The one thing about this article i did not understand was why would the raptors trade Ross for Afflalo....? lool
I DONT TRUST PEOPLE WHO WEAR SUNGLASSES AT NIGHT
Bold 1: I agree that was DeMar's best stretch of the season. However, it was also the Raptors worst. Was it Rudy? Was it coaching? I'm not sure. But even though he played off the ball it was within the context of "my turn, your turn" basketball. But even if he has been so successful shooting in the corners and posting up during that time, where is it gone since Rudy left? You raise some really good points on Gay. I'm not sure what the answers are to be honest. I don't agree with any comparison of DeRozan to Bargnani for obvious reasons: DeRozan cares A LOT and puts the work in. However they are both inefficient volume shooters and I wonder if Bargnani's amazing 13 game stretch is in any way comparable to DeRozan's stretch of extremely efficient scoring earlier this season.
Bold 2: I agree - even without the lovely stats.
Your last line is what worries me. Making the assumption he can play off the ball and be very good, can his individual success lead to team success? The times we've seen a healthy Bargnani and Gay says no (granted they are incredibly flawed first options). At the end of the day it is the team success that is what matters as I"m sure anyone other than the biggest 'DD fanboy' (not a dig at anyone here, in particular) would agree. The other aspects he brings to the game are still very much average at best and if he isn't scoring, what is he doing? The second reason for worry is, assuming DD is not the #1 option, how do you get the #1 option? He is likely one of those players good enough to keep you stuck in the middle so the draft is out, free agency is out because he is not the type of talent to attract another star, so that leaves the trade route - but what do you give up if you are building through the draft? Draft picks are out. Only real tradable assets Raptors have are Lowry, Amir, DeRozan, JV, and Ross.... basically their core.
This leads me to look at the teams in the league currently over .500. All those teams are led by incredibly dynamic and efficient players:
OKC - Durant/Westbrook
Indiana - George
Miami - LBJ/Wade/Bosh
San Antonio - Parker/Manu/Duncan
Portland - Lillard/Aldridge
Clippers - Griffin/Paul
Houston - Harden
Phoenix - Dragic/Beldsoe
Golden State - Curry
Dallas - Dirk
Atlanta - Millsap/Horford
When you look at those teams, you also have multiple dynamic and efficient players as 2nd and 3rd options. I don't think you can call DeRozan dynamic and the efficiency is still an unknown, in my opinion. I only see p00ka's comments when someone else replies with quote to him. I see he is going on and on about the "he is what he is comments" and to some extent rightfully so. However stats nor the eye test do not back up the claims he has added a whole new level to his game. The reality is he is still an inefficient volume shooter - maybe even a little bit worse when it comes to efficiency - who has brought his assisting others up to about average and improved getting to the line (likely strength improvement). But I've always said stats are not the be all and end all. There is no question he carries himself with more confidence and his increased strength/maturity has had a positive impact on his game. I'm pleasantly surprised by that growth. In that sense, I have no problem admitting I was wrong. Contrary to some people's posts here, one can't be right about everything. I've never claimed to be right about everything. I give opinions with the rationale behind them - if you agree great, if you disagree I look forward to a rational counter argument. I've been wrong before, I am wrong about DeRozan "is what he is" to some extent but the inefficient volume shooter remains fully intact, and *newsflash* I'll likely be wrong about stuff in the future. *Warning: Shameless pat on the back coming* Around these parts I think that makes me a real minority. I've yet to see any of these posters claiming the greatness that is DeRozan back it up with anything other than their opinions passed as fact. I'm still with OldSkool waiting for a post that logically proves how good DeRozan actually is. When others were boasting his great rebounding/passing/shooting pre-Gay trade, my counter has always been give it time because he has shown incredible stretches in the past. Consistency has been and continues to be his issue. I don't see the need to wait for the previously mentioned 40 games for this very reason. He has already had an 8-10 cold streak, an 8-10 game hot streak, and another 10 game cold streak. The consistency is not there.
I have not wavered in my opinion of tanking... that is probably an issue overall with me. There are many ways to build a team but the Raptors - even with DeRozan - are still faced with lacking the elite talent needed to win. You can find that talent anywhere in the draft but the probabilities are highest at the top. Free agency is not going to happen until the roster has talent that other talent wants to play with. I don't think DeRozan is that type of talent. The play of Ross and JV of late only strengthens resolve to start asset accumulation, ridding long term commitments, and adding value contracts.
*I apologize if this is all over the place. I've been trying to type this response for the better part of 5 hours. Life keeps interrupting the Republic.*
"You donít know the Bruno Caboclo......"Bruno Caboclo
Basketball has clear winners every night --except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.
I'm not sure why Matt is calling lamarcus Aldridge efficient when his true shooting percentage (51.4%) is about the same as Derozans (51.5%), and he's a bigman playing off an all star point guard, not to mention an excellent two way wing pairing in batum and Wesley Matthews.
Same goes off Westbrook at 51.8%.
Last edited by Masai Ujiri; Tue Dec 31st, 2013 at 07:58 PM.
I don't know why people are just refusing to accept that if DeRozan were able to play off a legit number one his efficiency would see a large increase. If you want another example, look at monta Ellis. Everyone was calling him a chucker last year and now he's one of the most efficient guards in the league. Did he suddenly improve as a player? Or is it because he's playing off dirk now instead of being miscast as the man in no hopeless bucks offense?
DD's true shooting percentage is bumped up due to him shooting more FTs per game than Aldridge. Other than that you can see how stats do not favor the long 2, which is where the majority of both players points come from. Also Aldridge is capable of handling double teams and can take a game over, DD not so much.
Ellis has been an inefficient chucker in the past, and has become more efficient due to the fact that he has started to grow up as a player. He is making smarter decisions and is being asked to run the offense more than score, and it has resulted in him attacking the rim more. Yes he does have a star to play off of, and gets some better looks from three, but he is able to hit the three unlike DD (which is another reason why he cannot be a secondary option due to his lack of outside shooting)
No he hasn't grown up as a player, he's performing better because he's on a better team where he doesn't have to be the number one guy. If you don't believe that, then please take note of the fact that he has had a season with this level of efficiency before (actually HIGHER shot over 50% from the field with 20ppg), because he was on a warriors team with multiple offensive weapons as or more dangerous than himself.Ellis has been an inefficient chucker in the past, and has become more efficient due to the fact that he has started to grow up as a player. He is making smarter decisions and is being asked to run the offense more than score, and it has resulted in him attacking the rim more. Yes he does have a star to play off of, and gets some better looks from three, but he is able to hit the three unlike DD (which is another reason why he cannot be a secondary option due to his lack of outside shooting)
Idk how you can say he can hit the three unlike DD, when he is shooting 32% and demar is shooting 31%, while demar takes and makes more per game. Don't ever make things up.
All Other Bolds: For a guy running around asking for proof, as in stats/facts not opinions, all over the place, with Matt52 as your personal back-up singer/asst, this is a rather odd way to counter a stat that doesn't fit your narrative. Where's your "proof" of these opinions?
In this case, Nosike is talking about LA being considered efficient, but DD not being efficient even though they have the same TS%. What I said is that DDs TS% is similar to the TS% of LA due to the fact that he takes more FT's (and because he shoots the three), not because he is as good of a shooter as LA is. TS% and eFg% are not kind to the mid ranged jump shot and neither player will have great advanced stats because, especially LA because that is where he gets his shots
K are you ready for some stats about DD and LA and who is efficient???
I'm not going to use TS% because it doesn't like either player, I will instead break down their shot selection and percentages in order to look at what are the players strengths, and how often do they play to their strengths (which is the basis of efficiency)
I'm going to break this into 3 parts, Short Ranged (shooting from rim to 9 feet), Mid Ranged (10-19 feet) and Long Range (20+ feet)
LA - 123/232 = 53.0% shooting. 34.9% of his total shots are taken from this area
DD - 90/151 = 59.6% shooting. 29.7% of his total shots are taken from this area
LA - 161/357 = 45.1% shooting. 53.7% of his total shots are taken from this area.
DD - 78/224 = 34.8% shooting. 44.1% of his total shots are taken in this area.
LA - 31/76 = 40.8% shooting. 11.4% of his total shots are taken from this area
DD - 46/133 = 34.6% shooting. 26.1% of his total shots are taken from this area.
So, I have numbers, what do they mean??
DDs strength is finishing at or near the rim (60%), and as soon as he steps past 9ft, his percentages drop to a paltry 35%. So, in order for DD to be efficient, he should be taking the majority (ie >50%) of his shots at the rim. Instead he only takes 30% of his shots in close, and takes 70% of his shots in areas that he doesn't shoot well. That isn't efficient play.
LAs strength is the mid ranged jumper, which he is turning in at a pretty good clip and he is taking the majority of his shots from that mid ranged area. Also consider that his close range is still a solid number, and is his second highest usage area. His lowest percentage area (Long Range - 40%, which is better than DD) is by far his lowest usage area.
DD takes a ton of low percentage (for his skills) shots and doesn't play to his efficient areas on the floor. LA is efficient because he takes 89% of his shots from areas of strength, whereas DD only takes 30% of his shots from efficient areas. TS% is great for a cursoury glance.
So when Nosike asks how can LA be considered efficient but DD not considered efficient even though they have the same TS%, you have to dig a little deeper and you see that LA is indeed a much more efficient player do to the types of shots taken and how many. This same process will tell you that DD is a very good corner three shooter, however, he tends to shoot very little from the corners and is therefor an inefficient player because he doesn't play to his strengths.
I am really not a stat guru, and really do think that stats have some pretty big limits, but they are used to look into what we see on the court (to help analyze the eye test). Saying that DD has the same TS% as LA and therefor concluding that DD is efficient, is not good use of stats. Also anyone who watches the game will tell you immediately that LA is a much better player than DD.
When I ask for a post explaining why you think DD is good, I expect to see:
DD does _______ in game, and he is really good at it because ____
All I'm getting is either no explanation as to what he does well in a game or I get a "I've proven it, where are your stats??, you're a troll". I'm even at the point at saying this: What does DD do well in a game, you don't have to prove it, just what do you see from him when he is on the court??????
Last edited by OldSkoolCool; Wed Jan 1st, 2014 at 05:43 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)