NBA Free Agency 2011 - Top Small Forward Options for the Toronto Raptors
by Adam Francis on Jul 6, 2011 9:01 AM EDT
in Feature Stories
Email
Print
Continuing on with their look at free agent options for the Toronto Raptors (if and when free agency arrives), the HQ turns to the small forward position.
When you look at the roster of the Toronto Raptors, a few things stand out.
For one, there's a big hole at center.
However you'd have to say that there's some promise at the power forward and shooting guard spots, and while the point guard situation isn't perfect, there's some value there.
But the small forward position?
Yikes.
This spot has been a problem for Toronto now for years, or as Bryan Colangelo likes to remind us, since Jose Garbajosa suffered a career-altering injury.
There have been many attempts made to upgrade that position, from Hedo Turkoglu to Carlos Delfino, but none have stuck and last season Toronto's PER of 12.2 at the 3 was bested by only the New Jersey Nets (9.1 thanks to guys like Travis Outlaw and Stephen Graham), Cleveland Cavaliers (10.0 - Alonzo Gee and Joey Graham anyone?) and LA Clippers (10.4 - Ryan Gomes and Jamario Moon).
That being said, James Johnson did show some flashes as the season progressed, both in terms of game play and advanced stats, and Colangelo's move to acquire him for a late first-round pick looks more and more like a solid decision. If Johnson can take another step next season, perhaps he can at least be a reliable option going forward.
The problem is, there's no certainty that this will occur, and given Johnson's age (he'll be 25 next Feb) and development to date, I'm not sure the Raps should be putting all their eggs in one basket.
So with that in mind, let's take a look at the free-agent situation at the small forward position.
The "I'll Hug Colangelo" Tier:
1) Grant Hill - Hill's price-tag last season was $3.2M so we're not talking about someone the Raptors wouldn't be able to afford. However it just seems that Hill is content to play out his remaining days in Phoenix, hence his application to this category.
But that doesn't mean I wouldn't be thrilled to see the Raps grab him.
He's 38 with a horrific history of injuries, but we're talking about a player who played in 123 of a possible 126 games the last three seasons, averaging about 12 points, 5 rebounds and 2.5 assists with great percentages. Most importantly though, his defence would be a huge boost to the club, and his veteran leadership and presence would be a huge benefit to a very young team.
The "Nice Work if you Can Get It" Tier:
1) Shane Battier - In a similar mould to Grant Hill, this other ex Blue Devil would lend a helping hand in both the leadership and defensive intensity categories. At 32, he's also six years younger than Hill with a better history in terms of health, and considering the success of Tony Allen last year, Memphis may be prepared to let him walk.
However while his salary of $7.4M last season should decrease, he's still likely one of the more in-demand free agents available, and Toronto may not be able to afford giving Battier a long-term deal and not addressing some of their other needs.
2) Thaddeus Young - Mr. Young made only $2.9M last season but as a restricted free agent with a $4.0M qualifying offer, he's due for a raise.
Can Toronto afford his services?
I'm not so sure, and considering Philly has first right of refusal, it doesn't seem like he's going anywhere.
Stranger things have happened though, and Young's rebounding, defence, athleticism and still blossoming offensive game would be a welcome addition at the 3 for Toronto. At only 23, if the Raps were going to throw around some big money at the 3, this is where I would put it.
3) Tayshaun Prince - To me, Tayshaun has gone from being underrated early in his career, to overrated thanks to his last contract situation, to now once more, being underrated as his Pistons struggled last year, and critics claimed that he and Richard Hamilton were dead weight contractually.
However we're still talking about 14 points, 4.5 rebounds and 3 assists over his last two seasons, and one of the better defenders in this free agent class. He's no spring chicken at 31, but if BC could get the original Thad Young on a short deal for somewhere around $4 to $5M, I'd pretty pretty content.
4) Caron Butler - "Tough Juice" has been one of my favourite players since he entered the league in 2002. Like Prince, he's a 31 year old vet now, and unfortunately, is coming off a season-ending rupture of the patellar tendon in his right knee.
So is he worth throwing serious cash at?
His salary of $10.8M last year will likely drop, but it's hard to imagine it falling into the $5M range that the Raps could stomach, barring major changes to the next CBA.
However as the title of this tier suggests, if Toronto could grab him he'd be another veteran presence with a professional demeanor that would serve this club well, not to mention being an accomplished scorer and solid defender when asked to play that role.
Oh, and did we mention his former assistant coach would be helping to recruit him?
5) Andrei Kirilenko - Kirilenko is kind of in the same boat as Butler and Prince; former All-Star who provided excellent value, especially on D, until he was given an egregious deal and now in his 30's, is trying to prove his best days aren't behind him.
There's no way anyone's throwing $17.8M his way (his last year's salary) but teams looking for help on D and in stretching the floor might be willing to hand him somewhere in the neighborhood of $7M or $8M per.
That's out of Toronto's price range, but if BC could get him for less than that, again on a short-term deal, it would be hard not to come away from the free-agent period with a smile. AK47 may not be the lock-down type he once was, but on a team that needs to compensate for Andrea Bargnani's deficiencies, Kirilenko, like Battier, Prince and Young, could provide some much-needed help.
The "Fine, I Guess That Works" Tier:
1) No One - With the dearth of options for the Dinos at the 5, we listed folks like Joel Przybilla and Samuel Dalembert on our free agent center breakdown as they were possibly affordable and actual upgrades for the team.
However at the 3, there's no one who fit this tier in my books.
Are guys like James Jones, Al Thornton, Earl Clark and Rodney Carney really upgrades over James Johnson or even a healthy Linas Kleiza?
It's highly doubtful.
The "These Guys are Kind of Interesting" Tier:
1) Josh Howard - To me, this is the most interesting tier in this analysis. While there are lots of big name 3's like Butler and Kirilenko, all are hardly spring chickens and likely won't be worth big deals. However there are a number of very interesting "sleeper" options this off-season, starting with Josh Howard.
Howard was at one point one of the up and coming 3's in the league, a legit 6-7 wing who could slash to the bucket and defend his position.
Injuries though, knee in particular, have resulted in only 105 games played since late in the 2008 season, and at nearly 32, he's just not the same explosive player he once was.
But as an option off the bench for a fraction of his former salary? I like this idea a lot however if I'm Colangelo, it's contingent on numerous medical reports and analysis that indeed says his knee is fully healed.
2) Kelenna Azubuike - Mini Josh Howard. Like Howard, Azubuike was an under-appreciated slasher out of college who really started to come into his own a few seasons, until knee injuries side-tracked things.
With a second knee surgery last spring, he might finally be on the road to recovery and at only 27, is probably a safer gamble financially than Howard.
3) Chris Douglas- Roberts - Is he a 2? A 3? With size to play the 3 and a good scoring touch at the 2, CDR remains one of my favourite sleepers in the NBA. He hasn't exactly lit up the league since being drafted about three years ago but in a more offensive-minded system with legit playing time (like Toronto), he could break out. Plus his price tag (less than $1M last year) makes him one of the more attractive "upside" players.
4) Reggie Williams - An argument could be made that Toronto should be focussing on defense instead of offense in free agency, but efficient offense is always in demand. That's what Reggie Williams provides thanks to 41% shooting from long-range, and a true shooting percentage of nearly 60%. At about $1M a season, this 24 year old could really help the Raps stretch the floor without being a pylon on D.
5) Shawne Williams - Basically Reggie Williams' double, Shawne shot about 40% from downtown for the Knicks last season and showed that he could play a nice role as a floor-stretching 3. He'd come at a pretty cheap cost and while not overall as effective a player as Reggie, could still be a nice addition off the pine.
The "Just Say No" Tier:
Jamarion Moon, Jason Kapono, Peja Stojakavic.
Been there, done that.
169 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Think that’s a pretty good read unless some of the above vets can be got for MEGA cheap.
No need to weigh down this young team with excessive contracts. The goal should be a jump 2 years from now anyways so a younger guy who can grow with the others is preferable.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
by Adam Francis on Jul 6, 2011 10:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I Wouldn't Call AI Old
Yes in terms of production according to the numbers AI is probably overpaid or is he. Not if you are a lover of WP. LOL
In fact according to WP and no I haven’t changed my opinion about it, AI ranked 41st in the league among underpaid players. T. Young was ranked 69th.
So ISTM that those here who have been touting WP as a valid measurement of a player’s worth they would prefer AI over TY. Just saying
I already mentioned my reasons for wanting AI over TY and I will add a fourth.
AI will need to be acquired through a trade. The 76ers are looking for a big man.
Having said that do I think it will happen. I doubt it.
https://dberri.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/just-desserts-overpaid-underpaid-remix/
That Is 69th Based Upon His Current Salary
The Raptors would probably have to come close to quadrupling his salary if they want to sign him. So his value according to WP would drop significantly.
My big problems with Young are that he doesn’t pass the ball, can’t shoot the three ball efficiently and can’t make Free Throws very well
CDR! CDR! It's our date (and franchise's) date with destiny.... plus CDR is on record literally begging to come to TO.
'....as a child, I dreamt of being a baseball.'
No kidding – how funny would it be if that came to pass considering the lobbying I did for him over the years!
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
..and if CDR stinks up the joint! ... Ha Ha.... I can't wait for people to think up some devious 'walk of shame' for you.... Basketball Jones - Do ya hear me?! lol..
'....as a child, I dreamt of being a baseball.'
Andre Igoudala
BC make a trade and make it happen
Iggy's perfect
He would cost us, but he’s young enough to be a building block and would pad the Raptors stats in a lot of categories. He’s still very underappreciated.
by CamHilton on Jul 6, 2011 11:20 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Ugh!
I really like Iguodala, but do you really think it’s the right time for the Raptors to add someone like him? Isn’t that simply pushing the team towards mediocrity?
Tim W.
The Picket Fence
by Tim W. on Jul 6, 2011 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Rec from me
Why bother? He’s good enough to help this team win a few games next year, but not good enough to help them actually win enough to matter (home date for the first round of the playoffs)
The Raptors need to go through next year developing an identity and getting rid of players that don’t fit that identity. It’s only after you have the identity that you go after players like AI, provided they are the correct fit.
Iggy
This probably requires an entire blog post but I view the Iguodala piece in two ways.
1) Ideally you want to tank next season to collect another marquee player, so in that case, you don’t want Iguodala.
2) However at some point you DO need legit starting calibre players and Iggy is just that. Forget contract etc, he fits a need, isn’t over the hill, and when surrounded by top talent, you’re looking at a nice fit as a third option.
I liken the situation to that of the Thunder. You build around your youth and by collecting assets, then when those pieces fall into place, you move for an established QUALITY vet to take things to another level. This is what OKC did with Perk, and even to a lesser extent with Thabo.
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
Iggy is an interesting case. I totally get where the “anti-Iggy” sentiment is coming from and definitely don’t want to see the Raps get pushed into 40-something-win purgatory. However, unless you feel you can draft or develop a similar type of player, acquiring Iggy via trade might be the best way to go.
Iggy and James Johnson would be a nice combo at SF (although you probably want a three-point shooting wing off the bench as well). The Raps’ point guard situation is not THAT bad (Calderon, Bayless). Power forward is a position of strength (Davis, Amir and they probably should’ve extended the QO to Dorsey). Valanciunas at the centre position in just over a year complemented by a proven veteran plus a project in Alabi.
That’s a solid team until you shift your focus to DeMar DeRozan and realize he REALLY needs to step it up in 2011-12. The Raps really need DeRozan to develop into a prolific three-point shooter (not just an average one), as well as a decent passer and defender.
Geoff Rahal
Author, RaptorsHQ.com
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Jul 6, 2011 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
The only problem is Iggy isn’t going to come here for nothing. Philly will want something of value for him and I cannot see them taking DD back. They may want Val and expect us to take Brand back as well. I have no problem taking on Brands contract (not sure how we could do this but just saying) but giving up any young piece for two players who will place us in the middle of the pack is pointless. It is essentially the same reason Chicago didn’t trade for Kobe all those years ago. As LA found out in the early 2000’s, one superstar player = first round playoff exit.
"However at some point you DO need legit starting calibre players and Iggy is just that."
The issue is timing. Of course you eventually need to aquire legit starters and talent. However, as you identified in the OKC example, they aquired that vet talent when the timing was right, meaning AFTER they had aquired the assets required to build a contender through the draft. Aquiring Iggy or a like contributer now will actually prevent the Raptors aquiring the talent they need to aquire through the draft. The time to aquire vets of Iggy’s ilk is actually 2 or 3 years from now… Unless you believe this team has the talent they need in Bargnani, DeRozan and Valanciunis to be a contender. I don’t.
Remove Bargnani from the mix, cross your fingers that DeRozan improves, and pray that Valanciunas lives up to the hype and you probably have the makings of a good, young team.
Geoff Rahal
Author, RaptorsHQ.com
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Jul 6, 2011 3:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Wow, coming from a guy that is bearish on Derozan, I’m surprised. Especially in the context of potentially having one of the best draft classes ever next year, not sure how adding a player of Iggy’s caliber makes sense for next season….
I’m definitely bearish on DeRozan. He has to take a massive leap this season to avoid becoming the SG version of Bargnani.
Geoff Rahal
Author, RaptorsHQ.com
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Jul 6, 2011 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok so remove Bargs and your not confident that Derozan will improve, so that leaves Val and Iggy as your young core? Yikes! Especially considering by obtaining Iggy your running the risk on completely missing out on one of the best draft classes of this generation.
Davis, Amir, Bayless, James Johnson… Calderon should still be decent assuming the Raps don’t continue to employ a pylon at the centre position.
Geoff Rahal
Author, RaptorsHQ.com
by RaptorsHQ - Defensive Stance on Jul 6, 2011 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Dude that's a 30 to 40 win team for the foreseeable future...
That’s a team with Iggy as your best player, hasn’t really worked out for Philly has it.
Take the hit, suck for a year or two, aquire some assets and stay the course. We’re half way there already. Aquiring Iggy this offseason would be akin to using the pull out method. The odds aren’t good so might as well go all the way ; )
Another thought on Iggy and the OKC model
If you look back at their process they were actually doing the opposite to adding a player like Iggy when they traded a solid vet in Ray Allen for the rights to Jeff Green. This accelerated their development in a few ways. First, it took a productive vet, that was bolstering their win/loss record out of the mix, allowing the team to lose more games. This positioned them to acquire Westbrook and Harden through the draft with high picks. Finally, they ended up using the asset from that original trade (Green) to acquire the veteran presence eluded to above (Perkins) when they were ready to make the next leap to conteding.
Acquiring Iggy now would be adding a veteran presence too early and actually doing the opposite of the OK model.
T. Young
The guy can score in bunches no doubt, get is own shot and is very athletic
The 76ers extended him a his QO.
======
Young made $2.9 million this past season. It was rumored at the beginning of the season that Young’s agent was looking for somewhere in the area of $11 million a year. That probably won’t happen.
A more plausible salary for Young would be somewhere around $6 million to $7 million a year.
Whatever his salary, Young hopes to continue playing in Philly.
“I love the city, I love the atmosphere, I love our motto “Show Ya Luv.” I just love the team. They’re like brothers to me; it’s the first team I’ve ever been on, the team that drafted me, and I think something really good is about to happen. Coach Collins is that coach. I think he is the guy who can actually take us to the next level."
complete article on link
He would definitely be cheaper than AI and is 4 years younger. My concerns with Young is that he had a bad season in 2009-10 which could have been due in part to his being injured. Also last season he shot an abysmal 27% from beyond the arc. and is not a very good Free Throw shooter.
He would be an upgrade over James Johnson and is one year younger.
He would certainly be cheaper than AI and the Raptors wouldn’t need to give up anyone to obtain him.
The big advantage of AI who will only be 28 over Young is that AI can pass and Young can not. Young is a volume shooter who relies on his athleticism for most of his baskets.
AI averaged 6.3 APG last season
Young averaged 1.0 APG last season
Their rebounding numbers are about the same.
I prefer AI if there is a way to obtain him. Why?
1. More experienced
2. AI is still relatively young
3. AI is a far better passer
Young is a longer version of Weems with better defensive ability. However, on offense they are both chuckers. Once they get the ball they shoot it and nothing else. AI on the other hand has a more complete all around game and has averaged just under 6.0 APG over the last three seasons.
Ah of course! Thanks!
I got to disagree though, by the time this team is ready to compete, Iggy would be past his prime. Iggy is an example of a short term fix this team should avoid as he could land them in the 35 – 40 win team purgatory.
Say What
He will be 28 next season
How many players over 30 did the Mavs have this last season? Everyone of their regular rotation players was over 30.
How long do you think it will take this current core to compete once they get rid of Bargnani? LOL
Hell They Were Competitive In Most Games Last Season
up until the fourth quarter.
The fourth quarter problems were due mostly to
1. Lack of 4th quarter defense
2. Inexperience.which hurt their fourth quarter offense as well as their fourth quarter defense.
So yep I figure if you keep the core of this roster together for two season and add Jonas in 2012-13 along with another mid-range ottery pick that the Raptors would have a shot at the playoffs by 2012-13. Not a lock mind you just a shot at it.
So yes I think that the current core group plus Jonas plus mid-range lottery pick next June could make the Raptors competitive in two seasons.
So maybe, just maybe, if everything works out, your BESTcase scenario is the Raptors having “a shot at the payoffs by 2012-13”? That’s your ceiling for this rebuild endeavour? That’s depressing…
To Say Anything More
given what what the Raptors current roster looks like would be the height of lunacy
Not sure I understand what your point is here...
But my point is, why sign Iggy for a shot at maybe making the playoffs in two years when you could build a legit team through a more patient approach.
Reggie Williams, or Douglas-Roberts...
Next year we draft a star SF so whoever we bring in here will battle JohnsonJ for backup role…
If we want to have a deep SF rotation we should go with Williams and JohnsonJ as backups, each of them giving you something different depending on matchups… Douglas-Roberts is too much similar to JohnsonJ, so it would be a choice between the two rather than keeping both…
"the Truth"
I agree with the thought that we should be looking at a cheap, temporary solution. My choice would be CDR as he has the flexibility to play both wing positions. I disagree though that CDR and Johnson have similar games. CDR’s game isn’t as diverse as Johnson (i.e. doesn’t have the rebounding, passing, defensive skill that Johnson has).
Yep…scary stuff.
Also scary? That “overpaid” list D Stance posted yesterday where there were a ton of Colangelo adventures listed…
Adam Francis - Publisher - RaptorsHQ.com
Tashaun Prince
One of the raps biggest problems is the inability to hit the 3 ball. price can shoot and he can play good hard D.
And he has won championships he knows how to play the game. Bring him in. We already have enough extremley athletic guys we need glue guys, guys that do everything well and nothing great.
"Big Gulps Eh, Well See ya later" - Lloyd Christmas
" You Gus ready To Let The Dogs Out" "What?" " you Know, Who Let the dogs out rough rough rogh rough" - Zack Galifinakis - The Hangover
Jonas Valanciunas
With Lithuania qualifying for the final 8 at 4-2, Jonas is leading the worlds U19s.
6gms, 28mins, 1.8to’s, 3.5pf’s, 3.5blks, 13.3rbs, 20.7pts per game 58.7fg%, 83.3ft%
Leading the tournement in blocks, rebounds, and points per game.
The US is at 5-1 losing to Crotia today by 2 points. Looks like a very intersting finals with a lot of very competitive games.
Go Cheap or Go Home
No thanks on the vets. I’d rather see what Johnson can do, and take a chance on another young player than waste the late-prime years of a good defensive vet on a team going nowhere.
I don’t think we have a real shot at Thad Young, especially since I expect BC to blow his wad on a FA center. So my faves from this list are CDR, Williams and … er … Williams. Any of the three would be a good cheap addition, with decent youth and potential. Would be nice to add a 3 point shooter, and Reggie Williams seems to fit the mold fairly well in terms of a shooter who can hold his own elsewhere.
So I guess my list is:
1) Thad Young – but it’s not gonna happen.
2) Reggie Williams
3) CDR – always liked him, all the way back to when he was stolen one spot before the Raps ended up with Jawai.
4) Shawne Williams
I am on board with this strategy.
Another alternative would be to trade Bargnani for a small forward and then split his minutes between a veteran big signed as an FA and Alabi.
For Those Interested - Here Is A Link To SportItalia24 Live TV
Might catch Bargnani on there
AndreaBargnani Andrea Bargnani
(Staff) Il Mago su SportItalia24. http://ping.fm/REuql?nav=1&lang=IT
34 minutes ago
Dwane Loves Money
Zach Lowe: Dwane Casey told me he really likes Sonny Weems, was consulted on decision to extend QO. Now Weems headed to Europe, it appears. Twitter
AI
Why is there no mention of how we would acquire AI? I can see the argument that AI could jeopardize our draft position for 2012 but we don’t even know if there will be a season next year. Furthermore, if we can trade AB for AI, then I say we jump at the chance. Few would argue. Here’s the simple truth, AI could be part of our better days years from now. 5 years from now he could still be very good and fit into a championship team. AB, no chance.
So, if we can make that trade we do it in a heartbeat.
But if we have to give up valuable assets to get AI, then we are not in that market. It seems simple to me.
I could be down with a straight-up AB for AI trade, but I doubt the Sixers would accept that. It is more likely they would insist on something like Ed Davis + Barbosa or next year’s draft pick + a salary to roughly match(Calderon?).
If the trade is Andrea for Iggy, then sure. If it is some other more expensive variation then no.
At this time...unless
We are not in the market at this time for a player of his calibre and his contract situation. However, we could take on his contract if Philly will take on Andrea’s.
Imagine Philadelphia fans, a big man who can get more than 20 pts per night, shoot the three and is a legit 7 footer….all he really needs is a place slightly warmer than Toronto and then he will truly flourish into the all star player he is destined to be. Sadly for us, in Toronto, it’s too cold for him to learn how to rebound, defend or pass and this has hurt his effectiveness. We send him to you with all the best wishes for his and your future success.
Why all the James Johnson hate?
I simply do not understand why JJ gets no love! I mean yes there are better players out there… but there always are. He is not OMG 25 and no room to improve! He is STILL ONLY 25, and absolutely has room to improve. Now I am not saying that he is a legit starter right now, but he has the attitude, willingness to defend and appears to have leadership qualities that are sorely lacking on this team. I totally like this guy. No I do not think he is an all star, but yes he is a solid player with room to improve. Simply sick of seeing so many people writing him off.
As for your list in the article… yes CDR would be the best pick-up from it. Loved the guy in college, and he hasn’t gotten a fair shake yet in the NBA (hmmm… kinda like James johnson until he came here no? lol)
JJ hate?
Most on this sight are highly optimistic of JJ’s abilities and were impressed by his efforts on the court last season. We look forward to his improvement this year and clearly indicate that we see him as part of this team’s future moving forward.
by defensive rap on Jul 6, 2011 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
You need to re-read the JJ paragraph in the article. Yes is says some nice things about him, then totally throws them out the window by suggesting that perhaps he could “at least be a reliable option.” a.k.a nothing more. The rest of the article is basically looking at ways to replace him. Suggestion things such as an over-the-hill Hill would be a good possible option for for ex. While yes Hill was an awesome player, and still good… come on! then to go on and list a bunch of players that basically are in the same class as JJ… this is all sideways. CDR, okay maybe… but even he is kind-of a sideways move. And williams is just a 3-pt guy for the most part. Loved him for that on my fantasy team… and while we could use that… he is not a starter.
While I agree that there isn’t much to talk about during the lockout… hence this article. I would at least like to see something positive about one of the lone bright-spots on our team last year. And I know that there are a lot of fans who like JJ.
read my post
I didn’t comment on the article, but simply responded to how most people feel about JJ. I was giving him “Love” and Buddah immediately agreed. Adam may be less optimistic about JJ, but he’s not down on him either.
I see JJ’s ceiling has being a complete unknown at this point but I could see him being a solid starter in the NBA on a top team. His speed, size and strength (the 3 S’s) really helped him on the defensive end of the floor and gave him lots of good looks offensively, where he needs to add polish to his game. But he has the tools to succeed in the NBA. Truthfully he is a lot like Demar in terms of talent and potential, they just each display their strengths on opposite ends of the floor and need to each improve their all round game.
by defensive rap on Jul 6, 2011 4:31 PM EDT up reply actions
yes mostly I like Adam's articles, he is very good at what he does. but this one I was not so high on. haha
and yes I saw you and buddah were sending him “love” I simply wanted to elaborate on what I saw in the article… and you were responding by talking about what the fan-posts in general were. Since this area is here for that exact reason, that is all fine and good. And by the response I would say that you all agree with me that yes there should be some more positives going on where we can find them.
We have enough negatives with Bargs, and the idiotic response that the fans and some others in the media gave the organization when they announced their pic in the draft.
JV
The moment he was selected I responded on this site with one word; “YES!!!!!”
Some fans don’t get it. For me it was JV or Kanter and at worst Williams. No one else appealed that much.
Kanter seemed better on O and JV on D, and having never had a great Defensive young centre, I thought the Raptors should give it a try. Finally I can say this, great job in the draft BC.
As for the doubters who wanted Walker or Knight, please. Some fans just want to be a better team and they don’t care how it is built. I do. Look at the Raps roster, it has a lot of nice contracts IF, and only IF, they pan out. But the fans who are upset that JV won’t be here next year and thought a 19 year Knight would be the difference maker we need to win now…they must be smoking some of that really good BC bud. JV will be more NBA in 2012-13 than Knight will, and Walker will likely never be better than Bayless, so where was the upside there?
by defensive rap on Jul 6, 2011 5:04 PM EDT up reply actions
+1
I was really happy with this pick too.
…he could "at least be a reliable option." a.k.a nothing more.
Do you understand the phrase “at least?” That means, effectively, nothing less. So he will be a reliable option… or maybe more, is what the article said.
Sigh…
yeah but then he wrote pages on the current possibilities for his replacement. So in THIS case it was not sounding like anything positive what-so-ever.
yeah i think you are reading a bit much into
Franchise’s comments.
I don’t think its hate at all… but rather slight optimism.
Which I think most (or a bunch) of people have with him.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Jul 6, 2011 8:05 PM EDT up reply actions
Outside of the top tier obvious upgrade players, the others aren't suggestions to replace Johnson, rather that with Kleiza injured we need a cheap replacement player to fill the gap, and then fight for a roster spot once guys are back...
Like I posted above, CDR or Williams fill a need now, and when we draft our star SF next year, then Johnson, Kleiza and F.A. SF to be named have a backup role to fight for…
"the Truth"
It will be interesting to see now how much of the defensive problems were Triano, how much the players. Assuming there is a season, there might be a signing here or there, but it looks like Casey will have a similar lineup to Triano. Maybe he can turn the defense around, if not, vindication for Jay
a couple possible differences though
that I think could have a major effect:
1) a decent SF in the line up for an entire season. I don’t mind Sonny as a back up SG, but fuck me if he’s a starting SF. Kleiza… I actually dont mind him either, but again I don’t think he is a starter. I think Casey already has a leg up on Triano in that he has a legit SF that can, at the very least, be a reasonable defender and for an entire season
2) accountability… did Triano have the option of using it last year or did he choose not to? I don’t think that ends up being a question we actually ever get answered… but I am hardly convinced that he had much control over his line ups. Casey I am willing to wager does.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Jul 6, 2011 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Very simply put
If Casey is unable to improve defensively this young core of players in 2 years, and it will take at least that long, as Dallas even with very experienced players did not happen overnight, then Goodbye Casey, enter someone else.
-1
If Casey can’t do it in two years with these players than I would say bye bye to a lot of the players before blaming the coach.
We have the right coach. Let him do his job and don’t start rumours about him losing his job if he can’t achieve a minor miracle with this current roster. Look for improvement, look for accountability (sorry Andrea) and let’s see what Casey can do.
For me the real fear for Casey is whether he can be a head coach. He has already proven he can coach defence. If the team doesn’t perform on D than it’s on the players more than the coach. But if Casey can’t make good play calls late in games or even out of timeouts, that would be an area of concern.
by defensive rap on Jul 6, 2011 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions
If Casey does a great job… both of them stay.
If Casey does an okay job… i imagine they will both stay as well (especially if the lockout happens)
If Casey does an okay job, but BC makes a couple more bad PR moves/trades… Casey stays and BC is gone.
If Casey does a slightly less than okay job but the Lockout happens and the players do show some improvements… Casey will still get the benefit of doubt and be retained for 1-2 more years, but BC will be gone.
If Casey does terrible… then both BC and the mighty Casey have struck out!
Slam Online Says Raptors Will Dump Amir
if there is an amnesty clause in the new CBA.
Okay, if they say so.
=======
Candidates: Amir Johnson (4 years, $25 million), Jose Calderon (2 years, $19.3 million), Linas Kleiza (2 years, $9.2 million), Leandro Barbosa (1 year, $7.6 million)
Father time is slowly catching up to both Barbosa and Calderon, as neither is enjoying their primes despite being in their late 20’s. Johnson is actually an underpaid player, but his future presence won’t be needed with the drafting of Jonas Valanciunas and development of Ed Davis. Kleiza is a skilled role player who makes this list because of a knee injury that may cause him to miss part or all of next season.
Final Verdict: Amir Johnson
Calderon is still an above average point guard, with no capable back up behind him (I consider Bayless a combo guard). Barbosa has one year left on his deal, and isn’t as washed-up as perceived. Kleiza’s scoring and toughness are useful, and his contract isn’t too bad to begin with.
Johnson is expendable with Andrea Bargnani, Davis and Valanciunas on the roster (hopefully sooner than later).
I would like to believe they (slam) are idiots
but I am not yet at all convinced BC isn’t completely retarded enough to not do this.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Jul 6, 2011 8:13 PM EDT up reply actions
I think it would Kleiza in the ultimate do over. I think Amir is overpaid (considering what they could have signed him for) but not ridiculously overpaid so cutting him unless his injury is career threatening would be silly. Barbosa is an expiring that may (may) net you a pick or prospect from another team at the deadline and Calderon is not that far off in value because his contract is short timing now. Kleiza on the other hand has been a complete disaster even when he was healthy and dumping him without a cap hit would be huge.
“I think Amir is overpaid (considering what they could have signed him for)”
that was a point of debate when he was initially signed. Now I don’t think he is overpaid… but could BC have signed him for less? If I remember correctly there were other teams after him (GS in particular comes to mind) and it was also THE summer of FA (alot of big contracts handed out) which in and of itself drives up the price of all contracts (alot of teams created cap space and they wanted/needed to use it). I forget Drew Gooden’s contract off hand, but it was right in Amir’s range aswell.
I’m not at all sure Amir could have been kept for less. He may be one of the few (both last offseason and on the Raptors) that was actually given a contract that the market dictated AND in the end was actually worth his fee.
by Not so Friendly Stranger on Jul 7, 2011 7:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Kleiza is the obvious choice.
However, as NSFS pointed out, it doesn’t mean that is what BC would do………………..
Bargnani is actually the obvious choice
Whether BC actually does it is another matter. I remain optimistic.
Amir would be the stupid choice as he actually has a lot of value, even if you don’t want him on the Raptors. Within 5 minutes of his contract being amnestied/bought out/whatever, Johnson would have plenty of competing offers for his services and would probably get a decent pay raise to addition. The proper move would be to retain him and trade him, so SI’s conclusion is completely wrong.
Truth be told, if the amnesty clause is time-flexible, I expect the Raps to use any cap room they have to absorb a bad contract from another team (one that needs to amnesty two contracts) in exchange for young players/picks and amnestying that bad contract. I don’t think there is a true dead weight contract on the Raps right now. Amir is underpaid, Calderon is useful and will be expiring in 2013, Barbosa is expiring, Kleiza may be useful and is actually a fairly low price per year, Bargnani has enough apparent value to net something in a trade.
That would be ideal...
Unfortunately, that`s not how it played out last round. I beleive if I remember correctly, it applied to contracts on the books at the time of the signing of the agreement only.
Their logic is complete trash. If you substitute the names of Amir and Kleiza then this article has at least a little bit of coherence. The thing is that the Raptors are not in bad salary cap shape and don’t particularly need any salary amnesty (some might argue differently regarding Bargnani). Even if they did decided to take advantage of an amnesty opportunity they certainly wouldn’t use it to dump one of their most productive players (even Colangelo is not dumb enough to do that).
That is what I meant when I said: “If you substitute the names of Amir and Kleiza then this article has at least a little bit of coherence.”
Kleiza Makes So Sense Because of Valanciunas
so X him off the list right now.
I really like young, Prince and Butler,
If we could sign one of these guys i would be extremely happy. Also Dalmenbert is canadien so i guess i wouldnt mind that signing either. But for me the first choice is Young, we will be hard pressed to sweep him away from Phili though.
By Canadian Federal and Ontario Provincial Law
No professional basketball team in Ontario can have more than one player named Jonas. LOL
Grant Hill
While having Hill on the team would be great for the young guys and his wife is from Ontario, they prefer to stay in a warm climate due to her health which is up and down throughout the year.
Andrea vs Amir
Which one is better for a championship team. I ask because I know some here love and hate both and advanced metrics are used on both and provide different results. I believe they are closer in value than you think but I prefer Amir and my heart is with Amir times a 1000.
If they both had similar contracts who would you prefer? If Andrea offered 18 pts and 6 rebounds and 3assts per 36 minutes and came off the bench who would dispute his value at 5 million per year? (well I might but I am a doubter)
I’d take Amir but not by a tonne. But being able to score is still a big asset in the NBA. The problem with Andrea is his salary and expected role. If he is expected to be the franchise player on the roster, good luck. If he is expected to be Tony Kukoc, I could see him pulling it off, maybe. But he was third or fourth option and played a simple role on defence. Andrea could do that, but he can’t be the first and arguably second option on O. He is the last option on D. SO trade him to Minny for Wes and Beasley and make a radical change. Beasley was just busted for pot, maybe we can get him and change for Andrea?
ANDREA FOR BEASLEY AND WEBSTER. DONE.
andrea would be see no playing time
love, williams, even AntRand would start over him
J.UST E.NJOY T.HIS S.HIT
This is Forty08.
A Healthy Kelenna Azubuike
Is better than all of the rest on this list. As a huge GSW fan I’ve seen a lot of KA and trust me he is a good player. There was a time every all 29 GMs would take KA on their team. That injury really set him back. If he was healthy and completely rehabilitated, he’d easily be my pick to back up JJ and DD.
NBA’s Audited Books Show League Lost $1.5 Billion in Last Five Years
Big Market teams like Bulls and Knicks making money. However the majority of teams have lost money over the last five years.
=============
Thursday, July 7th, 2011 at 9:20 am | no responses
NBA’s Books Show League Lost $1.5 Billion in Last Five Years
After going on the offensive to defend its claims of financial woes, the NBA continued to hammer the point home by leaking financial data to Forbes showing a loss of over $1 billion over the last five seasons: "Net Income–which is after the deduction of all costs–would give a more definitive picture. Sources close to the NBA labor negotiations have provided Net Income numbers for the league each year over the last five years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season. Given that the NBA is saying that they are running at a net loss, as opposed to the NFL, which is saying they are seeing profits declining, the NBA is compelled to open their books as part of labor law, and have done so. The following numbers are audited figures. If the projected figures are correct, the NBA will have lost $1.845 billion over the last 6 years, not turned a profit, as reported by [Nate] Silver. The following shows the losses, as well as the number of teams that reportedly have run at a loss the last 5 years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season: ’05-’06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million. ’06-’07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million. ’07-’08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million. ’08-’09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million. ’09-’10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million. ’10-’11 23 clubs ran at a loss, total loss of $300 million. Before one begins to say that this all is skewed toward ownership, looking at the Forbes numbers that detail the 2009-10 season show that while some clubs are running in the red, some, such as the Knicks and Bulls are profiting handsomely."
more here
Audited Numbers Show NBA Lost Over $1.5B Over Last Five Years
The following shows the losses, as well as the number of teams that reportedly have run at a loss the last 5 years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season:
05-06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million
06-07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million
07-08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million
08-09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million
09-10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million
* 10-11 23 clubs ran at a loss, total loss of $300 million
more on link
NBA Refutes Forbes’ Report
Claims it contains inaccurate information.
And last night, the League released a long statement in an effort to fight back:
The information from Forbes that serves as the basis for this article is inaccurate and we do not know how they do their calculations. Forbes does not have the financial data for our teams and the magazine’s estimates do not reflect reality. Precisely to avoid this issue, the NBA and its teams shared their complete league and team audited financials as well as our state and Federal tax returns with the Players Union. Those financials demonstrate the substantial and indisputable losses the league has incurred over the past several years.
The analysis that was posted this afternoon has several significant factual inaccuracies, including: "(The NBA) is a fundamentally healthy and profitable business" • The league lost money every year of the just expiring CBA. During these years, the league has never had positive Net Income, EBITDA or Operating Income. "Many of the purported losses result from an unusual accounting treatment related to depreciation and amortization when a team is sold."
more on link
Raptors Situation?
Just curious if you have found anything regarding Toronto’s standing?
Not Yet
Not really looking.
I just saw one tweet clicked on the link and then the links within article linked within the tweet. If I stumble across something I will post it.
ISTM at this point that it is the local TV revenues and team salaries that are the big variables here. BC has done a good job of managing the Raptors payroll, which no doubt is one reason he got extended. I don’t know the size of the Raptors TV deals. But here is a comparison between the Lakers and Blazers TV deals. Notice the very wide difference.
Also, the issue of revenue sharing is being debated between small-market and large-market teams. The L.A. Lakers’ tv deal is worth $150 million per year to the team, while the Portland Trail Blazers’ tv deal was signed for 10 years and $120 million. In other words, the Lakers make more off their tv contract in one season than the Blazers do in a decade.
Lakers deal is worth $150 million a year
Blazers deal is worth $12 million a year.
That is a difference in local TV deals of $138 million a year.
Regarding: ``BC has done a good job of managing the Raptors payroll, which no doubt is one reason he got extended.``
Raptors were LAST in the league in payroll efficiency last year.
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1632
That may well be true, but it is probably also true that Colangelo has kept the payroll within whatever limits MLSE has specified.
It’s one thing to spend a prescribed operating budget. Its another to use that operating budget to actually get a ROI.
Raptors are one of the few teams to post a profit. I’m sure MLSE considers that a return on income. Whether fans do or not is a whole other question.
by dhackett1565 on Jul 7, 2011 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions
ROI for payroll dollars is wins. Efficiency for payroll dollars is wins per dollar. Suggesting that BC managed the payroll well because the Raptors were profitable is not a fair statement as there are other factors that go into the Raptors overall profitability out side of BC’s management of the payroll (i.e. fixed costs – operating overhead, marketing budgets etc.). Further, I would argue that the Raptors would have been exponentially more profitable if BC wasn’t dead last in the league in payroll efficiency (higher attendance, play-off dates and corresponding gate consession sales, higher demand for tv rights etc.).
Sure, maybe they could have been better – but that doesn’t change the fact they were one of maybe 7 or 8 teams to post a profit. In a league losing money, that’s nothing to sneeze at.
by dhackett1565 on Jul 7, 2011 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions
And clearly, and I mean mind-numbingly obvious to the point of physical pain, MLSE cares not a fig for wins. So your “ROI for payroll dollars is wins” argument works fine for the fans, like I said, but means squat in terms of actual return on investment.
by dhackett1565 on Jul 7, 2011 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions
You obviously didn’t read where I wrote how if the payroll dollars were used more efficiently it would have positively impacted the ROI from a overall profitability perspective. So yes it has a MASSIVE effect on ROI from an overall profitability standpoint. Here, I’ll post again as payroll efficiency = more wins = more money:
“Further, I would argue that the Raptors would have been exponentially more profitable if BC wasn’t dead last in the league in payroll efficiency (higher attendance, play-off dates and corresponding gate consession sales, higher demand for tv rights etc.).”
Is your argument that BC shouldn’t be held accountable for the missmanaging of the payroll budget because the Raptors were profitable DESPITE his missmanagement of the payroll?
My argument is fairly simple.
Attendance was not exactly crippled by his performance. The Raptors still had fairly strong attendance numbers.
Also, although I’m sure MLSE would be happier if they had some playoff income, the reality is that every year, 14 of the 30 teams get no playoff revenue. BC missed the playoffs (which they don’t care about, outside of the potential profitability) and still made money, in a league that is losing money on average.
Sure, BC should be held accountable for mismanaging the payroll. However, do you think MLSE would prefer someone who mismanages payroll wins-wise, costs them some playoff money, but posts a large profit; or would they rather discard this person, and take a chance on a more wins-oriented manager, who might get them those playoff revenues, but lose money overall – which is not an unrealistic situation in a league where 16 teams make the playoffs and 7 post profits.
My Understanding Is That Player Payroll
accounts for huge percentage of a team’s expenses.
It is hard for me to imagine the Raptors spending $60 million in one season in expenses other than player payroll related expenses.
Ok, just so I have this straight:
1. BC mismanged the payroll, he was ranked LAST in payroll efficiency. We agree on this (I hope because it is irrefutable)
2. You are arguing this is not really a bad thing because it doesn’t matter because the Raptors were profitable.
So, by your logic, the raptors could have hired a shaved monkey to run the team. He would have likely got the same result (LAST in payroll efficiency) as he couldn’t have done worse than BC because BC was LAST.
As for your argument that attendance was not impacted by BC. You are dead wrong. Here are the Raptors attendance records rankings in the NBA during BC’s reign:
2008 – 9th
2009 – 10th
2010 – 14th
2011 – 19th
See a pattern here? Well I do, the Raptors have dropped in attendance EVERY YEAR over the last 4 years. I would hazard to guess, that after last years sh!t show, we’re going to see a further decline in attendance next year.
So here’s my argument: BC missmanaged the payroll and has the Raptors as LAST in payroll efficiency. Attendance is trending downwards due to this missmanagement. Therefore, the Raptors have significant lost oportunity costs due to BC’s missmanagement. The Raptors were profitable DESPITE BC’s incompedance, not because of it, therefore the following makes absolutely NO sense-
“However, do you think MLSE would prefer someone who mismanages payroll wins-wise, costs them some playoff money, but posts a large profit; or would they rather discard this person, and take a chance on a more wins-oriented manager, who might get them those playoff revenues, but lose money overall”
If they had someone who won more games, made playoff dates and managed the payrol efficiently it would not be possible to lose money overall if the circumstances were the same.
Let me ask you in a different way. If we agree that BC missmanaged the payrol, how is he responsible for the Raptors profitablility?
What Was The Value Of The Raptors
TV deals under BC vs before BC?
=====
related news
Toronto Raptors – Raptors Plus You
The Raptors build an interactive microsite tied to their "Raptors + You" marketing campaign, complete with video highlights, letter from the GM, benefits, payment plans, and information on new dynamic pricing for next season.
In addition, they are guaranteeing their ticket prices for the 2012-13 season as well.
http://www.thebusinessofsports.com/2011/05/09/more-nba-season-ticket-offers/
Do you have those annual Raptors attendance rankings memorized or do you have a link that you didn’t post? Just asking?
LOL Officer Buddah of the link police! Here you go, forgot to post the link: http://espn.go.com/nba/attendance
And you reminded me of something Buddah. I beleive the Raptors were lowering some ticket prices next year. Oh yes, see link below. What a remarkable job BC has done in improving both the product and sales! What a master executive!!
http://www.cbc.ca/sports/basketball/story/2011/03/01/sp-raptors-tickets.html
“Maple Leafs Sports and Entertainment Ltd., is lowering prices for next season in an effort to fill up the Air Canada Centre. The reduced prices will remain in effect for the 2012-2013 season as well.
“It’s no secret there were some pockets we were trying to fill, that we’ve been trying to fill for the last couple of years,” said Rajani Kamath, MLSE’s director of corporate communications."
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/basketball/story/2011/03/01/sp-raptors-tickets.html#ixzz1RRhPXppc
I Agree That BC Misread Bosh
Bargnani and Turkoglu.
But through all his player mistakes he has managed to keep the Raptors profitable. Its not like he is the only GM to make player mistakes.
SISTM that while one can criticize his player moves and possibly coaching moves one would be hard pressed given the NBA’s current overall financial status to criticize BC’s basketball business acumen.
MAS still hasn’t addressed the fact that in a league losing money overall, with 23 teams losing money last year, with attendance dropping and ticket prices being lowered, with one of the worst teams in the league and the least efficient payroll, BC has the business talent to make a profit.
Why on earth would MLSE ever let that go?
I have addresed this many times
The team may be profitable DESPITE Colangelo missmanaging the payroll. There is no relation between BC’s performance and the team’s profitablility. If I’m wrong, show me precisely what BC has done to make the team profitable? BC is responsible for the way the payroll is spent and the team that is on the court – which has been boarderline terrible. The fact that the team is profitable is completely coincindental. I’ve yet to hear an argument as to why/how you think BC has contributed to the profitability of the franchise.
I’ve yet to hear an argument as to why/how you think BC has contributed to the profitability of the franchise.
My argument is that he is in charge. He is the GM and President, which means he oversees all aspects of the Toronto Raptors business.
I can’t understand how you think that the Raps are somehow stumbling onto profits when so many other teams are losing money.
The one thing BC is in charge of – managing the payroll/talent – is where the Raptors are last in the league. He has driven down attendance and forced the francise to reduce ticket prices through his missmanagement of the roster.
The fact the Raptors are profitable despite other franchises being in the red has NOTHING to do with Colangelo’s performance. There are other factors that have much more impact such as:
- Marketing budgets
- Overhead/fixed costs
- Stadiums – the ACC is brand new with more corporate boxes, consessions and expensive seats than most arenas
- Leafs season ticket holders have been FORCED to buy Raptors tickets and boxes
- National sponsorship revenue – While raptors get national accounts like Air Canada and BMO, other small market teams don’t have this benefit
- recent strength of the Canadian dollar vis a vis the US dollar means a relative increase in the value of revenue (i.e. CDN$ coming in) versus payroll costs (USD$ going out to players).
- national and more lucrative local TV rights (i.e. I’m sure the TV rights for the Raptors bring in more revenu than say Indianapolis or Minnesota)
-etc.
-etc.
All of which contribute to why the Raptors are profitable and some other NBA teams aren’t. These factors have NOTHING to do with Colangelo’s performance. In fact, the ONE thing BC has control over, what he IS actually in charge of – the payroll – he is ranked LAAASSSSTTTT in the league.
The one thing that BC has done since being in charge is add a bit of “sizzle” to the line-up (although some might say he forgot the “steak”). Casual fans often get excited about scoring and the Raptors (until this year) have been good at that. I suppose you could also argue that BC is also good at selling “hype” to fans as well.
Sure, wins attract fans, but in the absence of wins scoring and hype seem to be the second and third factors that attract the casual viewing public. BC may not have delivered in category A, but he has brought enough of B and C to keep enough fans coming back for the team to make money while many others don’t.
These factors have NOTHING to do with Colangelo’s performance. In fact, the ONE thing BC has control over, what he IS actually in charge of – the payroll – he is ranked LAAASSSSTTTT in the league.
This is where you are wrong. The General Manager of a team has control over the roster and salaries. The President oversees all that other stuff you mentioned – bringing in sponsors, TV revenue, marketing, publicity, and operation of the facilities they are in (to the extent of the control of the team).
Bryan Colangelo is the President and General Manager. He is NOT only in control of the payroll – he is in control of all business aspects of the Toronto Raptors franchise.
Here’s a link to the Senior Executive Leadership team at MLSE: http://www.mlse.com/inside_mlse/leadersatmlse.aspx
You will notice that while BC and Burke have President and GM titles for their respective teams, Beth Robertson has overall ticket sales and service responsibilities for all of MLSE. Dave Hopkinson is the senior Exec. for Business Partnerships (HE will have corporate sponsorship for ALL of MLSE in his portfolio).Chris Hebb has Broadcast and content (i.e. TV revenue).
As you can see, while Colangelo has been managing the basketball team (badly) he has NOT been responsible for and does not have overall oversight of revenu and subsequently profitability. Say uncle dhackett, you’re wrong on this.
You are correct that he does not have direct control over those things. My apologies.
However, I’d like you to look at the big picture.
Colangelo is given a very specific situation – you have ticket sale assets, certain sponsorships, etc as inputs. He took those inputs and “mismanaged” the team to a point where the team made a profit. I never claimed he should get all the credit for making a profit. However, he should certainly get credit.
I don’t believe you have the insight into MLSE’s inner workings to know whether it was in spite of or because of BC that they made a profit.
Certainly, wins do not enter into operating profit. The top teams in operating profit were:
Knicks, Bulls, Rockets, Lakers, Pistons, Raptors, Thunder, Suns, Warriors, Clippers. In that order. So personally I see no correlation between winning and profit – so I put no weight whatsoever in your argument that BC’s cost-per-win inefficiency is in any way hurting the Raps’ finances.
Does Colangelo have some input? Sure, but it is minimal (i.e. corporate sponsor “meet and greets” etc.).
My overall point, which I think is indesputable, is that whether it was Colangelo or another GM, the Raps would have been profitable base on the many factor I listed above. Colangelow’s actions (missmanaging the payroll) actualy limitted the team’s profitablility. It’s very simple really. If BC had managed his payroll more efficiently, HIS MAIN TASK AS GENERAL MANAGER, the team would have won more games and possibly have been a playoff team. This makes his product more attractive to consumers (ticket buyers) and corporate sponsors. This means more revenue coupled with little to no increase in fixed or variable costs. This means more profit. All of the teams you have listed above would have realized MORE profit if their teams’ payrolls were managed more effectively and they won more games.
So in conclusion:
- It is likely that BC has little influence on marketing strategy, corporate sponsorships and tv revenue (other than the team’s ability to win of course)
- he failed at his primary objective (payroll to success ratio or efficiency)
- If the team had won more games they would have a better product to sell to consumers and sponsors thereby raising revenue and profitability.
Therefore, in the only sphere where BC had an impact on profitability, he had a NEGATIVE impact.
- It is likely that BC has little influence on marketing strategy, corporate sponsorships and tv revenue (other than the team’s ability to win of course)
It is possible. However, it is certain he knew what limits he would operate within, and would be at least familiar with what effect his choices would have on this part of the business.
- he failed at his primary objective (payroll to success ratio or efficiency)
Again, this is your opinion. IF MLSE’s goal was to win lots of games, you are right. However, if they prefer that he, say, start a rebuild process by which he takes on a level of salary inefficiency – due to giving more time to young players on mostly cheap contracts, playing the more highly paid veterans less, in combination with lengthy injuries to the highest paid players on the team, then he may have succeeded. You don’t know what his goal was for this year.
- If the team had won more games they would have a better product to sell to consumers and sponsors thereby raising revenue and profitability.
Sure, but how much effect does this have? The Maple Leafs sell out every game and they’ve been awful for years. Heck, even the Raps did fairly well in attendance last year (top 20) when they were close to the bottom of the league in wins. There would likely be a benefit, but how big would it be? Perhaps with his overall business success (indicated by the fact that MLSE likes money, and re-hired him recently – prbably because he was making them money) was worth more to them than what may have been only incremental profits from a more winning-now oriented model.
Finally, didn’t we all want to lose games this year? By definition then, Colangelo achieved exactly what you needed him to – he orchestrated a team that lost more than it financially projected to.
by dhackett1565 on Jul 8, 2011 10:04 AM EDT up reply actions
By BC’s own statements, the rebuild process did not start in earnest until injuries caused them to lose a wack of games. Now, I and every realistic fan knew that the rebuild process started at the close of the season before last. The roster was the problem, not injuries. BC thought that they would be able to field a team lead by Bargnani that would be competative. Another example of his infinite wisdom. It wasn’t until the team was getting crushed that BC then said OK we are now rebuilding.
As for the winning and profitability corollary, sure the Leafs, a team with a half century plus of branding has been profitable while being bad, but they are obviously in a very differnt situation than the raptors. So using them as an example is flawed. When a team wins and sells more tickets and gets better sponsorships and tv deals by managing the payroll better, the impact on profit is massive. That is because the in creased revenue is achieved by the quality of the product and therefore their is no increased to costs. So the organization spends the SAME amount of money and gets significantly more revenue , which translates into significantly more pure profit.
As for the following: “MLSE likes money, and re-hired him recently – prbably because he was making them money)”
You probably remember as well as I do that there was much consternation and hand-wringing on resigning BC. He was resigned to the shortest of short contracts (practically an insult) and it had nothing to do with BC making MLSE money and a lot to do with MLSE not wanting to go into a search for a new Executive while on the cusp of a sale.
BC thought that they would be able to field a team lead by Bargnani that would be competative.
The beauty of this reasoning is that if that was successful, we would have had a winning team. Yay. If not, we lose a lot and are rebuilding – it’s really a decision that made itself – which is evidenced by the fact that BC didn’t go out and sign a big free agent last year – this allowed both possibilities.
…it had nothing to do with BC making MLSE money and a lot to do with MLSE not wanting to go into a search for a new Executive while on the cusp of a sale.
Hey – you know how when a corporation is being sold, they like to keep paying high cost employees just because they can’t be bothered to, say, give a promotion to one of his underlings for probably a quarter of his salary – oh, wait, that’s too simple. And logical.
by dhackett1565 on Jul 8, 2011 10:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Your argument basically boils down to – the Raptors were profitable, MLSE rehired BC so he must have been successfull. Which is ridiculous. You have not demonstrated how BC had any impact on profitability or moreover presented an argument (or even a comment) that he didn’t actually hurt their profitability.
Face facts, on the portfolio that he actually had control and accountability over, he failed miserably. End of story. IF MLSE made a mistake re-upping him with a “make-good, last chance” contract, despite his poor performance, that’s their missmanagement.
How do you know that? I think that was the first thing DW19 has said on the subject. ;)
Anyway, I thought I responded to all your points, but I guess not… My argument boils down to: he was rehired, thus MLSE felt he made them money. Since MLSE’s only real interest is making money, and they have a heck of a lot more access to the inner workings of their own company than you do, I’ll take their opinion of BC’s business performance over yours.
Fine, if your going to assume that his rehiring was some sort of an affirmation of his performance in areas that weren’t in his portfolio or muted profitability that was coincident with him simply being here at the same time and he had little if anything to do with, then I suppose there’s no point continuing the discussion.
I think there may be a middle ground here
I think the fact that Colangelo was rehired is an indicator that MLSE thought he did his job by making them money. However, the length of the contract is also an indicator that they thought he should have done better, which includes providing a better team to drive ticket sales and other revenue.
The Raptors are solidly in rebuild mode and the only thing you have to sell in this case is hope. If BC goes off the rebuild rails and signs mediocre veteran talent, fan hope won’t last long and neither will he. One way or another, the Raptors are going to go through a complete rebuild. The only real question is whether it will be BC who does it or not.
My bad DW19...
As I didn’t even look at who wrote that. Instinctivly thought it was dhackett, and my response makes more sense if you take the entire thread between dhacket and myself into consideration.
Now having said that, curious to understand how you view my argument as dogmatic?
I did make one argument in this thread which is that BC is good at hyping the fans on the teams that he puts together. Essentially, selling them smoke, which to this point they have bought in great enough quantities for the team to make a profit. That can’t work forever (unless you run the Leafs), but MLSE must believe that it will continue to be effective for at least the next couple of years.
However, what I was referring to is your payroll effectiveness argument. It is an unfortunate statistic, but I don’t think it is the only relevant detail in BC’s job performance or in the Raptors profit/loss column. The Knicks have had a hugely ineffective payroll at various times in the recent past and still made tons of dough. All kinds of entertainment products make money despite being of poor quality (look at most summer movie blockbusters for example).
Just want to say – high quality discussion on this topic all around folks.
I’ll agree to disagree, since we are running out of horizontal space here. But I think Siggian and DW bring up great points here. He certainly has a ticking clock on his time here – and the short contract does indicate some level of improvement is needed. I just don’t think the picture is as bleak as MAS paints it.
@DW19
If BC is so great at selling fans on the teams he puts together, then how do you explain the declining attendance numbers for the last 4 years and the fact that the Raptors have had to reduce ticket prices for the first time ever?
Regarding your Knicks example, does this mean they should have re-signed Isaiah Thomas? It’s basically the same logic.
Your Isaiah Thomas point is an interesting one. Of course they shouldn’t have. But that is for basketball reasons. Perhaps he was great for finances. We simply don’t know, since we don’t get to see the inner workings of these companies.
Your declining attendance point is a good one – and probably why they gave him a shorter contract – the magic was wearing off.
Which sort of makes the point that the owners are to blame for their own mess. I remember reading an article (I think it was Simmons) that stated its a good thing for there to be only a few teams dominating a sport and I think the NBA is the poster child for why this is not the case. If you believe the league (even if they say is only half true it would apply)) then revenue sharing makes sense. The Lakers would have no one to beat up on if there were no Wolves or Warriors in the league. Its like the jobbers in wrestling, without them there are no stars.
No It Is Not The Owners Alone That Are Responsible For The Mess
The mess is due to their inability to properly handle the Player’s Association in the last CB A negotiations.
Clearly the Union is mainly at fault because the owners wouldn’t give away the store if they weren’t coerced into it by the Union.
So If The Owners Have A Fault In This
It was letting themselves be coerced by the Union in the last CBA negotiations.
Of course that doesn’t apply to current owners who were not owners when the last CBA deal was struck with the Union.
Buddah, you’re going to have to explain how the Owners were “coerced” by the NBAPA during a OWNER DRIVEN LOCKOUT!? LOL
You know what lockout means right? It means the owners “lockout” the players. So who was this an example of the players excerting coersion?
Unreasonable Demands By The Players
The owners wouldn’t have given the players the CBA that they did if not coerced by the Union.
ISTM that you don’t understand what “Lockout” means in this context.
What it means is that the players are barred from accessing team facilities because there is no CBA in place.
Seems like a very wise decision by the owners. With no CBA in place a team could possibly become liable for millions in legal expenses and court awarded fees if the player got injured on the teams facility without a CBA in place. One could argue that there is no CBA in place because of unreasonable demands by the Union with regard to the new CBA.
So it was the Union that forced the teams to lock the players out the teams’ facility by not agreeing to the owners new CBA proposal.
Its like locking an ex-spouse out of your home after they are granted a divorce which came about from their unreasonable demands during the marriage.. You and that person no longer are married so when the divorce nullified the marriage contract it is the same as when the clock nullified the CBA.
In both cases the owner of the home or in this case teams are smart in locking the players out of their home and arena’s until a new CBA is in place.
weren't the raptors one of the few teams that made money?
by sherwin316 on Jul 7, 2011 11:02 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
re Raptors profitability
MLSE being private will never know numbers, but they are one of the teams with a profit, something to consider, teams under Lux Tax level, Raps being one have rec’d approx $3mil per year from those who spend over the tax level thru the NBA.
Sorry for the typo
Andrea rebounds like a girl
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Raptors HQ
Related FanShots on Raptors HQ
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
