Feschuk: Moves not enough for championship

Post #1 » by **supersub15** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:46 am

The trade that sent T.J. Ford, Rasho Nesterovic and first-round draft pick Roy Hibbert to Indianapolis for O'Neal and Nathan Jawai can be viewed as a win-now move, and this corner is usually all for those. But this stroke obviously isn't as bold as the one made last summer by the champion Boston Celtics, who committed to exceeding the luxury tax – spent money to make money, in other words – while surrounding their big acquisition, Kevin Garnett, with the right role players.

The Raptors, committed to not exceeding the tax threshold, have no freedom to fill out a roster that's looking awfully shallow. So this is a go-for-it-now move that doesn't go far enough – if, that is, the championship is the goal.

For once, I agree with him. We are going to be good, but not good enough to win it all. And if the objective is ultimately to win it all, some other moves have to be made, and the luxury tax threshold has to be crossed. Unfortunately, this is MLSE, and there's zero chance they do that.

v1n5anity · Post #2 » by **v1n5anity** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:55 am

I hope nobody thought about us being a championship type team even with JO. Because what Feschuk wrote was a no brainer. Even I didn't think we're there yet. We need a few more pieces. Maybe 2 more guys. maybe 1 more all-star and 1 more decent player. Even NJ had a big 3 of VC, Kidd & RJ yet they never went far. That's sort of what I see in this team. We could end up that way or just slightly better.

RapTelligence · Post #3 » by **RapTelligence** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:16 am

I never got the impression that we were going for the Championship this year.

AndreaBustani · Post #4 » by **AndreaBustani** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:26 am

Feschuk has been writing scriptures for the past few months and he continues to, these moves are just band aid over the problems that plagued the raptors last year, no upgrade on the perimter, a unproven backup pg, capped out, two injury prone big men, but we just have to wait and see but I agree with Mr. Feschuk.

Justina · Post #5 » by **Justina** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:31 am

it's JO's fault! He wants the championship so badly and has spoken so much about it that he's rubbed off on everyone! Dare to dream JO lol. Well, i guess if we get a good wing player then he's allowed to dream big. But right now I don't see the raps going past the conference finals, IF they even go that far.

Hendrix · Post #6 » by **Hendrix** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:34 am

Meh it keeps us competitive, and 1 move away from being contenders imo. If we traded Bargs +Parker+ next years 1st for a team that has a disgrunteled solid wing I think we could be up there. I don;t thinki t's neciarrily a win now move though. We still have flexibility in 2 years if all doesn;t go well.

Post #7 » by **supersub15** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:39 am

Hendrix wrote:Meh it keeps us competitive, and 1 move away from being contenders imo. If we traded Bargs +Parker+ next years 1st for a team that has a disgrunteled solid wing I think we could be up there. I don;t thinki t's neciarrily a win now move though. We still have flexibility in 2 years if all doesn;t go well.

The trade for O'Neal is a win-now move. You don't take on $22M salary per year just so you become better. You do it, because you think you can win it all. If the brass thinks that O'Neal alone can bring a championship, then I'd like to drink that kool-aid that they have at the ACC. If they don't, then why make this move?

saturn28 · Post #8 » by **saturn28** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:52 am

This is another J.P. Riccardi type move by Colangelo. This trade makes no sense. We need at least one more all star player plus more depth to be a contender. If MLSE is not willing to spend over the cap then another move to bring in a young talented proven player should have been made. Colangelo should have tried to trade for a player like Deng. The guy is a young star in the league and would be here for years. Oneal will be here for 2 years than done.

miggymigs · Post #9 » by **miggymigs** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 10:55 am

We have to remember, Raptors had to move TJ. This was the best deal available to address needs (reboundin/interior defense) without having to lock up salary for 5 years. TJ was damaged goods, so Raptors have to take back damaged goods. We can agree this is not a Celtics type move to win a championship next year and Colangelo never said it was. I still think Feschuk and Grange for that matter are hedging there bets so that if this doesn't work well they can do a big 'I told you so'.

Maximillion · Post #10 » by **Maximillion** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:01 am

supersub15 wrote:
Hendrix wrote:Meh it keeps us competitive, and 1 move away from being contenders imo. If we traded Bargs +Parker+ next years 1st for a team that has a disgrunteled solid wing I think we could be up there. I don;t thinki t's neciarrily a win now move though. We still have flexibility in 2 years if all doesn;t go well.

The trade for O'Neal is a win-now move. You don't take on $22M salary per year just so you become better. You do it, because you think you can win it all. If the brass thinks that O'Neal alone can bring a championship, then I'd like to drink that kool-aid that they have at the ACC. If they don't, then why make this move?

It's an attempt to win-now without hurting our flexibility at winning later. You could even argue it's a win-later move.

Post #11 » by **supersub15** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:12 am

miggymigs wrote:We have to remember, Raptors had to move TJ. This was the best deal available to address needs (reboundin/interior defense) without having to lock up salary for 5 years. TJ was damaged goods, so Raptors have to take back damaged goods. We can agree this is not a Celtics type move to win a championship next year and Colangelo never said it was. I still think Feschuk and Grange for that matter are hedging there bets so that if this doesn't work well they can do a big 'I told you so'.

I agree that we had to move TJ, but both Colangelo and Sam agreed that O'Neal was the best deal to help them win now. If the thinking was to win 2 years down the road, then they should have accepted the Portland or the Charlotte trades.

There is no use putting 80% of your chips in and holding on to 20% (or whatever numbers you want to use). You go all in. I don't think that Colangelo wants to stop at this move, but I'm pretty sure that MLSE has set the luxury tax threshold as his budget (as proven by Calderon taking a $60K pay cut just so we can come in right on budget).

The Celtics knew they were a contender and went all in. We should too.

Legal Non-Conforming · Post #12 » by **Legal Non-Conforming** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:12 am

Man, there's a lot of bellyaching going on here.

Post #13 » by **supersub15** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:14 am

Maximillion wrote:It's an attempt to win-now without hurting our flexibility at winning later. You could even argue it's a win-later move.

It's more like this: It's an attempt to win 50 games now without hurting our flexibility at winning 50 games later.

miggymigs · Post #14 » by **miggymigs** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:29 am

supersub15 wrote:
miggymigs wrote:We have to remember, Raptors had to move TJ. This was the best deal available to address needs (reboundin/interior defense) without having to lock up salary for 5 years. TJ was damaged goods, so Raptors have to take back damaged goods. We can agree this is not a Celtics type move to win a championship next year and Colangelo never said it was. I still think Feschuk and Grange for that matter are hedging there bets so that if this doesn't work well they can do a big 'I told you so'.

I agree that we had to move TJ, but both Colangelo and Sam agreed that O'Neal was the best deal to help them win now. If the thinking was to win 2 years down the road, then they should have accepted the Portland or the Charlotte trades.

There is no use putting 80% of your chips in and holding on to 20% (or whatever numbers you want to use). You go all in. I don't think that Colangelo wants to stop at this move, but I'm pretty sure that MLSE has set the luxury tax threshold as his budget (as proven by Calderon taking a $60K pay cut just so we can come in right on budget).

The Celtics knew they were a contender and went all in. We should too.

I agree with what you say and the only way to win now is to go over the luxury tax, or it take years of steady progress (ie Spurs). I guess what is frustrating for us fans is know in our heart that MLSE will never do that. So we need luck and very smart people around the organization. I have faith, but not much.

Post #15 » by **The Duke** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:37 am

JO + Bosh + Jose + spareparts DNE Championship.

I hope MLSE realizes this, and is willing to add salary before the deadline. The odds
of that are indeed low, but i guess we'll see what happens.
It will take an upgraded wing player to say we have a legit "shot" at it.

MLSE is a corporation, favouring there bottom line, I dont think going over the
lux tax will yeild a higher NPV for them when you factor in percentages and
lost savings, coupled with additional cost, even when factoring increased revenue.
But this calculation is subjective, and most likely will hover towards less risk,
which does boad well for Raps realistic champ run this year

MrBojangelz71 · Post #16 » by **MrBojangelz71** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:39 am

saturn28 wrote:This is another J.P. Riccardi type move by Colangelo. This trade makes no sense. We need at least one more all star player plus more depth to be a contender. If MLSE is not willing to spend over the cap then another move to bring in a young talented proven player should have been made. Colangelo should have tried to trade for a player like Deng. The guy is a young star in the league and would be here for years. Oneal will be here for 2 years than done.

And at that time, should Oneal not work out, we have ample space to make any needed changes. If Oneal does work out, he gives us qualities Deng never could.

Raptolicism · Post #17 » by **Raptolicism** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:45 am

I've got to say that I agree with little that Feschuck says. Maybe I'm mistaken but there always seems to be a negative tone to his articles; almost just for the sake of being negative.

Rexx · Post #18 » by **Rexx** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:54 am

we need STEPHEN JACKSON. GET IT DONE BC !!!

JL5 · Post #19 » by **JL5** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:55 am

Agreed.
Better team? Definitely.
Competitive for the 3-4 spot in the East? I'd like to think so.
'09 Championship-bound? Most definitely not.

Guy Smiley · Post #20 » by **Guy Smiley** » Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:55 am

What has cap space ever done for the Raptors?

If things don't work out with JO then it will be a tough hole to climb out of and we can count our blessings if Bosh decides to re-sign.

The trade was a risk but it does have potential benefits. In theory I think it was a good move but it just so happens I have never been a fan of JO and feel he is grossly overrated. I hope I am wrong and he comes back as close to 100% as possible. He is obviously very talented but not a top tier franchise player. Even less so with his recent injuries.

I guess my disappointment stems from the fact that I don't see the Raps as a $70 million team with the talent they have. The holes are glaring and this includes the coach. Why not blow things up and start from scratch rather than bring in a big name player who has struggled mightily in recent years. This is a move I would have expected from Peddie. Let's hope JO doesn't turn into an Eric Lindros for the Raptors.