context of basketball, BC is smarter that him, and there is no lesson that you learned from being a PHX fan that BC did not learn from actually running the team. That is a little different then implying I am a wanker and an idiot.

Also, Pointing out the hypocrisy of a mod going against the terms of use, is not deflecting criticism, especially when I just addressed his criticism in the previous sentences. It is merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the mod.

Also see what quotations mean in that context, and you will see that is a terrible example of a personal attack. I was using Tserkins words, not mine, and saying his mockery of me is far more indicative of the posters on the Raptors board then anything I am saying, so maybe he shouldnt go around insulting them.

This is like a flame war between two novelists

Well I may write long posts, but atleast I don't break up fellow posters comments and try to answer them out of context.

Red Vines wrote:Knicks fan here - you guys probably know more about these two guys better than Toronto & NY fans. Both teams are struggling and the biggest weakness on both teams is defense. So, I'm wondering how close are their basketball philosophies? Should fans be worried about defense or will it mostly be a non-issue once you get the right players? I like Mike D personally, but I don't think we're winning with his system...

Colangelo doesn't like players who play defense and D'antoni doesn't teach defense, that about sums it up...

Oh I can't wait for the next chapter.