Toronto Raptors Ramblings

Why can't a mediocre Raptors squad who has no flow find minutes for one of last year's key guys? The answers are starting to come out and I for one am not happy.

Our Biggest Problem: The offence is stagnant, it's jammed up and the perfect flow of passing that was the Toronto Raptors is so far MIA. And sure we aren't shooting great, but I'd argue we aren't getting the right guys the right shots. Just because you are open does not make it the right shot (do you hear me Delfino?)

My Biggest Question: Integrating new guys into the offence is not resulting in a smooth, crisp machine like last year so why aren't we letting last years team show the new guys how it's done and then working them in to bigger roles?

The Shocking Answer: One piece of the puzzle is Garbo and apparently all the way from Colangelo down we've decided not to play Garbo. The Doctor's have said his leg is going to break again if they play him hard on it and so they don't want to risk it. "Risk it?". Risk what? They'd rather just work the new guys in now so nothing needs to be fixed later if he goes down.

My Reaction: Are you _____ kidding me (said with anger)!?! Ya, his leg is slightly broken. He didn't get surgery. So the answer is to just ride him on the pine? Seriously, this is the brain farts, solution to this problem? I mean tell me it's cause he's not playing well. Tell me something that doesn't sound like the Leafs are running this team.

How about this, if you weren't going to play him if he played in the Euro Championships why didn't you just tell him that!? Maybe then he wouldn't have played. Or we could have been even blunter and gone with "Sorry Garbo, we need you, you'll be at the Olympics in 2008 and we need you to have another surgery". Don't tell the guy you support him and then tell him he screwed it up. Of COURSE HE WANTED TO PLAY FOR SPAIN! Imagine Nash begging Steve Kerr, "Hey I can play, this leg will be fine, Canada needs me". We'd be like pigs in shit, but Kerr would simply say 'Sorry Nash, you gotta be 100% for us first'. And you know what, we'd be annoyed, but we'd completely understand. And we'd give him credit for wanting to play and trying to play. Kerr is supposed to be the bad guy in that situation.

The thought that we are benching Garbo because we don't want to mess with our yet undiscovered "chemistry" if he does in fact re-break the leg is an obscene decision based on what if's and butts, which are like Candy and Nuts (as Matt Bonner would say). Guys go down all the time, it's why you have depth.

Solution: Play him till it breaks. At least give the guy a couple of 30 minute game to SEE WHAT HE CAN DO! He's not a high energy, come in for 5 minutes and shake it up king of guy. He's steady Eddy who knows when to pass, when to pump drive pass, etc. Right now he's being forced to try and do too much in too little time and for one I think it's brutal.

The Media's Reaction: Reading this crap from Dave Feschuk in the Star this morning and seeing the anti-Garbo angle really bothers me. Don't try to turn us on Garbo. If Garbo is taking a suck because we're basically saying 'sorry man, can't risk you breaking your leg, you are too valuable on the bench' then I'd be sulking too. i.e. screw you guys, maybe you could have told me your real stance up front!

And hey, if he truly can't get it going, then of course he shouldn't play. And if he needs to have surgery, then have surgery. But this b.s., I've never heard such a pile of crap, and coming out of the Colangelo era I'm supremely disappointed.