Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Raptors Year in Review: Tim Chisholm of TSN

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Lark Benson wrote: View Post
    Just wanted to throw my name into the trade-demar hat. One point that nobody seems to have made (or that i just missed) is that the raps have a chance to evolve a much more balanced offence with valanciunas in the low post, but the derozan-gay combo ruins any potential of proper spacing. Something has to give there.

    If im colangelo my first off-season call is to orlando to see if a derozan for afflalo+sweetener deal can be worked out. Theres so much to be gained from swapping derozan for a guy who knows his role, only takes good shots and plays defense. Its hard to jusrify trading away the player who will likely be best in the long run, but this might be a case of addition by subtraction.
    Just a disclaimer that I'm someone who's not keen on trading Demar...but for the fun of discussion.

    Not just because he's Canuck, but Nicholson I think would be interesting if he's the additional piece. Decent height and length, a nice set of offensive moves. Could develop him as the PF off the bench, a role he currently seems well-suited to.

    It is, of course, also pointless if they get a better, experienced PF. But if the big rotation stays the same, more or less, I think Nicholson would be the only piece I'd really want (that Orlando might give up) to add to that deal.

    Comment


    • #32
      I don't want to join the debate of Lowry (good) vs Lowry (bad) -- I am still waiting to see the good and hopefully next year, clear of the excuses people have made for him this year, I'll get to see this almost-all-star point guard that I've heard so much about.

      But I do think that given the cap and roster situation we're in, we have an opportunity here to trade DeRozan even before he starts his ridiculously overpaid contract due to the improvements he's made from one year to the next. His hardworking mentality and the minor tweaks in game should be enough to sell him to another team that believes all the other holes in his game can and will be filled.
      your pal,
      ebrian

      Comment


      • #33
        The problem with Lowry this season is, as has been said by many, that he's been asked to pass, rather than create. Passing for passing's sake is not good offense. Give Lowry some degree of freedom on offense and he becomes that wrecking-ball type of drive and kick player we expected.

        Comment


        • #34
          Raptors Year-in-Review: Wings

          Building on the discussion about the Raptors guards, here is Tim Chisholm's article about the Raptors wings. Obviously there's some overlap between the two, with the SG position being both a wing and a guard...

          LINK: http://www.tsn.ca/blogs/tim_chisholm/?id=420929

          Comment


          • #35
            I enjoyed Chisholm's analysis about the guards, but I think his analysis of the wings is even more spot on. There were a few parts that really stood out to me:

            Here's the thing with Fields: he's a great fit for this club. He's the only wing that knows how to set up his teammates, he restricts himself to smart shots within his range (he easily possesses the highest field goal percentage of Toronto's wings at 46 per cent), he understands the team's defensive concepts and he doesn't need the ball in his hands to be effective.
            If these two (Gay & DeRozan) are going to continue to represent the bulk of Toronto's minutes on the wings then they have got to learn some shot discipline. Since the trade that brought Gay to Toronto, he and DeRozan rank 127th as a pair in offensive efficiency at 101.3 points per 100 possessions, which is below the team's mark of 102.5 points per 100 possessions (though it's above the team's pathetic 100.9 points per 100 possessions overall since the trade). To watch the Raptors play these days is to watch a handful of possessions every game devolve into a broken set resulting in Gay or DeRozan forcing up a jumper against two or three defenders several feet from the basket.
            It's not often an NBA organization builds their offence around two non-playmaking wings that both shoot below 32 per cent from three-point range

            Comment


            • #36
              This is kind of why I reacted to his PG article the way I did. It's hard to evaluate a roster position-by-position, because what you have in one position dramatically affects the others. I agree with all of this. I'm still struggling to see how Lowry, Gay and Derozan can co-exist and make this team successful. And I'm usually one of the more optimistic folks around here.

              What it takes for each of them to be optimally effective takes away from what makes the others optimally effective. Again, there's no way to coach around this. One or more of them will have to change their game and subvert some of "getting mine" for the good of the team.

              Definitely some serious roster decisions to make this summer and leading up to next season's trade deadline. All three have their strong points and arguments for keeping as well as drawbacks and rationale for moving out.

              Fields is the biggest wild card of all for next year, to me. If he can rebound close to his rookie numbers, he's starter material for the reasons Chisolm notes: unlike Demar/Gay, he doesn't need the ball to be effective; he can distribute as well as many PGs, and he has a great bball IQ. If he plays to potential, it will make it a lot easier to fix that starting lineup, and to then figure out how to best use Derozan and Gay as assets.

              Regarding the perimeter guys in general, if they can't find a way to make it work and show significant progression early on, the writing is on the wall for the future of both Gay and Lowry in Toronto. You simply cannot extend Lowry at the money he'll be asking -- and you definitely can't re-sign a 28yo Gay -- if the results are anywhere near this year's. And that's regardless of whether Derozan is traded.
              Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

              Comment


              • #37
                jimmie wrote: View Post
                Regarding the perimeter guys in general, if they can't find a way to make it work and show significant progression early on, the writing is on the wall for the future of both Gay and Lowry in Toronto. You simply cannot extend Lowry at the money he'll be asking -- and you definitely can't re-sign a 28yo Gay -- if the results are anywhere near this year's. And that's regardless of whether Derozan is traded.
                You're forgetting who the GM is.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Clearly Lowry has been asked to do something that doesn't come naturally to him. It he's allowed to play his natural game, he will be better and therefore his numbers. That being said, I sense the Bargnani situation brewing all over again. I mean hanging on to a player for what he can "potentially" do rather than what he's doing. So, before committing to a long term extension, I think Raptors must think to ensure they're not making a mistake. Going by experience(Bargnani), it may be wise to trade him when he still has value(6.3 mil. expiring contract).
                  Attitude Is A Choice.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    I wonder if people had the same discussions over Stephon Marbury in his early years when others were criticizing how he wasn't passing the ball. Seems to me the only difference between these two guys is that Marbury never listened.

                    If you compare careers (Marbury's first 7 seasons) to Lowry's they are pretty much the same except Marbury was slightly better. I did a comparison on theNBAgeek.com's tool and Marbury was above the average PG, similar to Lowry, in terms of shooting efficiency.
                    your pal,
                    ebrian

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      slaw wrote: View Post
                      You're forgetting who the GM is.
                      No, just hoping he won't be here. I hesitate to say I'd be "surprised" if he's still here, but I sure hope ownership's patience has run out.
                      Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        jimmie wrote: View Post
                        This is kind of why I reacted to his PG article the way I did. It's hard to evaluate a roster position-by-position, because what you have in one position dramatically affects the others. I agree with all of this. I'm still struggling to see how Lowry, Gay and Derozan can co-exist and make this team successful. And I'm usually one of the more optimistic folks around here.

                        What it takes for each of them to be optimally effective takes away from what makes the others optimally effective. Again, there's no way to coach around this. One or more of them will have to change their game and subvert some of "getting mine" for the good of the team.

                        Definitely some serious roster decisions to make this summer and leading up to next season's trade deadline. All three have their strong points and arguments for keeping as well as drawbacks and rationale for moving out.

                        Fields is the biggest wild card of all for next year, to me. If he can rebound close to his rookie numbers, he's starter material for the reasons Chisolm notes: unlike Demar/Gay, he doesn't need the ball to be effective; he can distribute as well as many PGs, and he has a great bball IQ. If he plays to potential, it will make it a lot easier to fix that starting lineup, and to then figure out how to best use Derozan and Gay as assets.

                        Regarding the perimeter guys in general, if they can't find a way to make it work and show significant progression early on, the writing is on the wall for the future of both Gay and Lowry in Toronto. You simply cannot extend Lowry at the money he'll be asking -- and you definitely can't re-sign a 28yo Gay -- if the results are anywhere near this year's. And that's regardless of whether Derozan is traded.
                        I agree with what you are saying if the Raptors continue to play the game as Casey has been coaching/running things. Lowry at his best does not mesh well with DeRozan and Gay in that system.

                        With that said, I see two options:

                        1) Keep running things the same as they have been (set plays for jumps shots and ISOs) neutralizing Lowry's positives,

                        2) Change the way the team plays on offense (i.e. more ball movement and off ball movement combined with more freedom for Lowry to punch and kick) and playing to Lowry's strengths,


                        If they go 1) then one of Gay or DD likely needs to go unless they can start hitting 3 pointers curling off screens or off pull ups in ISO.

                        If they go 2) then one of Gay or DD likely needs to go unless they can start hitting 3's in catch and shoot situations.

                        Personally, I like 2) much better for everyone. I don't think DD and Gay have any chance of making 3's in the situations the offense currently places them in. I don't think the chances are high of them hitting 3s consistently in catch and shoot situations but it is better than coming off screens or pull ups in ISO.


                        Everyone in the NBA is talented. The job of the NBA coach is to maximize his talent. I think taking the shackles off Lowry and showing faith and trust in him is the only way to figure out what the Raptors have in him and for the Raptors to succeed to the best of their ability. In doing that I guarantee you get a happier Lowry who is likely to totally listen and buy in to the other side of the ball (making the assumption he has not, as many here have). I am not implying this is right. But think about any profession where people are asked to do things outside their comfort zone - they get their back up, it is human nature for the majority.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Having people to pass to also helps Marbury got axed when he was on an awful Knicks team he was the guy. Lowry is in a position where he can feed the ball to 2 good friends of his, he is going to work on distributing. His numbers ending the season are pretty good getting Calderon ast numbers over his last 12 games?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Matt52 wrote: View Post
                            I agree with what you are saying if the Raptors continue to play the game as Casey has been coaching/running things. Lowry at his best does not mesh well with DeRozan and Gay in that system.

                            With that said, I see two options:

                            1) Keep running things the same as they have been (set plays for jumps shots and ISOs) neutralizing Lowry's positives,

                            2) Change the way the team plays on offense (i.e. more ball movement and off ball movement combined with more freedom for Lowry to punch and kick) and playing to Lowry's strengths,


                            If they go 1) then one of Gay or DD likely needs to go unless they can start hitting 3 pointers curling off screens or off pull ups in ISO.

                            If they go 2) then one of Gay or DD likely needs to go unless they can start hitting 3's in catch and shoot situations.

                            Personally, I like 2) much better for everyone. I don't think DD and Gay have any chance of making 3's in the situations the offense currently places them in. I don't think the chances are high of them hitting 3s consistently in catch and shoot situations but it is better than coming off screens or pull ups in ISO.


                            Everyone in the NBA is talented. The job of the NBA coach is to maximize his talent. I think taking the shackles off Lowry and showing faith and trust in him is the only way to figure out what the Raptors have in him and for the Raptors to succeed to the best of their ability. In doing that I guarantee you get a happier Lowry who is likely to totally listen and buy in to the other side of the ball (making the assumption he has not, as many here have). I am not implying this is right. But think about any profession where people are asked to do things outside their comfort zone - they get their back up, it is human nature for the majority.
                            OK, fine. But I'm not sure that bending over backwards for the guy currently making the least salary of this current "big 3" is the way to go, or the way management will see fit to go, given how much $$$ they've committed to the other two guys. It makes sense if you think Lowry is the most likely "keeper" of the three -- ie, the one most likely to bring the most return in terms of making this team better in the long run -- but only then. I haven't personally seen enough success in the past when Lowry is playing "shackle-free" to warrant that viewpoint. Minor success in Houston, especially when coupled with the 'attitude problems', isn't enough for me, personally.

                            And I've said it before, but will throw it out there one more time: How sure are you that the offense you see on the floor is the one that has been designed by Casey? How sure are you that the iso's you see, then one-on-one play, the late-clock shots, etc. are not actually by design, but rather a by-product of the 'designed' offense bogging down due to players not being able (or willing) to execute it?

                            Bottom line: If Lowry plays his game, Derozan and Gay can't play theirs (as effectively as the team needs). IMO, long-term, you will have to choose who you want to run with long-term. Ride with Lowry, you need to bring in guys around him who can defer to his style, not need volume shots or have the ball in their hands to make plays, and can still be effective (elite spot-up shooters, or guys like Fields). Ride with Gay and/or Derozan, you need a PG who is more dedicated to distributing the ball to those volume shooters than to being a scorer himself.

                            I don't think it can work both ways unless one side of that equation can change to fit the other side of the equation.
                            Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              jimmie wrote: View Post
                              OK, fine. But I'm not sure that bending over backwards for the guy currently making the least salary of this current "big 3" is the way to go, or the way management will see fit to go, given how much $$$ they've committed to the other two guys. It makes sense if you think Lowry is the most likely "keeper" of the three -- ie, the one most likely to bring the most return in terms of making this team better in the long run -- but only then. I haven't personally seen enough success in the past when Lowry is playing "shackle-free" to warrant that viewpoint. Minor success in Houston, especially when coupled with the 'attitude problems', isn't enough for me, personally.

                              And I've said it before, but will throw it out there one more time: How sure are you that the offense you see on the floor is the one that has been designed by Casey? How sure are you that the iso's you see, then one-on-one play, the late-clock shots, etc. are not actually by design, but rather a by-product of the 'designed' offense bogging down due to players not being able (or willing) to execute it?

                              Bottom line: If Lowry plays his game, Derozan and Gay can't play theirs (as effectively as the team needs). IMO, long-term, you will have to choose who you want to run with long-term. Ride with Lowry, you need to bring in guys around him who can defer to his style, not need volume shots or have the ball in their hands to make plays, and can still be effective (elite spot-up shooters, or guys like Fields). Ride with Gay and/or Derozan, you need a PG who is more dedicated to distributing the ball to those volume shooters than to being a scorer himself.

                              I don't think it can work both ways unless one side of that equation can change to fit the other side of the equation.
                              It doesn't matter if Lowry is running the point or Jose stayed: the Raptors offense as currently run under Casey is dreadful. Since the trade, it has only become worse. Set plays for 21ft plus jumpers is what Casey runs. It is dreadful. Casey plays east-west and unless you have Ray Allen and JJ Redick running off screens, the three ball is non-existent and a horrible shot for the majority of players in the league - let alone Toronto.

                              Bold: Then Casey should be fired if that is the case. If that is true then he lost the locker room and needs to go because he did not hold one player responsible. If that is true, it is not just the "new" guys, DeRozan would be equally guilty.

                              Bottom line: If DD and Gay don't develop catch and shoot ability from deep then one of them need to go regardless of who is running the point.


                              You know all I am advocating for Toronto to run with Lowry is more dribble penetration and have more off ball movement rather than run set plays for 21 ft jump shots.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                jimmie wrote: View Post
                                OK, fine. But I'm not sure that bending over backwards for the guy currently making the least salary of this current "big 3" is the way to go, or the way management will see fit to go, given how much $$$ they've committed to the other two guys. It makes sense if you think Lowry is the most likely "keeper" of the three -- ie, the one most likely to bring the most return in terms of making this team better in the long run -- but only then. I haven't personally seen enough success in the past when Lowry is playing "shackle-free" to warrant that viewpoint. Minor success in Houston, especially when coupled with the 'attitude problems', isn't enough for me, personally.
                                I agree. This pretty much sums up my thoughts on Lowry. Tell me if this sounds familiar:

                                - there's a player on your team that cost the team an early lottery pick
                                - the player has shown flashes of being very good over the past 7 seasons but hasn't been able to put it all together
                                - has been asked to play his position differently than what his skill-set would point to
                                - he doesn't necessarily exhibit the strengths of what you would normally expect from the position he plays, although he is very good at some other things

                                In the past we've had a player such as this and tried to accommodate by changing the roster to make up for his weaknesses, and it didn't exactly pan out. Now I'm not advocating getting rid of him like I do with Andrea, but I don't understand the fixation of trying to do so much in order to help Lowry succeed.
                                your pal,
                                ebrian

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X