Daytime TV is awful and the Raptors need to stand pat

There’s all kinds of talk – nothing concrete, mind you – that any new NBA CBA will include an amnesty clause that would allow teams to dump a player’s contract to save some money under whatever new cap/tax system there is.

And, of course, I’m getting all kinds of questions about who or what the HOTH should do if that’s indeed true.

Let’s play a hypothetical and say it is:

Dump no one.

Of course, the hue and cry is that Jose Calderon’s deal is a tough one to swallow, about $20 million left over two years but he can’t go anywhere.

Hear me out:

Aside from being a better player than a lot of you think, Jose brings one desperately needed attribute to this team: Veteran leadership.

As they are currently constructed, the Raptors are almost too young and there’s no way I’d way to hand over the reigns to a unproven point guard in Jerryd Bayless and there are other holes to fill (starting small forward, backup shooting guard) to have to worry about finding a point guard as well.

The one thing Bryan has done is get the team in a good financial situation, regardless of what the new system looks like. He’s got manageable contracts without too many long-term commitments so I don’t see any need to make a big, unnecessary move just because he can.

I guess the only other possibility would be Linas Kleiza but, for one, I’m not sure that guys on rehab would be amnesty possibilities – again, if that clause exists in a new deal – and I’d rather wait and see what he can bring, anyway.

-

I used to think the best invention of the modern era was wheels on the bottom of suitcases.

Now, after several days of Drizzle Driving Down The QEW In The Dark Of Early Morning, I’m going with intermittent windshleld wipers.

-

Know what sucks?

Daytime all-sports TV in this country.

Hours of the same show, canned crap. Boring.

So …

Q: Hello Doug. I thoroughly appreciated your rant - headlined even - about the women's national basketball team getting the cable coverage shaft. In fact I got more and more wound up about it as the day went on (eventually with a non-stop loop of the voice of Isaac Hayes' in the background..."but I'm talkin' about Shaft...Well, we can dig it...”

So, let's pretend you're the King of Everything at TSN. Could you describe how you would program The Perfect Day of Sports in a Cable World Ruled by Doug Smith? What would be in your "24 Hours of Must Watch TV"? Thank you.

Lorie P, London

A: Hmm, program director? Good. Unlimited budget, yet realistic plans? Done.

My major beef with the three networks is how awful and canned they are in the morning and most days so that’s where we start:

6 a.m. – 10 a.m. – LIVE. Some news show done in real time with real personalities and up-to-date issues and discussion. Think Mike and Mike only better; I don’t care if it’s simulcast with one of the radio stations the TV networks own but having live people discuss what’s going on, or what went on, has to be better than an endless loop of last night’s highlights, right?

10 a.m. – noon: Well, if I can’t find anything to do live from Europe, I’m drawing a blank here.

Noon – 3 p.m.: Sure, it’s dead time and who wants to spend money on live programming, right? So why not find a great game from the night before and replay it. Have a host to discuss it maybe with someone who was involved? No real audience but it beats darts and poker and pool, no?

3 p.m. – 6 p.m.: Find three one-hour shows that deal with issues, maybe a Canadian version of Pardon the Interruption? If you’ve got to buy programming from somewhere, well, do it.

6 p.m. – 7 p.m.: News show, more pegged to what’s coming up rather than what happened.

7 p.m. – 11 p.m.: Games, lots of games.

Overnight: I guess you have to cycle through the time zones with news shows and maybe replay a game in the middle of the night when I’m asleep.

Sound like a day?

Maybe next week if I remember we can do a perfect non-sports TV day.

-

It’s been a very, very, very long time since I found this film while I’ve been flicking around the dial (does anyone say “flicking around the dial” anymore?) but since the guy died on this day back in ’55 why not look at it again for a minute?

Not sure they make actors like James Dean any more.

-

Everyone loves an underdog, right?

So why wouldn’t you take Tampa Bay and Arizona in their first round baseball playoff series?

I am. I don’t have my Johnny Mac Diamondbacks jersey, or an old Jays one but I imagine some of you do and it’s as good a reason as any to cheer for Arizona, right?

Oh, and I like the Yankees over Tigers and, of course, the Phillies over St. Louis.

You’re welcome.

-

Mail? Last shot, folks.

And be sure to tune in tomorrow, some cool stuff from you and a special added bonus thanks to the grand poobah meeting yesterday with the smart people back at the Home Office.

-

Speaking of …

-

I know what you won’t be doing tonight at 7.

Watching the Canadian women in the FIBA Americas semifinal down at the Olympic qualifier in Colombia.

No, if you tune into TSN2 at tip-off time, you’ll be able to see two half-hour tapes of the Border Battle 9-Ball Challenge and then some World Series of Poker.

Rivetting. Must-see TV.

Yes, it sucks. And is a shame.

-

 

 

 

Comments

[JHK]

People who write in saying they should dump Jose's contract, they clearly aren't thinking much. I also don't know what these people's obsession with Bayless - like you said, the guy hasn't proved anything. In fact, I don't even recall seeing any glimpses of greatness or anything. He's a TJ Ford/Mike James at best in my opinion...
Kleiza's contract will look better when he actually plays. It sure is better than having Julian Wright at the small forward position.

[skiff]

Dump Caldernon. And I say this as someone who is a fan of his. But realistically, it's too much money for an average point guard, and there will be other cheaper, older PGs available that can fill the gap. Save the money now, we're not goint anywhere this year anyway, so vetran leadership is hardly an absolute need on this team. It won't hurt to have the maximum amount of cash possible at BC's fingertips when this lockout shakes out.

[doug]

as a GM or organization it is one thing to deal with trades,FA signings and the draft but this amnesty 2.0. would be a tough call as a GM, plus I am sure a few owners will have a say as their the ones signing the cheques.....the key thing to me will be if it counts towards the cap and what will be the cap be as those are the 2 unknowns...I wouldn't let Jose loose from a talent level perspective or what he brings to the table in terms of leadership etc...I would be torn as to let him loose from a financial standpoint and there will be other options out there....and also trade scenarios need to be considered first as then you can use your amnesty somewhere else...as i think every team should use it even if it is to rid yourself of a marginal contract as it's a one time "get out of jail free card"...but it's a tough call...look at the Pistons they can choose between Gordon, Hamilton and Charlie V..me I'd go the Charlie V route...and if your a Celtics fan wouldn't you be a little ticked at Ainge as he made the Perkins trade for financial reasons and made the team weaker in one of their last viable chances with that roster...when he could have done nothing and did what he had to do now....as these amnesty deals seem to be part of any new collective agreement anymore...but their is many points to ponder with this thing..as what do the Bulls do with Boozer?/, or the Sixers with Brand, or the Bucks with Gooden?/ and so on...and the Heat will benefit as they can let Miller loose and have that 24 million to spread out over a few guys...the whole landscape of the league will change, because a lot of these players aren't busts at all it's their contracts are just unwieldy , that's a big difference, guys like Baron Davis,Arenas plus the rest and the other's already listed can play...aside from the financial implications of the new deal this amnesty 2.0 if it comes to fruition will have the most impact from a organizational point of view and a fans point of view as well....look at all the players aside from the FA's that will be in play....that's why it's tempting for BC to let Jose go, ...it's a tough call....

[J]

No way, Jose, to dumping Calderon, and I say this as a Bayless fan and supporter.

The only reason they should ever dump Calderon is if they need to in order to land a certain player who would help in the long-term. Otherwise, dumping him and "saving" his contract value isn't going to help one bit as the team has never shown the need for that kind of financial accounting (i.e. they've never said let's buckle down this year and we'll have more money for next year; they constantly spent whatever they could). The team is young -- and going nowhere anytime soon, yes -- but that doesn't mean it doesn't need someone like Jose around. That's how you end up as the Timberwolves -- always young, never on the way up.

[mike kovacs]

Doug there was a movie a few years ago with greg kinnear about the guy who invented those wipers only to have GM steal the idea. it took years for him to win the credit back.

[Mike D.]

Doug, as I understand the amnesty it wouldn't allow the team to "dump" players in the sense of just cancelling the rest of their contract; they would have to pay off the balance of the contract in full, but it wouldn't count against the cap or luxury tax. Basically, the team buys a mulligan.

Jose is a team player, hard-core competitor and possibly a Raptor lifer if given the opportunity. So I would think he'd be fine with getting $20 million up front to wipe his old deal then signing a new deal with the Raps for, say, $3 million a year so the Raps could improve their roster with a free agent signing (as long as the new talent wasn't a top-flight PG). It would be a tougher decision for MLSE, who would be paying him twice to get extra cap room, but that's a different issue.

What am I missing or misunderstanding?

[Blake Kennedy]

To those who say that Bayless hasn't proven anything, that only begs the question: why not let him prove what he is now? After all, Jose is proven: he's proven himself as a declining shooter who does not make his teammates better and who cannot defend his own position if his very life depended on it. He's aging, he isn't much help as it is and he's grotesquely overpaid. If the Raptors get a break from NYC and get the opportunity to get out from under that albatross, they have a responsibility to do so. Now, if there's not going to be a season and they want to use him next year as trade ballast as an $11 million expiring - fine. But his days as a starter are long gone - long freaking gone - and to fail to explore a younger option who can do things Jose can only dream of (like playing average defense, being able to get into the paint and get to the free throw line) is madness.
.
If Jose were producing back like his magical 6-week stretch in 2008 (which he has never come close to repeating), then maybe I can get behind the "keep Jose!" logic. Unfortunately, all that he is at this point is an aging, overpaid distraction whose skills are in drastic decline.

Blogger's note: Who you getting instead? A 23-year-old who's started 25 games in his NBA career? Riiiiight. Can't wait 'til you start killing him 15 games into the season for being an unproven youngster

[doug]

if this amnesty becomes real imagine the talk all across the league on talk shows, sports pages in regards to specific teams and players..here in T.O. were having this talk on Jose, imagine with the Lakers, Walton is logical but what about Artest err Metta World Peace...??.. or the Bulls and even the Celts with Garnett??it will be fascinating and tough decisions...and i think there has to be a provision whereas the team releasing a player can't resign that player for a year...or the Spurs could dump Parker then turn around and re-sign him or Duncan...so once a player is released then I think he has to be off limits to that team for a year...but this weekend will be a indicator if and when a deal gets done in the near future...and yes the teams are on the hook to pay off all the players contract but whether it doesn't count against the cap or not is the big proviso...and i hope no one buys this new Walter Payton book I am personally tired of these "tell all" books that come out after the death of someone...it's nothing but trash, hamster cage material in my eyes...

[The J]

I know it's all theoretical now, but I wonder what the rule would state about re-signing someone you just waived after a certain time. I could see scenarios where a player get waived from their oversized contract, and then resign with the team for something reasonable because they do want to stay. I know some might say why go back to the team that just shafted you, but the truth is some of these players know they are on bad contracts. I recently read a quote from Rashard Lewis in which he acknowlegded that he was on a bad contract (essentially he says that his agent called and told him he had been offered X amount, and so of course he took it, why wouldn't he?).

Personally, I don't think amnesty should be applied to current contracts. Those deals were made in good trust, and it would seem unfair to void something that had been agreed to with the understanding it could not be broken. If the GMs want to protect themselves from the mistakes they might make, that's fine and actually a very reasonable choice. But the mistakes they have already made are theirs, and should remain that way. It'd be interesting to see what would happen when the Players go to vote on the CBA, and you have guys like Gordon, Turk, Arenas, Brand, Baron, and Lewis, etc. voting no.

[Nick M]

I can see both Mike D's and Blake's points w.r.t to the wink-wink, nudge-nudge buyout and sign for the minimum or keeping the contract as an expiring, nay, waiting to see 'contract year' Jose!
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't we see this hole 'amnesty' idea with the pucks new CBA. Each team had the opportunity to bury contracts in the minors (the team still had to pay but it did not count against the cap) and even the 'cash-cow' Leaves hardly took advantage. This hole idea must have been concocted by the Magic (dump Arenas so they can sign some guys to help them win now and thus keep Howard), Knicks (see Leaves) and Heat. If owners weren't willing to pay the luxury tax before why would they take part in this 'amnesty' which seems to be a pseudo-luxury tax.
-
Lastly, I'm surprised no one has mentioned dumpinig Amir. I like the guy and the way he plays but if there is a hard cap and Ed Davis' potential becomes reality I would think Amir's contract becomes very hard to move. Just food for thought!

[Blake Kennedy]

Doug, viz. my comments about Bayless. If he fails, he fails: what are you going to do? Jose has already failed: why continue to beat our heads against that particular wall? He's not producing us wins, so frankly at the very worst, we're no worse off with Bayless - and we could be far better. Am I going to kill him after 15 games if he doesn't succeed? No. And while he didn't start a lot of games for us last year, he was magnificent when he did: extremely productive AND extremely efficient. That merits more of a look. Jose gets thanked for his service, and sent back to his pig farm with $20 million in his chequebook. Oh, well. He already collects his paycheque with a ski mask and a gun as it is.
.
Nick M: viz. Amir, please keep in mind that Amir is the rarest of Raptors: a win producer. He's extremely efficient offensively, and very good defensively. His contract is a bargain: we're paying him, in most statistical evaluations, far less per Win he produces individually than the league average. Those are guys you keep. The guy who needs to get moved is Bargnani. Whether he gets moved for a moon rock or a shoelace or an empty can of shaving cream is immaterial: he's the lynchpin of the suckitude of this team.

Blogger's note: What do the kids say? Whatever

[sam]

The Calderon/Bayless debate starts anew.....and the NBA and the players association aren't even playing nice yet.

Blogger's note: And TJ's a free agent

[John]

Yes veteren leadership from a veteren who has no winning experience in the NBA.
Such a crucial spoke in the wheel. $10 mil a year you say? Even better, and let's keep that Bargnani guy too, he's just awesome. So you Doug your idea of a winning team is basically the team the Raptors already have. Whatever indeed.

[Nick]

Doug: Regarding your TV progamming schedule, it sounds like you've pretty much listed off a day of programming on ESPN. Let's fix our problems by just getting ESPN beamed into Canadian households. Done. Then maybe Bosh would have stayed. If you want Leafs locker room postgame footage, or CFL highlights, you can just flip to a Canadian station.

[Michel G]

Nick M: "Lastly, I'm surprised no one has mentioned dumping Amir." Nobody's mentioned it because it would be a stupid idea.

[SheikYurbouti]

Would seem this Blake Kennedy dude is a clone of some of the clowns over at raptors republic whose idea of fandom is flapping their trap every other day about how they'd be a better management and coaching staff of the Raptors, mostly by selling Andrea and Jose to the lowest bidder. Likely a guy who doesn't really know the game, but has his efficient stats to back up his self important debating skills. I'm far removed from a kid, but "whatever".

[Jeff D]

Ok, I'm WAY late on getting to your blog this week...thanks to a trip over the big pond to Ireland. Funny you should mention intermittent windsheild wipers as they are a necessity over in Ireland for sure. There is a movie with William H. Macy about that very invention. Quite interesting as I never considered the innovation required to make it happen. It chronicles the invention, Ford's attempt to steal the idea and the ensuing litigation. So if you ever have a few hours to kill (I know, not likely) it may be an interesting watch. Cheers,

PS. Any recommedations on where to dine in Belfast?

Blogger's note: Sorry, I've got nothing in Belfast

[Jeff D]

Oops, looks like Irregular mike kovacs already mentioned the movie...and I think he's right, that is it wasn't William H. Macy. But I do believe it was Ford, not GM who stole the idea.

[doug]

it was Greg Kinnear and called Flash of genius..it was a good flick, sort of lost in the shuffle...his idea came to him in a pouring rainstorm, he developed it, presented it to Ford, then Ford stole it, he pursued it feverishly thru the courts, his wife divorced him as he was so irate, so fixated, so determined to get what was his, he had like 5 kids who to varying degrees helped him in his battle...he eventually won the judgement and raked in millions...a feel good story...and a excellent movie choice on a rainy or cold winters night...

[Jeff D]

@ doug. Thanks for the title. I onyl dispute that it was not really a "feel good" movie. The guy lost everything (i.e. family) to win a confession from Ford. It was never really about the money. Makes you think about priorities and the "need to be right" sometimes. Thanks again,

[doug]

I only meant feel good in reference to the sacrifices Robert Kearns made...he knew he was losing/lost his family and throughout Ford offered to settle and he declined...this man's passion and his fight in dealing what he rightfully thought as his and being "ripped off" was and is a feel good experience for me....I realize it had nothing to do at all about money or if he did he would have taken the $30 mill he was offered as it was less then then he ultimately received ...I admired his passion and his values and I think and know his kids saw that as well and admired there dad for his stance and that played out when the day before the end of the trial the Ford negotiator showed up with another offer at his home and his kids voted to turn it down...so it was a feel good story in my books and money had nothing to do with my feelings on thinking that, it is based in that man's values...