Indiana-Detroit barometer

[Santoki]

Do the Raptors become an upper echelon team in the East in the next few years...or do they become like Indiana, a team that had high hopes because they had a franchise player in JO, and a solid supporting cast. I suppose there are too many variables at this time to really determine the answer, but my gut has them leaning towards the latter. Thoughts?

[Rasheeed!!!]

well Indiana was a contender, but then Ron Artest happened.

[Illuminati]

We don't have a Ron Artest type player, you can't make the comparison. They were a better defensive team while we are a better offensive team.

Odd comparison.

[The Letter V]

We don't have a Ron Artest type player, you can't make the comparison. They were a better defensive team while we are a better offensive team.

Odd comparison.

I think the comparison is more about 2 teams that were neck and neck, and one improved to become perenial contenders, while the other peaked, and regressed from there on.

Ron Artest was part of the problem for sure, but so was management. The difference is pretty clear actually; Detroit went out and got Rasheed without having to give up their core...Indy didn't really do anything as significant.

The Raptors aren't really at that stage yet, where you need to add another player for your team to improve. We still have a lot of internal improvement left from our team, especially core players. I think it's going to be atleast a year or two until it would be necessary to add another significant talent. It's all about timing though, if we could grab a major piece that suits our needs from a team willing to sell low, then that would be the perfect time to make a significant move like that.

[Cassius]

The Pacers still probably would have won that series (six games) had it not been for all of the injuries they suffered that year. JO and Tinsley weren't anywhere near 100%.

That Pistons team gets a bit overrated. The Nets with an injured Kidd had them down 3-2 in the round before that.