Bill Simmons RIPS the Raptors roster and salaries. (UPDATE Zach Lowe & Rob Mahoney go in on Raptors)

[lobosloboslobos]

Bill "If they're stupid they'll take Dwight Howard" Simmons

Bill "The crowds in Memphis suck because of MLK's assassination" Simmons

Bill "I thought [the trade that landed the Celtics the Js and Marcus Smart] was pennies on the dollar for the Celtics" Simmons

Bill "The Warriors are not a dynasty" Simmons

Bill "I hated the Rudy Gobert trade more for Minnesota than any trade for the last 30 years that I’ve hated for a team" Simmons

Bill "I would take Gabe Vincent over Kyrie" Simmons

Bill Simmons is white Kendrick Perkins. Outrageous soundbites that, however entertaining one may find them as a personality, is altogether poison for actual discourse in the sport and is f*cking terrible when it comes to the commentary potion of the job.

Maybe one day AI will be able to summarize our worse hot takes here on real GM and hopefully give us a bit of humility.

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

[SpiderMunn]

I've listened to him this week a couple times, he likes/enjoys watching the Raptors and how we have been playing. He also said that he has finally bought stock in Scottie Barnes, and praised him.

[mdenny]

Maybe one day AI will be able to summarize our worse hot takes here on real GM and hopefully give us a bit of humility.

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

You sir....are always reasonable and sensible. Daps.

I read somewhere that Bill was the guy who started the 30 for 30 series? It was a little vague tho. If true....he deserves enough goodwill to look past his raptor take.

[xAIRNESSx]

Read on Twitter

[MoneyBall]

Maybe one day AI will be able to summarize our worse hot takes here on real GM and hopefully give us a bit of humility.

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

And he never takes himself too seriously either. In just about every episode he'll say something like "I really thought X was gonna happen because of Y, but it turns out I was completely wrong because Z happened instead."

I don't know why there are people who get vitriolic reactions out of BS... he's like a guy at the bar with his buddies talking about basketball.

[OakleyDokely]

I like Bill, he's entertaining both in sports and entertainment, but the Ringers love for Evan Mobley needs to be studied.

[Tha Cynic]

It is not that I think this roster is fantastic but I think these podcasters, even the ones I generally respect are more and more lazy with their analysis and a general group think seems to take over across podcasts. Yes, the team is expensive and the starting lineup is pretty ill fitting. But they are also one of the youngest teams in the league and have all their picks going forward. To me it isn’t a bottom 5 situation in the league to talk about constantly

I think a lot of analysts come at things not from a pure talent perspective, but how much room does a team have to grow.

You can argue that Toronto is young and has its picks, but it is playing a weird game of assembling talent without a ton of regard for fit in a functional NBA offense, and then kind of capping itself to that team with little way to improve.

To guys like Zach Lowe the middle is the worst place to be. You have a team which added Ingram, and a healthy roster is worth about 42 wins. Great, but how much more can that team develop into a contender? The worst part is it is hard to tank out with that expensive a roster, and now we are finding it hard to move bigger salaries. I don't know if Toronto is bottom-five overall, but from a flexibility standpoint it isn't great.

To me this is reminding me of the Chicago Bulls, but at least the Bulls have a crazy fun offense with Coby White and Josh Giddy. I have a feeling Toronto's offense might be an eyesore with Barnes/Barrett/Ingram tripping over each other.

It is not so much the argument then the uniformity of argument that I find annoying. I can totally understand the perspective. But I have heard it repeated by basically everyone. Why is that? Is it that this uniform opinion on basically every team has been super accurate in assessing the season to come in recent years? I have actually found the hit rate of the general media has been shockingly predictive of what won't happen in recent years except in the case of the Westbrook trade to the Lakers being a disaster. They hit that one. You know who built from the middle? The Pacers, the Knicks and the Pistons. Sure this is an assessment of Cade and Haliburton to a degree vs Barnes I suppose. Again, I am not arguing against the take as much as the lack of diversity of opinion in general. Are they scared to have different opinions about the league from one another because they might end up being ridiculed for getting things wrong? Better for everyone to get it wrong/ or right together?

All true once again. They basically look at teams that have modern offense and project them higher than others imo. Then they look at whether said team can play defense. It’s all about how aesthetically pleasing the team will be. They don’t trust teams that actually play grind it out playoff styles like the Heat or Raptors in the regular season and can switch styles game to game.

I believe Lowe and the other guy started this narrative and everyone else just ran with it

[Westside Gunn]

He compared BI to Naz Reid, Myles Turner, and Randle

smh

[6ixpessant]

Well, we're on pace for 62 wins, maybe Bill was thinking we wouldn't get 65?

[lobosloboslobos]

I read somewhere that Bill was the guy who started the 30 for 30 series? It was a little vague tho. If true....he deserves enough goodwill to look past his raptor take.

Yeah he definitely was. He was really the guy who saw that the transforming media landscape opened the door to telling sports stories in all kinds of new ways.

He was also creator of the original smart sports journalism platform called Grantland, which was great while it lasted, and which led directly to the creation of the Ringer and indirectly to The Athletic and even the Player's Tribune.

And before that – if maybe you weren't around back then – he was ESPN.com's first and best columnist, who wrote a lot of really funny, outrageous and deep stories about sports people and events for many years long before eventually getting into the whole TV/podcast thing. I think he started in the 1980s.

For all the people who understandably can't stand his shtick in recent years, here is one he wrote about Kobe scoring 81 on us that will give you an idea how fun it was to read him. It includes this bit:

"The game made me feel the same way I felt while watching "March of the Penguins." I had always wondered what a penguin's life was like; once I knew how depressing it was, I wanted to sit in my garage with the car running."

and this:

"This didn't feel like a team effort. Actually, I'm not sure what this felt like. With seven minutes remaining, Odom made an open 3 because Kobe was being ninetuple-teamed by all five Raptors, two ball boys, an assistant coach and a Staples Center usher from Section 104. Without a shred of irony, the announcer reported it was Odom's first field goal of the night. He ended up finishing 1-for-7. By the way, he's the second-best player on the Lakers.

"Can you imagine being on this team?" my father said, shrieking. "Can you imagine? Look at Odom! I think he's going to throw up!"

https://proxy.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060124

I can't take his whininess on tv and haven't listened to anything he has said in years, but his place in modern sports history is actually pretty huge and very well deserved.

[DatHomieYouHaTe]

He compared BI to Naz Reid, Myles Turner, and Randle

smh

He wasn't. He just said those guys got paid WAY less in the off season. Let's be real the Raptors are not the best contract negotiators

[johanliebert]

He compared BI to Naz Reid, Myles Turner, and Randle

smh

Thats why i never cared for him and Zach lowe. The nerds can worship them.

[Shaazzam]

Maybe one day AI will be able to summarize our worse hot takes here on real GM and hopefully give us a bit of humility.

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

https://www.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060224

Babcock: I have to disagree with that -- I think everyone can agree that I made the worst trade of the past 10 years.

Simmons: The Vince Carter trade?

Babcock: Right. I gave him away to the Nets. Gave him away. And I'm known for that now -- it didn't matter that I was working for Toronto. So you can have a negative impact on a small-market team, I think.

Thoughts on trading? For GM Rob Babcock, one step forward and three steps back.
(The crowd applauds.)

Simmons: Let's talk about that trade, Rob. Walk us through your thought process.

Babcock: When you're trading an unhappy superstar, like Isiah said before, you have to get one of three things back: Cap space, draft picks or young stars. Or else your fans will flip out. Especially if the guy immediately starts playing hard again, which was a mortal lock in Vince's case, because he was clearly tanking it for us. Anyway, my goal was to trade Vince without getting cap space, draft picks or another young star -- that's what would have made it the worst trade of all-time. The problem was that you can't be too obvious with this stuff or the commissioner's office will veto the deal. So what ended up happening was, the Nets gave us two non-lottery picks to save face, but everything else worked out -- not only did we not get a superstar back, we took on three bad contracts, including Alonzo Mourning's deal, which we had to buy out. So instead of getting cap space back, the trade hurt our cap space. I was more proud of that than anything.

Weisbrod: You know, I loved that trade, but I loved the Rafael Araujo pick even more.

Babcock: Thanks!

Weisbrod: Passing up Andre Iguodala for a 24 year-old center who averaged 0.1 blocks per game in college and runs like a duck … I just thought that was brilliant.

Babcock: Well, you hope with these things, but you never sure how they'll work out until they happen.

Simmons: Let's talk about the draft, guys. What are some strategies there? Worst guy available? Taking someone at a position where you already have someone?

King: See, that's where you're wrong. It's always better to make good picks in the draft -- this way, your fans can become attached to them, then you can trade them for inferior guys with bad contracts. Plus, it throws the media off your scent a little bit. I would much rather draft a decent guy, then trade him down the road, or overpay him with a crazy contract that makes no sense or kills my cap space. If you're openly tanking draft picks, it's too obvious.

Thomas: I agree, Billy. If you look at what I've done over the years, I always drafted well: Stoudamire, T-Mac, Camby, Frye, Ariza … you want to stockpile as many assets as possible, only because it gives you more options to do something dumb.

Babcock: I couldn't agree more. That's the single-biggest mistake I made with the Araujo pick. In retrospect, I should have taken Igoudala, kept him for a year, then traded him last summer for Joel Przybilla and immediately given him an $85 million contract extension. Oh, well. You live and you learn.

[TorontoRapsFan]

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

https://www.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060224

Babcock: I have to disagree with that -- I think everyone can agree that I made the worst trade of the past 10 years.

Simmons: The Vince Carter trade?

Babcock: Right. I gave him away to the Nets. Gave him away. And I'm known for that now -- it didn't matter that I was working for Toronto. So you can have a negative impact on a small-market team, I think.

Thoughts on trading? For GM Rob Babcock, one step forward and three steps back.
(The crowd applauds.)

Simmons: Let's talk about that trade, Rob. Walk us through your thought process.

Babcock: When you're trading an unhappy superstar, like Isiah said before, you have to get one of three things back: Cap space, draft picks or young stars. Or else your fans will flip out. Especially if the guy immediately starts playing hard again, which was a mortal lock in Vince's case, because he was clearly tanking it for us. Anyway, my goal was to trade Vince without getting cap space, draft picks or another young star -- that's what would have made it the worst trade of all-time. The problem was that you can't be too obvious with this stuff or the commissioner's office will veto the deal. So what ended up happening was, the Nets gave us two non-lottery picks to save face, but everything else worked out -- not only did we not get a superstar back, we took on three bad contracts, including Alonzo Mourning's deal, which we had to buy out. So instead of getting cap space back, the trade hurt our cap space. I was more proud of that than anything.

Weisbrod: You know, I loved that trade, but I loved the Rafael Araujo pick even more.

Babcock: Thanks!

Weisbrod: Passing up Andre Iguodala for a 24 year-old center who averaged 0.1 blocks per game in college and runs like a duck … I just thought that was brilliant.

Babcock: Well, you hope with these things, but you never sure how they'll work out until they happen.

Simmons: Let's talk about the draft, guys. What are some strategies there? Worst guy available? Taking someone at a position where you already have someone?

King: See, that's where you're wrong. It's always better to make good picks in the draft -- this way, your fans can become attached to them, then you can trade them for inferior guys with bad contracts. Plus, it throws the media off your scent a little bit. I would much rather draft a decent guy, then trade him down the road, or overpay him with a crazy contract that makes no sense or kills my cap space. If you're openly tanking draft picks, it's too obvious.

Thomas: I agree, Billy. If you look at what I've done over the years, I always drafted well: Stoudamire, T-Mac, Camby, Frye, Ariza … you want to stockpile as many assets as possible, only because it gives you more options to do something dumb.

Babcock: I couldn't agree more. That's the single-biggest mistake I made with the Araujo pick. In retrospect, I should have taken Igoudala, kept him for a year, then traded him last summer for Joel Przybilla and immediately given him an $85 million contract extension. Oh, well. You live and you learn.

What? this was sarcasm right?

[Potential]

Simmons admitted he was wrong? who has the clip?

[Madvillainy2004]

I like Bill, he's entertaining both in sports and entertainment, but the Ringers love for Evan Mobley needs to be studied.

They keep calling him KG/Anthony Davis when hes a lot closer to Al Horford than people would like to admit lol

[Westside Gunn]

He compared BI to Naz Reid, Myles Turner, and Randle

smh

He wasn't. He just said those guys got paid WAY less in the off season. Let's be real the Raptors are not the best contract negotiators

Yes but naz reid.

It was a dumb comparison then and it is a dumb comparison now

[Ell Curry]

Maybe one day AI will be able to summarize our worse hot takes here on real GM and hopefully give us a bit of humility.

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

The other thing people get confused is that Simmons is a really enjoyable and generally solid basketball historian, but like many historians, that doesn't mean he's able to analyze anything actually occurring today, and certainly can't predict the future well. It's hard for people to wrap their head around, but it's extremely common in the general field of history, or at least in political history. A framework and approach to understanding the past and working with a lot of secondary over primary sources is just different than working with primary sources or keeping up with changing approaches in real-time. There are people who wrote really sharp stuff about Nixon-era politics in the last 20 years, but if they wrote about contemporary era politics, you'd laugh at how idiotic they sound.

[mdenny]

I read somewhere that Bill was the guy who started the 30 for 30 series? It was a little vague tho. If true....he deserves enough goodwill to look past his raptor take.

Yeah he definitely was. He was really the guy who saw that the transforming media landscape opened the door to telling sports stories in all kinds of new ways.

He was also creator of the original smart sports journalism platform called Grantland, which was great while it lasted, and which led directly to the creation of the Ringer and indirectly to The Athletic and even the Player's Tribune.

And before that – if maybe you weren't around back then – he was ESPN.com's first and best columnist, who wrote a lot of really funny, outrageous and deep stories about sports people and events for many years long before eventually getting into the whole TV/podcast thing. I think he started in the 1980s.

For all the people who understandably can't stand his shtick in recent years, here is one he wrote about Kobe scoring 81 on us that will give you an idea how fun it was to read him. It includes this bit:

"The game made me feel the same way I felt while watching "March of the Penguins." I had always wondered what a penguin's life was like; once I knew how depressing it was, I wanted to sit in my garage with the car running."

and this:

"This didn't feel like a team effort. Actually, I'm not sure what this felt like. With seven minutes remaining, Odom made an open 3 because Kobe was being ninetuple-teamed by all five Raptors, two ball boys, an assistant coach and a Staples Center usher from Section 104. Without a shred of irony, the announcer reported it was Odom's first field goal of the night. He ended up finishing 1-for-7. By the way, he's the second-best player on the Lakers.

"Can you imagine being on this team?" my father said, shrieking. "Can you imagine? Look at Odom! I think he's going to throw up!"

https://proxy.espn.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/060124

I can't take his whininess on tv and haven't listened to anything he has said in years, but his place in modern sports history is actually pretty huge and very well deserved.

The 30 for 30 thing was a masterstroke. And it wss a perfect format decision to make each episode it's own production (ie different directors, writers, etc) instead of streamlining it. (Like the "behind the music" doc series) Each episode is it's own sports doc.

[Boardbreaker]

we don't make money off our hot takes. a higher standard applies.

I'm not going to defend Simmons' basketball takes or his ongoing disdain for the Raps...BUT...

1) if you said like 100 different things a day about sports and players you'd be wrong plenty often no matter who you are...hot takes are just that and not worth taking for anything more...

2) anyone who remembers what Bill Simmons built his reputation as a brilliant sportswriter on will know it wasn't his perceptive analysis of this or that player or team, it was for being a great storytelling fan with an eye for interesting stuff that others missed, which led to endless super entertaining articles but nothing that would make him a reliable analyst...problem is he got given that platform and it was never going to work for him...

The other thing people get confused is that Simmons is a really enjoyable and generally solid basketball historian, but like many historians, that doesn't mean he's able to analyze anything actually occurring today, and certainly can't predict the future well. It's hard for people to wrap their head around, but it's extremely common in the general field of history, or at least in political history. A framework and approach to understanding the past and working with a lot of secondary over primary sources is just different than working with primary sources or keeping up with changing approaches in real-time. There are people who wrote really sharp stuff about Nixon-era politics in the last 20 years, but if they wrote about contemporary era politics, you'd laugh at how idiotic they sound.

I try to avoid his takes but it’s pretty apparent on the clips I come across online that he’s out of touch with today’s game.