The Ringer: Raptors should consider blowing it up

[dkb33]

It's a solid article and does a pretty good job of evaluating our situation. No final decisions should be made until we see this group with Kyle of course. If the defensive gains are real and sustained with Kyle in the lineup - then maybe we have a bit of puncher's chance to win the East and you try to run this back again next year. However, if Kyle gets back and is healthy and playing well and we still get vaporized by Cleveland in the playoffs - or worse still bounced by someone else - then getting as many guys signed with the purpose of flipping them for youth and picks probably should be the path forward.

I agree with signing as many guys as possible and flipping them in the future if things start to look like they are going south. The problem is I don't even want to start that conversation right now. The roster is stacked and is pretty much the best you can have if you do not have a true Superstar.

Starters:

Lowry
DeRozan
Tucker
Ibaka
Valančiūnas

Veteran Role Players:

Joseph
Carroll
Patterson

Development Players:

Van Vleet
Wright
Powell
Caboclo
Siakam
Nogueira
Poeltl

... All of the lean years I lived threw as a Raptors fan I could have never dreamed of a roster like this. Watching the likes of Kevin O'Neill & Jay Triano coach mostly scrub rosters under scrub GMs like Rob Babcock & Brian Colangelo made me want to tear my hair out. I trust Masai Ujiri and the success of being 2 wins away from the finals would have seemed impossible before he took over.

[LastNameEver]

The Raptors are essentially delaying the inevitable until the last few seasons of Lowry's contract. Compete for a few more years to get playoff revenue and then start the rebuild process.

But even then, if he ages bad and falls off a cliff production wise then they won't be able to trade him until his contract is expiring.

[Double Helix]

By the way, just for fun, may I suggest this:

Bill Simmons should just blow it up now and retire. He'll never have the influence on the sport he once had. He's lost the reach of ESPN to a new generation. He's being blasted on Twitter now for irrelevance once he lost his HBO show. Digital Media publishing houses are expensive to run without click bait, and face constant challenges for clicks from other places, and without him I'm not sure the Ringer has much on offer that's truly unique.

[Senbonzakura]

I don't even disagree with the writer that they should consider rebuilding, but the anti-demar thing by some stats guys seems to be at least partially motivated by the fact that any success he has invalidates the work they have put into building their models.

Oh this definitely has a LOT to do with it and I'm a big stats guy myself. He's the antithesis in their minds to everything advanced stats related, but the reality is that isn't even true. The first thing that is really anti-advanced stats about DeMar is the high volume of mid-range jumpshots he takes. Over half of DeMar's shots come from 10-23 feet, which is effectively the worst shot to take in basketball. However what's often ignored about this is that it's also the shot that defenses are going to give up the most, and has less variation in efficiency from game to game than three point shooting.

The other thing stats guys don't like about DeMar is that he tends to suck in impact stats (RPM, VORP, etc), but does well in production stats (win shares, PER, etc). This is because many of them have a fundamental misunderstanding of what types of star players there are in the NBA. There are the top tier guys who are both high impact and high production. These are the top 10-15 players in the league (Lowry when healthy is part of this group). However in many cases these players are accompanied by or paired with someone who is still a star, but high production but not high impact. There are several of these guys and they're all very good players (DeMar DeRozan, Kyrie Irving, Klay Thompson, Lamarcus Aldridge etc). These players usually act as secondary creators for their teams and are highly effective usage sinks. Then you also have low production, high impact players who are typically your "star" role players, who don't have large roles but are highly effective at what they do and impact the game on both ends.

Now while the ideal would be to have 2 or 3 from the first category (high impact, high production) and surround them with high level role players. That's not always possible. Many championship teams, including the Cavs last year, had one from the first category paired with someone from the second.

And there are some things DeMar does that are favorable to advanced stats. For one he does get to the free throw line a lot (best shot in basketball, an 80% FT shooter gets ~1.6 ppp from a trip to the line, to get that from two pointers you need to shoot 80% from the field and from three pointers you need to shoot a bit over 50%). Also he's very effective as a pick and roll ball handler which creates shooting opportunities for other players in a spread P&R offense. He also can handle a high usage with a very low turnover rate, meaning he is effective to use when you want to dictate the pace of the game.

[Ell Curry]

1. You don't blow up the team when you lead a conference in point differential. You just can't.

2. We could theoretically make a DeRozan trade and improve if we got a similar or slight better level of player who is a better defender and 3pt shooter in the deal, in exchange for some team getting the security of a star for the next 4 years, like if we traded DeRozan for Jimmy Butler or Paul George (if he immediately agreed to resign, which it sounds like he would not). Even something like DeRozan for Harrison Barnes and we swap 1st rounders to move up 10 spots or so might improve us in that we'd be better defensively and have more spacing, even if crunch time scoring would be an even bigger issue.

Or a godfather offer for a superstar like DeRozan, 2017 1st rounder, Siakam and Wright to the Pelicans, Valanciaunas and to team X and Team X offers assets to the Pelicans for Valanciaunas and we get Anthony Davis.

3. But the best option is just to bring back Lowry, Ibaka and Tucker and either sign Patterson if the owners will pay a huge tax for a couple years, or let Patterson go (I hate to do this with how well we've played over the years with him on the court) sign a big deal elsewhere and hope Siakam can hit enough 3s to be a useful backup 4, or embrace going a bit smaller and trade Valanciaunas for a wing or combo forward, with Ibaka, Poeltl and Bebe manning the 5.

Compete for the next 2 years, then if we want to trade Lowry we can probably still get a bit of a return or at least trade him without attaching much, since his 3pt shooting and decent defensive play should make him an okay candidate to transition into a nice 4th or 5th starter type as he ages, unlike a Rondo or Rose style guy who needs the ball and no longer has the athleticism to draw free throws. We could also then trade Ibaka, who would be of a similar use as a 4th or 5th starter for a contender with his 3 and D game, DeRozan to a team needing a volume scorer to make the playoffs and sell tickets or a team with great 3 and D guys but nobody to actually score and draw doubles (could see this happening as more and more teams embrace analytics and don't want prime Monta Ellis types who DeRozan can't be successfully paired with, think of Detroit if they sour on Reggie Jackson and need someone to score and run the P+R with Drummond), Patterson or Tucker can be dealt to become a team's 6th man for a late 1st or similar return like we saw Lou Will and Bogdanovic get (again they have solid 3 and D credentials) and Carroll's deal allowed to expire.

So, compete for the next 3-4 playoffs (including the upcoming one) and then sell off what we can and build around our draft picks with Wright, Powell, Poeltl, the 2017 and maybe (if not used in a deadline deal) 2018 1sts to make the team watchable enough while we hopefully reload with picks from selling off every veteran. Or trade them too and Embrace the Process (TM), but I don't see why we can't eat most of our cake and then sell it off right before it gets moldy for a nutritious if not spectacular salad of a not completely tank, retain some young assets and hope to strike goal in the mid to late lottery rebuild. You risk becoming an Orlando or Sacramento that way, but I don't think the league is so weak that we couldn't tank while retaining some decent young talent, like the Knicks have done with Porzingis and Melo this year or the Suns with Bledsoe. As long as you play a bunch of youth, you'll suck even if you have some solid talent.

[Ell Curry]

I don't even disagree with the writer that they should consider rebuilding, but the anti-demar thing by some stats guys seems to be at least partially motivated by the fact that any success he has invalidates the work they have put into building their models.

There are the top tier guys who are both high impact and high production. These are the top 10-15 players in the league (Lowry when healthy is part of this group). However in many cases these players are accompanied by or paired with someone who is still a star, but high production but not high impact. There are several of these guys and they're all very good players (DeMar DeRozan, Kyrie Irving, Klay Thompson, Lamarcus Aldridge etc). These players usually act as secondary creators for their teams and are highly effective usage sinks. Then you also have low production, high impact players who are typically your "star" role players, who don't have large roles but are highly effective at what they do and impact the game on both ends..

3 and D, though. The Warriors play 4 on 4 with tons of spacing since you can't leave Thompson for a second, and he guards very well. DeRozan does neither.

I do think you can win a title with a ballhandler like DeRozan who isn't crazily efficient but you need a top 5 D for sure and so we get back to the DeRozan + Valanciaunas is just a difficult combination from a spacing and defense proposition. If we wanted to give DeRozan a chance to do what Iverson did and make the finals, we need a Mutombo. Derrick Rose had Noah during his run, too. If we could turn Valanciaunas into the next Rudy Gobert, DeAndre Jordan, Draymond or similarly impactful defensive 5 via a trade, then I think we could legitimately compete for a few titles despite DeRozan's imperfect nature. Goddamn was picking Bruno over Capela a **** mistake.

[Jonn]

Well if we lose in the first round a blowup actually makes some sense. But still not clicking the article.

[No-Man]

The only thing good about the ringer when it comes to basketball is the eventual Johnathan Tjarks game/players breakdown, rest of it is trash.

O'Connor had a couple pieces regarding shooting mechanics that were interesting, mainly due to the content coming from shooting doctors or NBA personnel, but his own ones aren't that interested to me, and his takes on the Draft are bad.

I'd love to get Tjarks doing draft stuff for them by himself, but they seem to have given O'Connor the bigger role for w/e reason.

[mrdressup]

Dunc'd On podcast didn't even mention us as a top 4 team in the Eastern conference in 2018-19. I Don't know what these people are smoking but last year was not our peak, despite the high win number. This team is much better now. Next year we could be at our most dangerous as far as threatening to go to the finals is concerned. Assuming we resign KL, I don't see us being out of the running for Eastern crown for another 2 or 3 years. Way too many people assume that high picks and young talent translate into immediate success in this league. It takes a few years before that happens. I wouldn't blow anything up now, we' re just arriving to the promised land. There's literally nothing that ever says we' ll be this good again in the next 2 decades.

Unless everyone wants out of Toronto, we' d be wise to keep our best assets for more success.

[VanWest82]

Well, I think Simmons is really good when he's with a guy like that - his podcasts with Lowe were always really good because you'd have someone who could argue the hot takes. Part of the problem now is that Simmons is their boss, so when he's wrong, he doesn't really get called out by someone on his staff...

But again, the site is way better now than it was 6 months ago.

I completely agree with this. His NBA writers (Tjarks, O'Connor, et al.) either don't have the backbone, or just have too similar styles/views. I actually think the latter is the most likely culptrit, and Bill often recognizes it when he has people on. It's a mistake he didn't make as often with Grantland hires. You're always going to WANT to hire the person you get along with, share similar views with all else being equal, but when it comes to ensuring content diversity for your website that can be counter productive.

The best hire The Ringer has made so far is Michael Lombardi. He has no issues with telling Bill what's what on his podcast and is a surprisingly effective writer. They just need a guy like that covering MLB and NBA and they'll be set.

[tecumseh18]

I disagree with the idea of punting a season purely because an opponent seems invincible. We’ve already seen that the Warriors and Cavaliers are vulnerable. But team-building must be done with an eye toward sustainability, not hope. If Toronto’s 2017–18 season will be more of the same, with even less financial and asset flexibility to make impact additions, then the best future for the Raptors will come in the form of a teardown.

So this is the crux of the article. But I think there are any number of counter-examples showing that being capped out doesn't mean you can't improve, we've already seen this GM do it this very season. The good franchises are the ones that manage to scout diamonds in the rough drafting late, develop players well, and are able to spot undervalued players on other rosters. That is the only way to have long term success. Drafting blue chippers is way less important than that, there are tons of terrible franchises who draft great players and never do anything.

Houston's model of staying good, raising the value of peripheral players and not signing bad long term deals so you're ready when a great player becomes available is way better than just throwing games for 5 years and hoping you draft Kobe & Shaq.

I "think" Masai has an eye for sussing out undervalued talent, and the success of the 905 may be indicative of that. It's been tough for him not so much because of we're capped out, but roster constraints. We haven't had any spots, and with Kyle out we're not going to waive Fred. There are some intriguing prospects on the 905, and I hope the extra two roster spots next season allows us to keep them.


These types of articles especially in US media are interesting and useful (although I do question the timing - are they trying to mess with our chemistry on the eve of the playoffs to help their precious snowflake Celtics?). Re-signing a 31-year-old Lowry to a huge contract is a major economic decision that no organization, no matter how large and profitable, can take lightly. The point that athletic PGs (i.e. not Stockton or Nash) historically tend to decline precipitously after age 32 is well-taken. How much is Jose at 36 helping the Hawks right now? Would you as a Hawk fan like to be paying him >$30 mill this season?

But, Raptors don't end up with players of Kyle's quality very often. T-Mac, Vince, Bosh. That's it - a short list. If the delayed S&T is a option next season, then that's all the more reason to sign Lowry now to contract that is potentially tradeable and preserve the asset. But with the glut of quality PGs in the league, especially after this years' draft, I'm not sure how tradeable a $30 mill contract will be.

If Lowry comes back healthy, the playoffs should make it all clear. I'd say there are additional tiers than the author cites - Warriors (with Durant) on top; Warriors without Durant, Cavs, Spurs, Rockets and ... maybe ... the Raptors with healthy Lowry, defence-minded DeMar, along with Serge and PJ. We just don't how good this team is yet.

The Spurs kept bringing back their guys, but not for full value. They all took a discount to play for a superbly-managed winner. But as DH points out, this is Lowry's last chance for the big payday. He wants to get his David Price-sized contract. Given the market his age and injury history, he may end up more in Edwin's situation. Not quite worth what he thought.

[vaff87]

I don't understand why someone would write this article, right now. It just seems like trolling.

[DonMega]

Not clicking that garbage and giving them satisfaction in the view count department. **** them. Never even heard of the site before.

[hankscorpioLA]

Here is the author's thesis:

"Maybe their midseason reinforcements get them over the hump, but if they don’t, the fabric of the team needs addressing."

I don't see how that is a controversial statement. If the Raptors falter in the playoffs, changes will need to be made. Moreover, I am not sure why the writer believes it requires a doctoral thesis to defend.

Midway through the article we have this gem...

"I know what you’re thinking: It’s weird to speculate about whether a conference power should trade one or both of its franchise cornerstones during the home stretch of a fourth-consecutive successful season. But that’s the strange reality of the NBA. If a general manager’s goal is to win titles and not just accumulate regular-season wins and kinda-sorta-maybe have a chance in the playoffs, then they have to constantly question their roster, no matter how good things are in the moment."

Here he is attempting to justify his article...but the justification makes no sense. It IS weird to speculate about these items at this time because we happen to be in one of the few windows where there is NOTHING to do about it. Maybe an article like this makes sense before the trade deadline...but really its for after the playoffs. Its even weirder because Masai Ujiri just made a major move that shows he IS constantly questioning the roster...and it was a move that was specifically intended to try to get the Raptors over the hump.

Of course, after the season there will be bigger publications making similar points and garnering bigger clicks...so I guess he figured he had better get in while the getting was good. And apparently, despite everyone questioning how the Raptors would survive without Lowry a month ago, today the fashionable argument seems to be that the Raptors success without Lowry has suddenly made him expendable.

[Vlade Divac]

1. You don't blow up the team when you lead a conference in point differential. You just can't.

2. We could theoretically make a DeRozan trade and improve if we got a similar or slight better level of player who is a better defender and 3pt shooter in the deal, in exchange for some team getting the security of a star for the next 4 years, like if we traded DeRozan for Jimmy Butler or Paul George (if he immediately agreed to resign, which it sounds like he would not). Even something like DeRozan for Harrison Barnes and we swap 1st rounders to move up 10 spots or so might improve us in that we'd be better defensively and have more spacing, even if crunch time scoring would be an even bigger issue.

DD has a career year. His last stretch of 10 games is very impressive overall. Still I agree that we have to trade him and get something of value for him. But the reason I am writing this is these proposed trades. I am pretty sure if you offer Chicago, Indiana and Dallas these trades they would openly laugh in your face. I guarantee if you offer DD for Barnes (without picks swap) you would get the same answer. Should we ask ourselves why is that? What they don't see in DD, or what we don't see in his game and others see.

[BoyzNTheHood]

Boston based sports writing is as bad as Toronto. They're extremely biased and don't produce much substance. Their entire narrative has always been based on a Boston should always be at the top and there's no reason anyone else deserves anything thought process. After the Patriots and Red Sox started winning around the early 2000's the Boston trolls came out in full force.

[gerrit4]

Well, I think Simmons is really good when he's with a guy like that - his podcasts with Lowe were always really good because you'd have someone who could argue the hot takes. Part of the problem now is that Simmons is their boss, so when he's wrong, he doesn't really get called out by someone on his staff...

But again, the site is way better now than it was 6 months ago.

I completely agree with this. His NBA writers (Tjarks, O'Connor, et al.) either don't have the backbone, or just have too similar styles/views. I actually think the latter is the most likely culptrit, and Bill often recognizes it when he has people on. It's a mistake he didn't make as often with Grantland hires. You're always going to WANT to hire the person you get along with, share similar views with all else being equal, but when it comes to ensuring content diversity for your website that can be counter productive.

The best hire The Ringer has made so far is Michael Lombardi. He has no issues with telling Bill what's what on his podcast and is a surprisingly effective writer. They just need a guy like that covering MLB and NBA and they'll be set.

Yeah - not to beat a dead horse, but for whatever reason, it makes me cringe whenever I hear anyone on the ringer say "Are we sure so & so is good?"

I've really enjoyed Mark Titus' March Madness coverage too. He's funny, and as a guy who played in the NCAA (as a benchwarmer), he's got interesting insight.

It's a good site, and I think there's a lot of potential there. I'm actually a little surprised at the Raptor column, when the quality has been pretty good lately.

[timdunkit]

There is quite a history of teams blowing it up too early and then landing in mediocrity for a very long time.

It's true that without a few lucky breaks, this team will likely never taste the finals. But that doesn't mean we should blow it up. There is a great chance here to sustain a 50+ win team for the next 2-4 years, enjoy a good product and build some history.

For many years, there were clamours for the Spurs to start rebuilding and trade away TP/Manu/TD. But they likely wouldn't have won their 2014 ring if they had done that. Dallas doesn't win in 2011 if they blow it up & traded Dirk after their 67 win team failed to do anything significant and were mediocre for the next few years. Detroit reached ECF after ECF, after their 2004 championship win, and then decided to retool/rebuild and have been trying to get back ever since. Don't you think their fans would have liked 2 more years of competing at a high level before starting over again? Should the Rockets trade James Harden and start rebuilding/tanking right now because they aren't any closer to championship team then we are?

Timing is really important in the NBA. We are unfortunate that we are stuck in the ECF while Lebron James has been in his prime (and continues to be in his prime). But this mentality that if you aren't a real contender (and there is only 3 in the league right now), then you have to tank or else you are wasting your time is really perplexing. There is this assumption that the grass is greener when you are tanking because you have a chance at a talent that could bring you to that championship status. That chance is worth it to some fans more than having a high great team that is just not good enough. For some reason, fans are more comfortable with absolutely trash basketball because they feel the rules are in their benefit then watching good basketball (because the rules don't really help you get over that hump). Despite there being countless evidence that teams have struggled to build a decent team despite multiple years in the lottery.

It's true we don't have the generational talent that the Spurs had to win a championship or give our teams potential to win one. We also don't have a championship ring like Detroit, so that we can sustain some belief in our core for a foreseeable future. But we have several players entering into their primes that have proven to be a winning product. Lowry/DeMar/JV/Ibaka should be a really good team for the next few years. I'd rather we ride out their primes and then start rebuilding once that's over.

I look at a team like Indiana, who should still be competing for a ring or being a great team, but had their team break up early because Hibbert couldn't keep himself together and Lance's ego got too big. Now their team is stuck being mediocre (not even pretender status) with a star player who is going to leave. The grass isn't always green on the other side, whether that's retooling or rebuilding from something that is proven.

What's more important is whether you have someone in charge who understands timing and asset management. Masai seems to get that and when it's time, I trust him to blow it up. We aren't Chicago or NY, holding onto aging stars and old players that have not proven to be a winning team. Our path is similar to that of the Grizzlies, always a great team but never good enough to win. And it confuses me that so many fans can't accept or enjoy that.

[mieshpal]

Consider rebuilding lol smh and hope for a lowry or derozan being drafted.

Sent from my D6603 using RealGM mobile app

[Arman_tanzarian]

The article isn't bad. The title is click-bait. However the article has substance. It just goes over multiple scenarios Masai will be faced with. It doesn't suggest we have to blow it up like that trash Sportsnet article.