Toronto

[ForeverTFC]

As others have said, the pieces just didn't fit. The players they had took away from their teammates in a lot of cases rather than complimenting them. The fit of the team was clunky and duplicative in different ways. They were doubled and tripled up in some skill sets while totally lacking in others.

This essentially was the strategy. Lowe used to call it "vision 6'9" on his pods. The roster was designed so every player could be interchangeable. Ultimately, I think it came down to 3 key factors in my opinion on why the team never amounted to the sum of its parts:
- No one on the team could shoot off the dribble and even FVV slumped for a year and half; this made them very easy to guard in the half court
- Barnes/OG/ Siakam all wanted to operate in the same area, which due to the lack of shooting, was always clogged
- All 4 of FVV/OG/Siakam/Barnes believed they deserved to have their games and touches prioritized, there was no understood hierarchy on the team; this partly came from the strategy to have everyone be interchangeable

It's not a coincidence that Barnes, FVV, and Siakam all saw their numbers and impact increase when they were broken up. OG is the only "stagnant" performer, though it sounds like he no longer is expecting more touches and plays run for him in NY.

[cupcakesnake]

I really liked the players on that team and wanted them to do well (I'm talking about 2023, specifically) but...

Regardless of talent level, the Raptors didn't check enough boxes in terms of skills they were putting on the court.
- No primary rim protector (and not even a lot of good secondary ones)
- No elite source of rim pressure (Siakam is a decent at this, but not as a primary guy in cramped space)
- Lack of shooting in the frontcourt. Also too many guys had weird cold spells that year to compound the problem.
- Weak defensive rebounding.

That's just too many holes to fill. They were still elite at forcing turnovers and playing disruptive defense, but you can't be giving that much stuff up just to be elite at a couple small things.

The Jakob Poeltl trade fixed the rim protection thing, but made the shooting problem worse, since now you had Scottie, Siakam, and a non-shooting center.

It was a cool idea but ultimately really poor roster design. I still think that team was a bit unlucky and easily could have made the playoffs and even possibly made a little noise.

[Tor_Raps]

When you screw up and forget how to build a complete roster, this is what happens. Masai was hellbent on his stupid 6'9 strategy but forgot that you also need complimenting skillsets to go along with their heights and wingspan.

From a macro level, we had no starting calibre Center for 3 years and still haven't gotten a backup PG in 3 years. Then on a micro level, we had no shooting, playmaking abilities, interior defense, depth and a number 1 scoring option.

This has always been on Masai and Nurse maximized the redundant crap he was given.

[YogurtProducer]

Pascal, OG and Barbes essentially play same position, their game does excell in different ways, but the fit was clunky. I think there is a reason why basketball is played the way it is, and why positions exist still. Similar case with Phoenix this year I guess, individually, these players were good.

Also, sometimes it can be as easy as, do you have best player to close out the game. These 3 weren't that.

The position thing mattered less than the lack of shooting. If Barnes or Siakam were a consistent 36% shooter from deep it would've changed a lot.

But that team also had ZERO depth. We lost every game when benches came in - it was actually wild.

[___Rand___]

How did Toronto w/Siakam, OG &Barnes leading the way not do better in the playoffs the Last few seasons ? Had Trent Jr to shoot & a decent pt guard too + Nic Nurse is a damn good coach, smh

Not enough guard play. When you're starting Poeltl Siakam Barnes and OG along with a PG, you basically have 4 front court players starting and that just doesn't work. Gary Trent Jr entirely too inconsistent. Point guard not enough. Pascal and Barnes are ill fitting on the floor at the same time.

I thought it would've worked better once we traded OG and got RJ and Quickley. RJ Quickley, Barnes Pascal and Poeltl as a unit should have worked. Didn't have time to jell before Pascal was traded. Darko isn't very good at implementing his schemes on a team. It takes entirely too long before you can see stuff working.

Agree, especially with the bolded.

You can get away with only having journeyman centers, but you can't get away with only having one playable guard. FVV is fine, but he can't be the only guard capable of handling the ball and initiating. During the 2 year run with Siakam-OG-Barnes-FVV:
- the team was 89-74 in the RS (good, but not great) and 2-4 in the PS
- the best backup PG, the only backup PG with positive VORP, was . . . 2-way player Jeff Dowtin, who played in a total of 25 games

FVV is vulnerable defensively against taller quicker guards. He is too slow to guard Brunson Maxey, etc now and other lead guards would just torch us.

I think if we moved Pascal 1st, and had FVV/Quickley, RJ, OG, Barnes and Poeltl, that lineup would work. Gary Trent Jr would be the 6th man which he should be not the starter he is now, then we got a real starting 5.

[Raps in 4]

Terrible fit. Scottie and Siakam played the same position and style (point-forwards who can't shoot). Then we added another big who can't shoot into the mix (Poeltl). We'd then camp either Pascal or Scottie in the corner to unclog the paint, which didn't play to either player's strengths. Scottie is best used as a Jokic-lite hub on offence, surrounded by shooters and slashers. It was a really poorly thought out roster and it took Masai way too long to realize it.

[giberish]

As others have said, the pieces just didn't fit. The players they had took away from their teammates in a lot of cases rather than complimenting them. The fit of the team was clunky and duplicative in different ways. They were doubled and tripled up in some skill sets while totally lacking in others.

This essentially was the strategy. Lowe used to call it "vision 6'9" on his pods. The roster was designed so every player could be interchangeable. Ultimately, I think it came down to 3 key factors in my opinion on why the team never amounted to the sum of its parts:
- No one on the team could shoot off the dribble and even FVV slumped for a year and half; this made them very easy to guard in the half court
- Barnes/OG/ Siakam all wanted to operate in the same area, which due to the lack of shooting, was always clogged
- All 4 of FVV/OG/Siakam/Barnes believed they deserved to have their games and touches prioritized, there was no understood hierarchy on the team; this partly came from the strategy to have everyone be interchangeable

It's not a coincidence that Barnes, FVV, and Siakam all saw their numbers and impact increase when they were broken up. OG is the only "stagnant" performer, though it sounds like he no longer is expecting more touches and plays run for him in NY.

The big problem with the 'vision 6'9"" plan is that it's REALLY hard to find guys that size who have at least secondary playmaking skills and who are credible 3-point threats. Even the good players who Toronto had in that range weren't really good enough shooters to work when they're making up most of the guys on the court. It's great for defense but gums up your own offense. Though they never really had the guy that size who was physical enough to slide down to center which was keeping their defense from being elite. So they went for Poeltl who upgraded their defense but made their shooting even more limited.

Then in pushing for the all forward lineup they ended up with a very weak/thin guard rotation.

[Duffman100]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

[YogurtProducer]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

Like I would say if we even had an "average" bench - we would have won like 5+ more games in both 2021 and 2022. Our bench alone lost us that many games in the 10 minutes per game they had to play.

Heaven forbid we had an injury...

[Rapsin6]

A part of the problem with Nurse is that he had a defensive philosophy to allow corner 3’s to not so great shooters and give extra attention to opposing stars. It worked the first couple of years as we had great defenders his first 2 years but faltered as we kept losing them and the league continually getting better at 3 point shooting. We were still allowing wide open 3 after wide open 3 in his last game coached. In other words, he was innovative in the beginning but got figured out. I’m not sure how he did this year in Philly but it’s telling that he’s a first round exit with last year’s MVP and a rising star.

The other Raptor issues are well covered here as far as roster construction and talent not replenished.

[JRoy]

Long bois!

[Duffman100]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

Like I would say if we even had an "average" bench - we would have won like 5+ more games in both 2021 and 2022. Our bench alone lost us that many games in the 10 minutes per game they had to play.

Heaven forbid we had an injury...

Yup. Our best bench player was ... Boucher.

[Capn'O]

They're all big wings/forwards. They needed a guard and a center and spacing to make it work. Same as Phoenix.

[Rapsin6]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

The bench was terrible but the starters the last two years were terrible too. I don’t think we sniff 50 wins with a better bench unless some of the starters were the bench and replaced in the starting lineup by good players. FVv, Scottie and Poeltl would be good bench players on a 50 win team if they were replaced by a stretch center, good SG and ball movement PG. We had huge first quarter deficits both years.

[ConSarnit]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

I have to disagree. The bench was a problem but I don’t think the team had 50 win potential. The early season production of Schroder vs FVV was not a huge gap (Schroder eventually regressed back to his regular self).

DS/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a -0.9 net rating.

FVV/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a +9.5 net rating.

I don’t believe FVV is good enough to swing a net rating by 10 points. And that’s with Barnes being much better this year than last, which should have somewhat compensated for the loss of FVV.

The reason that lineup to end last year looked so good is because they beat up on some really bad teams. Here were some of the Raptors wins during that time:

DET x3
CHA x2
WAS x2
ORL
NOP (no Zion)
MIN (no Towns or Edwards)
MIA (no Butler)

Almost every win during that 15-11 run was against the absolute worst teams in the league or against teams missing their best player.

Do I think the team would have been solid had FVV stayed? Probably. I don’t know if we can trust that sample size to project than as a 50 win team given it was the end of the season when many teams had given up or they had begun resting their stars. The schedule seemed incredibly soft.

[Duffman100]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

The bench was terrible but the starters the last two years were terrible too. I don’t think we sniff 50 wins with a better bench unless some of the starters were the bench and replaced in the starting lineup by good players. FVv, Scottie and Poeltl would be good bench players on a 50 win team if they were replaced by a stretch center, good SG and ball movement PG. We had huge first quarter deficits both years.

We won 48 games in 21/22 with that SL and zero bench. They would have easily won 50 games with a 2-3 solid bench players.
We went 41/41 in 22/23 with zero bench. It's definitely possible we could have won 50 games with 2-3 solid bench players taking the load off of the starters and reducing injuries.

Tough to gauge anything from last year.

I'm not saying we were going win anything of consequence (2 round ceiling). But bench was definitely a massive factor.

[Pointgod]

Raptors had no shooting. There was a lot of talent but it didn’t fit on the court and it showed

[Duffman100]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

I have to disagree. The bench was a problem but I don’t think the team had 50 win potential. The early season production of Schroder vs FVV was not a huge gap (Schroder eventually regressed back to his regular self).

DS/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a -0.9 net rating.

FVV/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a +9.5 net rating.

I don’t believe FVV is good enough to swing a net rating by 10 points. And that’s with Barnes being much better this year than last, which should have somewhat compensated for the loss of FVV.

The reason that lineup to end last year looked so good is because they beat up on some really bad teams. Here were some of the Raptors wins during that time:

DET x3
CHA x2
WAS x2
ORL
NOP (no Zion)
MIN (no Towns or Edwards)
MIA (no Butler)

Almost every win during that 15-11 run was against the absolute worst teams in the league or against teams missing their best player.

Do I think the team would have been solid had FVV stayed? Probably. I don’t know if we can trust that sample size to project than as a 50 win team given it was the end of the season when many teams had given up or they had begun resting their stars. The schedule seemed incredibly soft.

What team are we taking about?

The 2021-22 team that had FVV/Trent/OG/Barnes/Siakam won 48 games. That was a 50 win potential team with even the slightest bench.

The next season was 41 wins which again had 50 win potential with any bench at all. Regardless how you want to examine who they played, it's a 50 win team. Otherwise you have to put every team under a microscope to see their wins.

You can start asking questions like "If we had any bench, does Nurse plays the starts 40+ minutes and does FVV get injured late in the 2021-22 season. And injury that clearly persisted into the next season and likely contributed to his shooting woes."

The SL had flaws for sure, but they weren't the core problem. Chris Boucher being our best bench player was the core issue.

[YogurtProducer]

They had no bench. It was pretty simple as that. The SL had 50-55 win potential (2nd round ceiling) but the bench has been razor thin since the title.

I have to disagree. The bench was a problem but I don’t think the team had 50 win potential. The early season production of Schroder vs FVV was not a huge gap (Schroder eventually regressed back to his regular self).

DS/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a -0.9 net rating.

FVV/OG/Barnes/Siakam/Poeltl had a +9.5 net rating.

I don’t believe FVV is good enough to swing a net rating by 10 points. And that’s with Barnes being much better this year than last, which should have somewhat compensated for the loss of FVV.

The reason that lineup to end last year looked so good is because they beat up on some really bad teams. Here were some of the Raptors wins during that time:

DET x3
CHA x2
WAS x2
ORL
NOP (no Zion)
MIN (no Towns or Edwards)
MIA (no Butler)

Almost every win during that 15-11 run was against the absolute worst teams in the league or against teams missing their best player.

Do I think the team would have been solid had FVV stayed? Probably. I don’t know if we can trust that sample size to project than as a 50 win team given it was the end of the season when many teams had given up or they had begun resting their stars. The schedule seemed incredibly soft.

What team are we taking about?

The 2021-22 team that had FVV/Trent/OG/Barnes/Siakam won 48 games. That was a 50 win potential team with even the slightest bench.

The next season was 41 wins which again had 50 win potential with any bench at all. Regardless how you want to examine who they played, it's a 50 win team. Otherwise you have to put every team under a microscope to see their wins.

You can start asking questions like "If we had any bench, does Nurse plays the starts 40+ minutes and does FVV get injured late in the 2021-22 season. And injury that clearly persisted into the next season and likely contributed to his shooting woes."

The SL had flaws for sure, but they weren't the core problem. Chris Boucher being our best bench player was the core issue.

For some reason Raptors fans on this board have just erased 2021-22 from their memory.

The amount of times I have read "the ceiling of that team was a play-in / 41 win team" makes me wonder how many of these fans realize we won 48 the season before, with arguably a worse team.

The team had an awful record in close games as well (historically noisy) and also had FVV hurt for pretty much the entire year.

The team was not to be confused as a contender but there was a reason why there was some reason to have some optimism. The wheels fell off this year with a rookie head coach, losing a very important piece in FVV (floor raiser), and also OG/Siakam pretty much dogging it for the entire season as they knew trades were coming.

[Black Jack]

I feel like Raps vibe has been absolutely awful ever since their prophet Kawhi forsake them.

Nah. They won 50+ games the year after. More like after Lowry left and they lost the leader of the team, then their bench turned into hot garbage, nobody could shoot, and the rest is history.

Seems like they waited too long to trade OG / Siakam. Do you guys think you're well positioned now?