Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Couldn't believe this when I saw it

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

  • #16
    Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
    I really don't know why people give this starting line up such a hard time. Is cause of all the money tied up to the wing position? This a talented starting 5. With room to get better. The most promising thing about those standings is that in the top five we have the chance of getting better. Those other lines up can't really be any better.
    I think this is why honestly.

    If we had won that coin flip for Barnes I'm sure no one would be complaining right now.

    Comment


    • #17
      Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
      I really don't know why people give this starting line up such a hard time. Is cause of all the money tied up to the wing position? This a talented starting 5.
      Nobody would say that any of our starting five aren't talented. They are. But talent alone doesn't win games: you need a decent complimentary starting five as well, and our starting five don't compliment one another well: we have two paint players (Jonas and Amir), and three players whose primary game is drive-and-slash (Rudy, DeMar and Kyle). No serious perimeter threat to create spacing; it's a problem.

      This whole "best lineup" thing is kind of silly anyway. Ooh, our starting lineup is fifth? Man, it must've sucked for Boston, whose best lineup in this metric was 24th - oh, right, they won seven more games than we did. Well, it sure sucked for Golden State and Houston (19th and 20th respectively) - oh, right, 13 and 11 more wins than us, respectively.

      Comment


      • #18
        magoon wrote: View Post
        Nobody would say that any of our starting five aren't talented. They are. But talent alone doesn't win games: you need a decent complimentary starting five as well, and our starting five don't compliment one another well: we have two paint players (Jonas and Amir), and three players whose primary game is drive-and-slash (Rudy, DeMar and Kyle). No serious perimeter threat to create spacing; it's a problem.

        This whole "best lineup" thing is kind of silly anyway. Ooh, our starting lineup is fifth? Man, it must've sucked for Boston, whose best lineup in this metric was 24th - oh, right, they won seven more games than we did. Well, it sure sucked for Golden State and Houston (19th and 20th respectively) - oh, right, 13 and 11 more wins than us, respectively.
        Those teams played better D than us and were deeper.
        @Chr1st1anL

        Comment


        • #19
          Xixak wrote: View Post
          I think this is why honestly.

          If we had won that coin flip for Barnes I'm sure no one would be complaining right now.
          I would most definitely be complaining right now about DeRozan's extension.

          DD is an average to below average NBA starter. The average NBA player makes around $5M per season. The median NBA salary is something like $2.5M. He is overpaid somewhere in the range of 2-4 times his production. In the new CBA with ridiculous penalties every dollar below the cap counts because the ability to take other team's money presents itself. We are already seeing a lot of teams making financial versus basketball trades.

          DD will be 24 this upcoming season with 9700 NBA minutes under his belt. He has already equaled the length of an average NBA career. He has been a 1st or 2nd option for nearly 3 seasons. Nearly 100% of players with that much experience and opportunity have shown what they are. If there was still natural talent left to be tapped, a man of his work ethic would have extracted it by now. Unfortunately it seems quite likely the following statement while harsh is true: he is what he is. All the potential talk is a sad sequel to a recently departed Raptor who had all the talent but just lacked the work ethic and desire - of if we could only make a Raptor Hybrid.

          Here is a fun game that illustrates the frustration with DD's extension. Player A is just signed to a new 4 year, $38M contract. Player B is signed to a one year veteran minimum. And now......

          GUESS THAT PLAYA!

          (all stats are per48 minutes)

          Playa A:

          WP48: .054
          PoP: -1.4
          PTS: 23.7
          REB: 5.1
          AST: 3.2
          STL: 1.2
          TO: 2.4
          eFG%: 45.9%
          TS%: 52.3%
          FGA: 19.6
          3ptFGA: 1.9
          FTA: 6.8
          PPP: 1.20


          Playa B:

          WP48: .056
          PoP: -1.4
          PTS: 21.4
          REB: 4.4
          AST: 2.9
          STL: 1.2
          TO: 1.7
          eFG%: 48.2%
          TS%: 52.5%
          FGA: 18.4
          3ptFGA: 7.1
          FTA: 4.4
          PPP: 1.16



          This is not to say that player A and B should be paid equally - hardly. Player A is younger and is known for strong character unlike player B. However, when you get past subjective intangibles and look strictly at individual on court production, is the difference worth $8.3M per season?
          Last edited by mcHAPPY; Mon Jul 15, 2013, 02:11 PM. Reason: PPP backwards

          Comment


          • #20
            As already mentioned, this was touched upon already in some other threads, but I still need to state my opinion about this.

            Our starting lineup is indeed pretty good. Our bench, especially after the Rudy Gay trade, sucked bad.

            We lost our two main guys that played quality minutes either off the bench or as starters - Ed Davis and Calderon. With both of them gone, our bench was absolutely bad, real bad.

            - We had Anderson who was good for 1 out of 6 games, huge chucker.
            - We had Bargs who didn't play much, but when he did, he shot 29% from the field (Dos Equis somewhere here...).
            - We had Ross, who was horrible most of the time in the second half of the season.
            - We had Lucas III who would have one good performance every 10 games, but was horrible otherwise
            - Kleiza didn't play at all.
            - Fields couldn't shoot.
            - Gray is, well, Gray. He's ok, neutral with all of his 99 shades.

            With Hansbrough we're gonna be a lot better already. Steve Novak should give us some consistent 3-point production. If Fields starts knocking down his shots and does the other things that he does - great!

            My only concern is the backcourt off the bench. We need Ross to become more confident and more consistent with his shot. I don't even expect much improvement in ball-handling and other stuff from him, he just needs to shoot it at a respectable %. Be a spot up, knock-it-down type of player. Pretty much like Novak. If he can do that, I would be happy!

            The biggest problem I see though is at the point. Lowry himself still needs to prove that he can be an efficient starter, but first of all he needs to prove that he can stay healthy and play more than 60 games over the course of one season. Because if he can't - we're in trouble. Our backup PG's are unproven. Already it could be a mess when they come in for some PT to give Lowry a breather during the game, but if Lowry goes down with an injury for a prolonged amount of time - we could be in serious trouble. Then again, I know that Fields, if his hand is OK, could play some at the point, but that is NOT ideal.

            If we somehow could get another PG in the league of a Steve Blake or Luke Ridnour before the season starts, I would be very confident about my Raptors going in to the next season. Especially when I consider that JV will be much improved and, to a lesser degree, also should be the rest of the starters. We'll see what happens.

            Comment


            • #21
              magoon wrote: View Post
              Nobody would say that any of our starting five aren't talented. They are. But talent alone doesn't win games: you need a decent complimentary starting five as well, and our starting five don't compliment one another well: we have two paint players (Jonas and Amir), and three players whose primary game is drive-and-slash (Rudy, DeMar and Kyle). No serious perimeter threat to create spacing; it's a problem.

              This whole "best lineup" thing is kind of silly anyway. Ooh, our starting lineup is fifth? Man, it must've sucked for Boston, whose best lineup in this metric was 24th - oh, right, they won seven more games than we did. Well, it sure sucked for Golden State and Houston (19th and 20th respectively) - oh, right, 13 and 11 more wins than us, respectively.
              You're talking as if our starting five played the full 48 minutes each game. Those teams all have better bench line-ups. Ours was garbage.

              How many times did our bench dig us a hole we couldn't climb back out of? Too many fuckin times thats how many.
              You come at the King, you best not miss.

              Comment


              • #22
                Mr.Z wrote: View Post
                You're talking as if our starting five played the full 48 minutes each game. Those teams all have better bench line-ups. Ours was garbage.

                How many times did our bench dig us a hole we couldn't climb back out of? Too many fuckin times thats how many.
                To be fair there were an awful lot of games where the 1st quarter we got smoked and our 2nd unit came in and got us back in the game. Let's not forget all those slow starts.

                Comment


                • #23
                  JimiCliff wrote: View Post
                  Keep in mind that our schedule was much, much weaker in the last part of the season.
                  But pro tank people almost always use the 4-19 start, which was an unbelievably tough schedule (4 games in 5 days, 3 times when nobody else had that 2x), with a very different line-up, as the team we're going into the season with.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I think these numbers show promise but a couple of reminders.

                    that's a less than ten game sample size

                    It came at the end of the season where we alternated between teams resting stars for the playoffs, and teams looking to plunge further into the tank hole
                    For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      CT2010 wrote: View Post
                      To be fair there were an awful lot of games where the 1st quarter we got smoked and our 2nd unit came in and got us back in the game. Let's not forget all those slow starts.
                      The only thing I can think of is Alan Anderson turning into Kobe and that happened like 5 times throughout the entire season
                      You come at the King, you best not miss.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        p00ka wrote: View Post
                        But pro tank people almost always use the 4-19 start, which was an unbelievably tough schedule (4 games in 5 days, 3 times when nobody else had that 2x), with a very different line-up, as the team we're going into the season with.
                        I tend to ignore the start (although we ALWAYS get a very tough schedule in the opening months, so it's not entirely irrelevant) and focus on the Rudy Raptors since that's effectively what we have going forward, and they were a just-below-.500 team that didn't play defense, and who got more than a few wins against teams that were tanking for the draft or resting for the playoffs.

                        Assuming some incremental improvement gets us a couple more wins (not an unreasonable assumption) and we're basically a .500 team, which means we're most likely battling for a shot at the 8th seed with no obvious prospects for improving the team going forward because we're still going to be financially hammered in place.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Ok people, teams don't rest their starters for the final 25 games. Only in the final 5 games of the season did we play teams who were resting their best players for the playoffs.
                          You come at the King, you best not miss.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            That lineup was also one of the best defensive lineups in the league!

                            Now imagine that same lineup going through training camp together and getting more chemistry underneath them!
                            We just need to make sure that Ross and Hansbrough can pick up the slack from the bench, because as I remember correctly, we would always lose our competitive edge the moment Lucas III came in... the offense fell to a hault, and the coach scrambled and improvised the rotations attempting to plug that whole.
                            The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Michel G wrote: View Post
                              25 games is not a large enough sample size?
                              343 minutes is worth ten games not 25
                              For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Some people on here are impossible to please. So quick so prove our optimism wrong with advanced stats that show we suck but when the stats show that's not true... somehow we still suck lol
                                You come at the King, you best not miss.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X