Would you Keep Bryan (with impassioned case for keeping him)

[FluLikeSymptoms]

Face it - BC is the only name from this pathetic organization that gets respect in the league.

Not true. Several people in the organization have been linked to Rod Black. They are feared and respected throughout the world.

[LodzBaluty]

Honestly, you cry way too much. Are you a dude or a lady?

I think you guys are the ladies that can't be without your man Bryan. It bothers me.


Or are you saying I am way too expressive of my opinion to be a man? LOL, if so that is a compliment, thanks. Means I am gifted.

[Volcano]

So, this first season of Bargnani's that you're referring to. That was the one where he came over as a highly skilled seven footer and was runner up for rookie of the year? That's when it was best for us to just cut bait on him?

At this point in time with many more years of evidence I'm willing to accept there is some merit to the idea of trading him. After year 1 though? Seems a bit reactionary to say the least. Especially since it seems to me that he was also one of our better players in that playoff season too.

To your treadmill point, I think it was a calculated risk, not some attempt to just "make do" and keep us going on a treadmill. Chandler was expiring this year and would (maybe) have been that perfect match to cover up for Bargnani's obvious deficiencies. This was a perfect opportunity to find that out. To me, we still don't have that answer, and that might be part of the reason Bargnani is still around. Because BC doesn't feel that he has, yet, put him in that *perfect* situation for him where he maximizes his strengths and minimizes his weaknesses.

Plus, Diaw was expiring a year earlier than Calderon. So, all in, this may have delayed our full on tanking by a year if it hadn't worked out, but it by no means would have tied our hands for the next three to four years or anything.

Again, it goes back to my marathon/sprint comment. If you take a long-term view of things, the net downside of this (delaying tank by a year) was outweighed by the potential net upside of discovering that Bargnani matched with a true 7-footer who does nothing but block and rebound was a killer combination. I'm not saying that *would* have happened, but when you take the big picture view it was a risk worth taking.

Why do you think we traded CharlieV? He was redundant with Bargnani. A soft jumpshooting big man. We saw what a big disaster it was in the previous year with Bosh, yet he still decides to go ahead with this combination. All of us agreed that we needed a real big man at the time, yet 5 years later this guy is STILL on the team. Bargnani's value was probably the highest in his first season. In hindsight, it would have been the right decision to move him. That was FIVE YEARS ago. When hindsight tells you that a player should never have been brought to your team and you keep him for 5 years and you still have him on your team, then that's just bad management.

The other point was..why trade for old and not young? After Bosh left, it was pretty clear we needed to go young. He was obviously in win-now mode. Get Diaw and Chandler..and Amir/Davis would be rotting on the bench all season long..and for what? 10th seed? I would love Chandler on this team..but it doesn't show good foresight or good direction from the GM. It's not a calculated risk..it's an awful risk. He was banking on Bargnani becoming a franchise player, when he's just a streaky scrub.

[timdunkit]

I can't leave... its impossible. Help me, to help you... please. Help me make this forum a place where we are talking about the playoffs.

Cause this crap I keep reading about us needing to hold on to Bryan at all costs, is going to make me slit my wrists. (that is joke, but its that depressing to see this forum so disappointed every year.)

This board has issues, but in this case the issue is your reading comprehension ...

Only one poster has put an argument of retaining Bryan at all cost, everyone else has either said there dissapointed but don't mind him being back or don't want him back at all ... thats hardly the "need Bryan at all cost" mentality your crying about ...

[raps95]

I got bored with the agenda after a few paragraphs -- . "fully fixing mistakes", labelling any criticism as "blindly hating" and "insane". It lacked any merit. A case can be made to keep BC, even if I disagree. The agenda laden plea that you presented is not it and was not worth my time to read any further.

Please, pray tell, where did I label *any* criticism as blindly hating? That was directed towards those who are actually "blindly hating" without any logical, well thought out reason. Also, the "insane" comment was directed towards people who put forward the idea that Bargnani's contract is untradeable. Totally separate points.

I think you'll see by way of my responses to others who, you know, took the time to actually read what I wrote, that I'm more than capable of intelligent, well reasoned discourse. Feel free to continue on though if that's too much for you.

[LodzBaluty]

This board has issues, but in this case the issue is your reading comprehension ...

Only one poster has put an argument of retaining Bryan at all cost, everyone else has either said there dissapointed but don't mind him being back or don't want him back at all ... thats hardly the "need Bryan at all cost" mentality your crying about ...

Read this thread.


There are posters saying that this organization is NOTHING without Bryan. This disturbs me. It insults my city, my pride, my loyalty to this team.

It bothers me that MLSE's expenditures, the attendance, the support, is ALL a joke, but Bryan's moves are the ones that we can not live without. I can't see bigger fighting words as a fan.

[Reignman]

Honestly, you cry way too much. Are you a dude or a lady?

I think you guys are the ladies that can't be without your man Bryan. It bothers me.


Or are you saying I am way too expressive of my opinion to be a man? LOL, if so that is a compliment, thanks. Means I am gifted.

Well, I can't speak for the rest of the board but I'm not at all happy with the job BC did for the first 4 years; however, I don't doubt his ability to execute, I've always doubted his vision.

Now that his vision seems to be changing I'm on-board with giving him a chance to clean up his mistakes and continue down this new path. We've already seen him try to move Jose and I'm getting the feeling that Bargs will be gone as well. BC knows what his paying customer wants and it's pretty clear that most want to move on from Jose/Bargs.

I've said this before but I'll say it again, sometimes these execs get let-off-the-hook way too easy by firing them. BC created this mess, seems like he realizes he didn't build the type of teams this city loves and now he's going in that direction.

Really, he's basically doing what I'd want any new GM to do anyway, he's tanking, he's making good picks and he's not blowing money on any short-sighted moves. Hell, he's even trying to move some of the main pieces that we don't like.

Isn't that what we want anyway? So what's the point of changing GMs now? At least we know this guy has the ability to execute deals when he needs to.

[timdunkit]

This board has issues, but in this case the issue is your reading comprehension ...

Only one poster has put an argument of retaining Bryan at all cost, everyone else has either said there dissapointed but don't mind him being back or don't want him back at all ... thats hardly the "need Bryan at all cost" mentality your crying about ...

Read this thread.


There are posters saying that this organization is NOTHING without Bryan. This disturbs me. It insults my city, my pride, my loyalty to this team.

posters or poster?

Jeez ...

[darth_federer]

I can understand some of you arguing that BC is a good executive even though I disagree, but to suggest that this team will somehow fold or that GMs wouldnt touch our team with a ten foot pole just beggars belief. I guess people will delude themselves into believing whatever they want. Bryan is not the man with the finger in the broken dam. If he leaves we ll move on. This is a top 10 franchise in terms of profit and revenue. This city is one of the richest in North America and it has a great fanbase. We will move on and adapt like we always have.

[Alfred]

No more personal attacks, no more complaining about people not being "real" Raptors fans.

[SDM]

In what other avenue of life would we even be considering Colangelo to "finish what he started"? Lets think about it:

Say we hire some guys to build a deck and they do a crappy job and the deck falls apart. The same guys put in a bid to fix the deck. Do you hire them?

Say we visit a restaurant and receive a pube in the food. Do we send the food back and ask them to take the pube out or do we just not go back?

I mean, are both of those comparisons out to lunch? I think they're frighteningly accurate.

[LodzBaluty]

That probably came off as wrong, I did not mean to imply people were not real or some how their opinion was less valid than mine.

What I question is the end result of fear. The fear to change GM's cripples an entire organization. Just like the fear to trade Bosh before his contract expires.


This attachment that we create for ourselves by pinning our hopes onto the back of individuals ends up doing more damage to us than good.

[raps95]

Face it - BC is the only name from this pathetic organization that gets respect in the league.
If he decides to leave the things will get worst fast.
First the value of the franchise will get a lot lower, since no decent GM would want to touch it.
And how many Canadian owners do you know that really would want to spend money on the NBA laughing stock franchise?
I think that if he leaves in bad terms, it is the beginning of the end for the raps stay in Canada. He will leave with the last shred of credibility for a franchise that has always had hard time to attract any real talent.

I don't think it would mean the end for the team in the city since there is always value to MLSE to have another tenant in the ACC for 41 dates per year. That said though, the gist of your point was also part of my thinking in that if BC leaves here on bad terms what, realistically, can we hope to attract? All of those big names I rhymed off wouldn't touch us with a ten foot pole at the best of times. If our ownership group develops a bad reputation around the league we'll be back to scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of front office talent.

In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Hammond turn us down, or decline to interview with us, or something like that when we wound up taking Babcock? To me, that's the kind of situation we'd be returning to. Scouring around, beating the bushes, hoping to get lucky, but never being able to even get a sniff of somebody with some actual, pre-existing credentials.

[timdunkit]

I can understand some of you arguing that BC is a good executive even though I disagree, but to suggest that this team will somehow fold or that GMs wouldnt touch our team with a ten foot pole just beggars belief. I guess people will delude themselves into believing whatever they want. Bryan is not the man with the finger in the broken dam. If he leaves we ll move on. This is a top 10 franchise in terms of profit and revenue. This city is one of the richest in North America and it has a great fanbase. We will move on and adapt like we always have.

I'm with Reignman on this, he's shown that he is willing to change his vision of a time. His execution is really good but his vision was really flawed and that set us back.

You could hire someone else, but the risk of failure comes with all GM's.

The people who "don't mind him coming back", doesn't mean that we don't think we can move on without him. It just means we it doesn't make a difference whether we bring him back (understanding that he's made mistakes and is looking to change his vision) or whether we move forward with someone else.

The issue with this franchise and integrity right now is being compromised by MLSE. Once again, there putting the franchise in a terrible position by not giving it the security it needs at management position. Like Feschuk said ( i think in his article), its not just BC but the whole status of the managment is up in the air. Going into an important draft (especially a weak one where scouting and having information is extremely important) and an unknown era (CBA), its (Please Use More Appropriate Word) that we haven't given BC security yet or begun a search for a new GM.

[miruss2001]

Toronto would be fine without BC. Anyone who argues that there isn't another personality as capable is foolish. That being said if he was renewed for a couple of years I wouldn't cry into my cornflakes.

[LodzBaluty]

His ability to change his vision overtime, cost this organization dearly.

The JO flip flop was the biggest mistake. We should have lived with it and enjoyed the cap that year. Miami would not have had the same leverage, and we would not be in this position.


Changing your vision, every year, is not exactly a sign of focus. A rebuilding team needs a vision that is adhered to for the long term. It is my understanding that Bryan wanted to use the pick to make trades to get us back into the playoffs and got shot down by the board.

Are we really adhering to Bryan's vision at this point?

[MrBojangelz71]

Everything BC has done since Bosh's departure has been excellent.

Many things done prior to Bosh's departure were mistakes, misguided attempts to build around a player not worthy of such. BC's mandate upon taking the position was to retain Bosh, not once but twice. His biggest mistake was having Bosh resign back in 06 as it lead us down a bad path. Had we parted ways with CB then I have the feeling we would have drafted a top tier player already and along with assets like Demar and Ed, be in a much better situation today.

Either way, most on here that cry like babies about how BC should be exiled keep referring to moves made during the Bosh era but won't acknowledge the solid moves made since. Acquiring young assets like Bayless and JJ, the solid signing of Amir, drafting Ed and DD. All they do is scream Hedo, JO and Marion, with a sprinkle of Kapono on top. Yet they neglect moves such as getting Reggie for JK or Barbosa for Hedo.

Truth is BC is the best man for the job of rebuilding this team. He has made good on his last 2 draft picks, he has some nice cap space coming up, a TPE still available and should he decide to move Andrea, an asset to play with. He is a GM that will take risks and will work the phone night and day to find deals that other GM's don't unearth. I much rather a GM that is always searching and working on making the team better opposed to one that takes months off at a time. Yes, there are failed deals but unless you are a moron, you realise that deals many times fail. Top GMs' througout the history of the NBA have bad deals on their resume, FACT.

We are in good hands and BC will right this ship in less than 3 years.

[raps95]

In what other avenue of life would we even be considering Colangelo to "finish what he started"? Lets think about it:

Say we hire some guys to build a deck and they do a crappy job and the deck falls apart. The same guys put in a bid to fix the deck. Do you hire them?

Say we visit a restaurant and receive a pube in the food. Do we send the food back and ask them to take the pube out or do we just not go back?

I mean, are both of those comparisons out to lunch? I think they're frighteningly accurate.

I wouldn't say they're out to lunch, but I wouldn't say that they're totally accurate either. In both those cases you have an innumerable number of other options. Hundreds of contractors in the GTA could build a deck with a reasonable degree of competence. Thousands of restaurants could meet your eating requirements if all you're looking for is sustenance that doesn't have pubic hairs in it.

What if, however, the deck you are trying to build is made of a very special type of wood and there are only thirty people in all of North America who are qualified to work with that wood. Upon doing some research, you discover that only three of those contractors have a perfect track record. All others have an equivalent (some, even larger) number of screw ups working with this special kind of wood in their history. Now, what do you do?
[Edit] Assuming that you are not able to use those top three contractors, obviously.

My support for the status quo goes back to somewhere in one of my posts where I said the only reason I would see value in making a change to one of these other equally competent (or incompetent if you like) people would be if you felt you needed to shake up your organization. Based on the fact that the team in Bryan's tenure has been anything *but* stagnant I would argue that's not needed here. You could, of course, argue that the high turnover is, itself, a problem in that he's not letting the team gel or something, but that's a different discussion.

[Reignman]

His ability to change his vision overtime, cost this organization dearly.

The JO flip flop was the biggest mistake. We should have lived with it and enjoyed the cap that year. Miami would not have had the same leverage, and we would not be in this position.


Changing your vision, every year, is not exactly a sign of focus. A rebuilding team needs a vision that is adhered to for the long term. It is my understanding that Bryan wanted to use the pick to make trades to get us back into the playoffs and got shot down by the board.

I don't think his vision changed every year. Even with JO I think he was forced to make the trade because of Bargs' piss poor sophmore year and Sam's insistence on a defensive C. Again, BC's vision and the way he handled Bargs has been the major problem over the last 4 years. I don't think BC ever wanted JO here in the first place and sure enough he moved JO at the first opportunity. IMO, that wasn't BC changing his vision, that was BC being forced to make a short-sighted move.

Now that his vision finally seems to have changed and we're also hearing whispers of Bargs being moved (along with the failed Jose trade) I think it's safe to say he has heard the voice of the fanbase.

That's basically what I wanted all along so if BC can deliver that vision from here on out I'm fine with keeping him.

[LodzBaluty]

It's his ability to trade and work those phones and make moves that worries me. He made keeps trying to fix mistakes each one after costing more then the one before.

It's like a gambler doubling up. If he wins great, if he looses... well here we are. I think the board has done quite a bit of holding back so that your boy BC did not trade away DD, Davis or the pick. I bet you he already had a few scenarios.

The only one who knows where Bryan's head is is the board. They will know if the moves made recently were Bryan's moves, or the result of the boards restrictions. If its the latter, than you Mr Bojanglez should run out and kiss Glenn the accountant at MLSE, since the moves you speak of are the boards.