On Prime Time Sports tonight, John Shannon (who's pretty plugged in with MLSE) stated the the MLSE Board told Casey directly to no longer worry about having to play Bargnani and to just focus on winning.
This was right around the time that Bargnani was injured.
Last edited by RaininThrees : 01-04-2013 at 10:48 PM.
“It is clear that Toronto will explore moving Bargnani once he returns to action, and the hope is that return is sometime in early February so teams can get a good look at Bargnani before the February 21st NBA trade deadline.
The Raptors want to dump the salary associated with Bargnani and are not seeking much in return for Bargs. Sources close to the Raptors say they have several players they would consider taking on – a shopping list of sorts – and most of them are players radically out of Toronto’s reach unless other assets are packed in.
The Raptors have been linked to Lakers big man Pau Gasol, Milwaukee’s Ersan Ilyasova, and Denver’s Wilson Chandler; however, Raptors sources warn taking on a ton of long-term salary is not what they are looking for in a deal unless it’s exactly the right player.”
I'm a a Bargnani fan and i'll definitely be routing for him on whatever team he ends up on. But I was a Raptors fan before I was a Bargs fan so i'm not gonna be pulling a Lebron23 and becoming a full fledged fan of whatever team he joins, dismissing my old team.
I'm a a Bargnani fan and i'll definitely be routing for him on whatever team he ends up on. But I was a Raptors fan before I was a Bargs fan so i'm not gonna be pulling a Lebron23 and becoming a full fledged fan of whatever team he joins, dismissing my old team.
Mitchell was good at developing players he sucked as an X and Os guy. But he did alot for bosh, and I do think if BC wasnt so dense and let Mitchell coach bargs, no doubt in my mind that we would see a different player. Some tough love for bargs early on would have done wonders for him, I doubt he would have gone in a corner and cried.
BC not only screwed this franchise many times over, he even sabotaged the development of the one player he was so adamant of shielding.
Mitchell was good at developing players he sucked as an X and Os guy. But he did alot for bosh, and I do think if BC wasnt so dense and let Mitchell coach bargs, no doubt in my mind that we would see a different player. Some tough love for bargs early on would have done wonders for him, I doubt he would have gone in a corner and cried.
BC not only screwed this franchise many times over, he even sabotaged the development of the one player he was so adamant of shielding.
I don't know, I think Mitchel was a pretty damn good coach. Just look at the difference between his record and Triano's (a supposed x's and o's coach). They both had pretty much the same talent to work with.
I don't know, I think Mitchel was a pretty damn good coach. Just look at the difference between his record and Triano's (a supposed x's and o's coach). They both had pretty much the same talent to work with.
I think Sammy was a good coach that knew how to work the X's and O's game. The problem was he didn't know how to adjust in game. Everytime the opposing coach brought in a gameplay that countered Sam's, he didn't know what to do, ala the 2007 playoff run. Mitchel always thought he was right, and his pride got in the way of him becoming a great coach.
I always viewed mitch as a hardass who could motivate his players (which was his best characteristic as a coach) but I never really viewed him as the type of guy who had that inkling for drawing up good plays in game or off court. Maybe I went too far saying he sucked in that regard but it was a weakness of his imo. Jay when he took over, I did notice some really nice plays on the offensive end but he couldnt really motivate the players.
But Boogie is right mitch was notorious for his lack of in game adjustments as was triano and now casey. Keeping mitch with triano drawing up the plays wouldnt have been that bad tbh but BC threw them under the bus.
I agree with Himan. I think he was good conceptually and a strong motivator but he was pretty set in his ways and thus made poor adjustments. If things weren't going well the players were always the problem and the strategy never was a factor. He wasn't a bad coach but I think he'd be best suited as an assistant coach somewhere rather than the H.N.I.C.
I agree with Himan. I think he was good conceptually and a strong motivator but he was pretty set in his ways and thus made poor adjustments. If things weren't going well the players were always the problem and the strategy never was a factor. He wasn't a bad coach but I think he'd be best suited as an assistant coach somewhere rather than the H.N.I.C.
Re: Mitchell: I was forced to go easy on Bargnani
