Lowry/Derozan - best backcourt in the East?

[isaacthompson]

LOL Hill/Stephnson? Why has nobody called this guy out? Hill and his 10 pts 3 assists per. Derozan vs Stephenson is close, maybe lead going to Lance, but Lowry blows Hill out of the water, this year and every year. Hell, he has a 13.3 PER to Lowry's TWENTY.

I know people hate giving us the "best of" anything, but our 2 best starters are better than Indiana's two worst starters, believe it or not.

Welp. This is why I said "Hill is really underrated".. I thought this was common knowledge since seemingly every analyst on the continent has said so, but I digress. Being the worst starter in a lineup that has George, Hibbert, West and Stephenson is exactly a bad thing.

Bold 1: Clearly you've never watched the Pacers play. You can't judge the guy solely based on stats when he's playing as the 5th option on the offensive end. Mind you, 11 PPG as a 5th option is pretty damn good. Consider this when compared to Lowry's 16 PPG while often being the 1st or 2nd option.

Bold 2: Well, I didn't want to play the stats game, but since you started I suppose I shall play along:

Lowry Career per 36: 14.1 pts on 42%FG, 35%3PT, 79%FT --> 48% eFG%
Hill Career per 36: 14.2 pts on 45%FG, 38%3PT, 81%FT --> 51% eFG%

Lowry Career advanced: 112 OffRTG, 108 DefRTG, 0.13 WS/48
Hill Career advanced: 114 OffRTG, 104 DefRTG, 0.15 WS/48

You simply can't make an argument that Lowry has been a better player than Hill over his career. Consistency is something that automatically comes to mind when describing the difference between these two.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

wow that was super convincing. great job, buddy. i have been won over. nevermind the past few posts where i basically debunked this completely.

You should know by now that saying anything negative about DeRozan around here gets you labelled a "hater" and causes your fan-hood to be questioned. Not that you even actually said anything negative about him...

[iblastoff]

Yeah, it's a real serious issue that must be overcome...every good SG needs a 3 point shot!!!


Or not.

Did you just try to compare Dwayne wade to derozan? My god. Dude you are lost.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[magoon]

Did you just try to compare Dwayne wade to derozan? My god. Dude you are lost.

Actually, Wade is a good comparison to 2013/14 DeRozan. Not in terms of sheer skill and talent, of course - Wade is clearly the better player, even at this point in their careers. But Wade's game at SG is elite without being a particularly good three-point shooter, because Wade has always had excellent floor sense and has always been a willing passer, and in his prime he was an elite passer. Until this year DeRozan was never a particularly good passer; now he's become one, and the comparison is not unreasonable to say he's a lesser version of Wade.

[iblastoff]

Actually, Wade is a good comparison to 2013/14 DeRozan. Not in terms of sheer skill and talent, of course - Wade is clearly the better player, even at this point in their careers. But Wade's game at SG is elite without being a particularly good three-point shooter, because Wade has always had excellent floor sense and has always been a willing passer, and in his prime he was an elite passer. Until this year DeRozan was never a particularly good passer; now he's become one, and the comparison is not unreasonable to say he's a lesser version of Wade.

Let's call 2013-14 DD version "Super Derozan". Because he's clearly never played at this level prior to the Rudy trade.

It's really awesome that Super D is actually passing the ball now. He's become a little less of a volume shooter and is able to contribute more than just scoring.

How does Super Derozans assists measure up? It's even lower than wades rookie season, wades career low.

Defensively, Super D is showing a lot more effort. His defensive win shares have "skyrocketed" this season to about 1.7. Meanwhile wades DWS has slumped from his usual AVERAGE of around 4.5.

And since I'm on my ipad I don't want to try and paste
Shot charts (spoiler: wade is basically more efficient from EVERYWHERE on the floor) but let it be said that derozans TS% rating is near a career low in 2014, while Dwayne is nearing his career high at .580.

So yes, derozan is a lesser version of wade. Pretty much EVERY shooting guard is a lesser version of wade.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[ezz_bee]

wow that was super convincing. great job, buddy. i have been won over. nevermind the past few posts where i basically debunked this completely.

Part if it is how you determine best. Is it talent? Production? OR is it winning? If someone said, "There's a best of seven series STARTING TONIGHT and you have a choice of having Lowry and Derozan as your starting back court OR Wall and Beal, who would you take?" My answer would be Lowry and Derozan and it's not even close. Next year, I'd put my money on the Wall Beal combo, but right now, TODAY, Derozan and Lowry are playing better basketball. Hopefully, the Raptors will get Washington in the first round, as that would go a long way to settle the argument.

The fact that Lowry and Derozan are the two most important players on a team that has a better RECORD than everyone in the conference other than Miami/Indy/Atlanta, goes a low way to saying they're better. If you look at the rest of our starters we've got a two second year players, and Amir not the most potent of front courts.

I don't think it means much, and I don't see them being the best back court next year, but right now it's pretty easy to make the case for them.

[BobLoblaw]

Interesting topic. Yes, I agree.

Healthy Rose + Butler would be better but who knows if we will ever see a healthy Rose again.
Healthy and fully focused Rondo + Bradley would be better. But Rondo hasn't been at his best / focused even when healthy last year.
Wall+Beal has talent to be better, but based on this year, no.
Chalmers+Wade. Chalmers is a solid player, and Wade is still one of the best guards. But they've missed a combined 15 games already.

[Puffer]

I'm seeing a lot of references to "career" numbers. Looking at the topic of the thread, I wouldn't have imagined that it was meant to be "Who is the best back court in the East, career-wise?" If that is what was meant, then the question would have been "who is the best back court in the East over the last three years?" or "Who is the best back court in the East, even if they didn't play together before this season but say we combined their career averages and came up with some number out of context from their actual experiences of playing together?"

Typically a question like this has an unstated "...right now" understanding. So I think any comparisoon of career numbers is not germane to the question.

And I like this:"The fact that Lowry and Derozan are the two most important players on a team that has a better RECORD than everyone in the conference other than Miami/Indy/Atlanta, goes a low way to saying they're better. If you look at the rest of our starters we've got a two second year players, and Amir not the most potent of front courts."

[iblastoff]

Part if it is how you determine best. Is it talent? Production? OR is it winning? If someone said, "There's a best of seven series STARTING TONIGHT and you have a choice of having Lowry and Derozan as your starting back court OR Wall and Beal, who would you take?" My answer would be Lowry and Derozan and it's not even close. Next year, I'd put my money on the Wall Beal combo, but right now, TODAY, Derozan and Lowry are playing better basketball. Hopefully, the Raptors will get Washington in the first round, as that would go a long way to settle the argument.

The fact that Lowry and Derozan are the two most important players on a team that has a better RECORD than everyone in the conference other than Miami/Indy/Atlanta, goes a low way to saying they're better. If you look at the rest of our starters we've got a two second year players, and Amir not the most potent of front courts.

I don't think it means much, and I don't see them being the best back court next year, but right now it's pretty easy to make the case for them.

lowry and derozan have been great post-gay trade, but lets face it, the wins have largely been from the lack of dropoff in pace/tempo/scoring once the bench rolls onto the floor. the wizards do not have that luxury just yet. martel webster and vesely are not going to make up for wall/beal the same way patterson/salmons can easily make up for derozan.

that being said, wizards are a SINGLE W behind us with a convincing win over a full rostered miami heat, something raptors haven't done in years and years. thats hardly going a long way to saying we have a better back court duo.

[Lark Benson]

I'd have to agree that DD/Lowry is currently a touch better than Wall/Beal, but is there anyone on these boards who wouldn't immediately agree to a swap of these 4 players?

This is one of those pointless debates that relies on people ignoring extraneous factors like injuries. Fact is, if Rose were healthy this wouldn't be anywhere close to a debate. If Rondo was healthy you could make the argument for he and Bradley too. If Irving could get ANY help from his 2 guard then you'd probably be looking at that combo. If Williams and Johnson were playing at anything close to their peak abilities then again, no debate.

Then you have to consider team context and where the team generates it's offence: the Raps backcourt duo benefits from the fact that they essentially ARE the team's offense. If you sort Raptors by FGA per game you'd see that DD and Lowry's totals equal those of the next 4 highest Raptors on the list. So are they the best backcourt, or are they simply being relied upon more heavily than others and therefore putting up greater numbers? Context.

So sure, maybe they're the best backcourt right at this very second. But it's by default, not by virtue of their being the best possible combo; they just happen to be in the injury-ravaged, **** heavy East. Go ahead and expand the question to the entire league and they're instantly behind San Antonio, OKC, the Clips, Phoenix, Portland, Houston, Golden State, and possibly Memphis (depending on how much you like Tony Allen).

[JawsGT]

I'd have to agree that DD/Lowry is currently a touch better than Wall/Beal, but is there anyone on these boards who wouldn't immediately agree to a swap of these 4 players?

This is one of those pointless debates that relies on people ignoring extraneous factors like injuries. Fact is, if Rose were healthy this wouldn't be anywhere close to a debate. If Rondo was healthy you could make the argument for he and Bradley too. If Irving could get ANY help from his 2 guard then you'd probably be looking at that combo. If Williams and Johnson were playing at anything close to their peak abilities then again, no debate.

Then you have to consider team context and where the team generates it's offence: the Raps backcourt duo benefits from the fact that they essentially ARE the team's offense. If you sort Raptors by FGA per game you'd see that DD and Lowry's totals equal those of the next 4 highest Raptors on the list. So are they the best backcourt, or are they simply being relied upon more heavily than others and therefore putting up greater numbers? Context.

So sure, maybe they're the best backcourt right at this very second. But it's by default, not by virtue of their being the best possible combo; they just happen to be in the injury-ravaged, **** heavy East. Go ahead and expand the question to the entire league and they're instantly behind San Antonio, OKC, the Clips, Phoenix, Portland, Houston, Golden State, and possibly Memphis (depending on how much you like Tony Allen).

I completely disagree. Given how our backcourt has been performing lately, it would still be an interesting discussion point and worth debating. Everyone thinks they may know how backcourts or teams would perform if all was well, but the fact is you don't know. You, and others, almost seem offended by the topic. But, I did mention that you could add Rose and Rondo to the discussion if you wanted. And you immediately put Rose/Butler higher than Lowry/Derozan by DEFAULT, which is what you also advised against in the Raps case.

So, sorry folks that I didn't expand the discussion to SF's, or the West, so you could easily dismiss the success of our starting backcourt!

BTW, I would take Lowry/Derozan over Wall/Beal. I think our backcourt is performing better presently, I don't like Walls contract, and I think the intangible characteristics like heart, hustle and dedication are far superior than Wall/Beal.

[Skip2MyLou]

2 elite defenders in Rondo and Bradley are game changers on defence but don't have the complete package

[Lark Benson]

I completely disagree. Given how our backcourt has been performing lately, it would still be an interesting discussion point and worth debating. Everyone thinks they may know how backcourts or teams would perform if all was well, but the fact is you don't know. You, and others, almost seem offended by the topic. But, I did mention that you could add Rose and Rondo to the discussion if you wanted. And you immediately put Rose/Butler higher than Lowry/Derozan by DEFAULT, which is what you also advised against in the Raps case.

Of course I don't know how injured players would perform. But are you suggesting it's unreasonable to give the former MVP of the league the benefit of the doubt until his injuries prove he's not the same player? Because I disagree.

I'm not offended by the topic, I simply think it's silly to trumpet the Raps' duo when they're winning a race because everyone better than them dropped out or is in a different conference. They're still not a backcourt that you would want eating up about 1/3rd of your salary cap on a contender (and here I'm assuming what we all know to be true: Lowry will probably get paid 9-10mil per), so who cares if they're the best backcourt in an anaemic conference? To me it's a case of winning first prize at the Special Olympics.

[Axel]

In 2 weeks, the answer will likely be Rondo/Bradley in Boston because they would impact the game at a much higher level but as of today I'd probably give Lowry/DD the top spot in a slight edge of Hill/Stephenson and Wall/Beal. But it's pretty close overall (as has been discussed/argued above by others).

[OldSkoolCool]

Yeah, it's a real serious issue that must be overcome...every good SG needs a 3 point shot!!!


Or not.

I must protest. Wade is elite at getting to the rim and creating for his teammates. DD is neither of these and he doesn't have the 3pt shot. I wish people would stop comparing the 2 players all together.

Any and all DeRozan comparisons should be limited to Rip Hamilton. Same style of game-play IMO.

Actually, Wade is a good comparison to 2013/14 DeRozan. Not in terms of sheer skill and talent, of course - Wade is clearly the better player, even at this point in their careers. But Wade's game at SG is elite without being a particularly good three-point shooter, because Wade has always had excellent floor sense and has always been a willing passer, and in his prime he was an elite passer. Until this year DeRozan was never a particularly good passer; now he's become one, and the comparison is not unreasonable to say he's a lesser version of Wade.

Not even close. Not even with the "lesser version" in there to describe him.

Wade is an elite ball handler and creater. DD is an average at best ball handler who isn't able to create for himself or others. And no, his increase in assists is not him being a creater, he is just actually passing the ball now instead of being a ball stopper.

Oh, and whoever made the DeRozan Hater comment needs to give his head a shake. Nobody hates DD. That would imply that we think DD is a dbag or something of the like. DD is an upstanding Toronto citizen and is by all accounts a great guy. Just because we don't think that DD is as great as you think he is doesn't make us DD haterz

_____________________________________

Also best back-court in the East is Hill/Stephenson.

Lowry is currently playing better than Hill. Though the gap is not as large as it seems, Hill is just not asked to be a primary option, he is fully capable of putting up bigger numbers. They can both defend and shoot the three equally well. Both can run a team as well, just Hill isn't being asked to score as much or be integral to initiating the offense due to the strength of his teammates.

DD vs Stephenson isn't even close. Stephenson is better at EVERYTHING than DD. This isn't DD hating. Stephenson on any night can explode for a triple double while being a great defender. And it's not just that Stephenson can put up the stats, it's how he does it. He has the ability to completely dominate a game and make an elite defensive scheme look like a bunch of dancing monkeys.