Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 67

Thread: Why DeRozan is an ideal 2nd option for a championship team.

  1. #41
    Raptors Republic Rookie
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    143
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote mountio wrote: View Post
    I was just about to do this. A couple of additions / changes. Youre missing Leonard from SA (their third option, who they wouldnt trade for DD). This is a definite no.

    There is no chance that por trades lillard for DD. zero %. Take that off the list.

    Conley I agree is a toss up, but hes # 3 behind Z bo and Gasol - neither of which they would trade for DD.

    GS - its amazing to me that K Thomson is their 2nd option, but I guess thats true ... in which case, I agree.

    So, Im pretty close, but I would say 8 out of 10 dont do it, but GS and Dallas (the bottom two) would.
    Agree on pretty much all of this. I took another look at Lillard and he's a much better offensive player than I thought, I thought he was roughly equal to DeMar on offense with worse defense, but that is not true. You can't use the only one real year of great production excuse either, because DeMar only has one year of great production.

    On Memphis, I see ZBo, Gasol and Conley as almost equal options, and I tried to get away for the "trade for big men" stuff later in the list because big men are inherently more valuable.

    San Antonio's strange, because they have such a good offensive system that it makes players who are mediocre on other teams become monsters (Boris Diaw for instance). So Leonard definitely has better numbers , but I can see a scenario where SA sees someone with DeMar's tools and thinks, "Oh yeah, we can make him fit" and increase his efficiency a lot.

  2. #42
    Raptors Republic All-Star OldSkoolCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Jamshid wrote: View Post
    When Haters talk about trading him for Henderson and late picks, or think Sawgy P is a more talented player than him or at sometimes even talk about trading him for future pick and Cap flexibility, then you are NOTHING but a HATER with no insight to the game.

    It is that simple. DD is our most talented player, a guy which this organization has invested for past few season, who has delivered and is on a reasonable contract for his talent and still can grow.
    I think you missed the points of the Henderson trade as well as the Swaggy P talent reference.

    I would argue that DD is not our most talented player, Lowry and Valanciunas I would say have him beat for sure. People forget how good Lowry is...

    Quote imanshumpert wrote: View Post
    Is 02-03 Tony Parker better than DeRozan?
    That is a tough comparison. DD probably was better, but Parker was a 20 year old guy who made a huge jump in nearly every statistical category and posted nearly as good of an ORat as DD. I think it is an unfair comparison.

    ____________

    DD I think is a 3rd option. Looking at our offense all season, the Raptors were at their best when the ball flowed (starting with Lowry) and DD just operated as a role player within the system and took good shots. He could be a high-scoring role player on a good team, but I would not say he is a number 1 or 2 option. Those guys are the ones who can completely break down a defense at will and create shots for himself or his teammates. A good example of a second option would be Jeff Teague. DD is not on that level.

  3. #43
    Raptors Republic All-Star stooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,991
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post

    DD I think is a 3rd option. Looking at our offense all season, the Raptors were at their best when the ball flowed (starting with Lowry) and DD just operated as a role player within the system and took good shots. He could be a high-scoring role player on a good team, but I would not say he is a number 1 or 2 option. Those guys are the ones who can completely break down a defense at will and create shots for himself or his teammates. A good example of a second option would be Jeff Teague. DD is not on that level.
    We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. I think DD is at least as good as Teague.

  4. #44
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The 2003 Spurs were a single star team. Possibly the worst supporting cast to win a championship. One of many reasons why Duncan is one of the greatest.

    But if you don't have Duncan or someone else like that, it's a moot question. Sure, DeMar could've been good enough to be the no.2 on that team, but that's because of Duncan, not because DeMar is so fantastic. He still has ways to go before we can talk about him as a legit 2nd option on a typical championship team.

  5. Like OldSkoolCool liked this post
  6. #45
    Raptors Republic All-Star OldSkoolCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote stooley wrote: View Post
    We're gonna have to agree to disagree on that one. I think DD is at least as good as Teague.
    Difference is Teague can break down and rotate the defense and get himself shots or his teammates good shots.

    DD needs teammates to get him good perimeter shots and can only sometimes get into the paint, where he is good at finishing for himself, but does not pass it off his penetration and make his teammates better.

  7. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote BobLoblaw wrote: View Post
    The 2003 Spurs were a single star team. Possibly the worst supporting cast to win a championship. One of many reasons why Duncan is one of the greatest.

    But if you don't have Duncan or someone else like that, it's a moot question. Sure, DeMar could've been good enough to be the no.2 on that team, but that's because of Duncan, not because DeMar is so fantastic. He still has ways to go before we can talk about him as a legit 2nd option on a typical championship team.
    Umm so Duncan is atypical? The #1 options that win titles are usually generational talents. There are a few exceptions: Pierce, although he played with two other Hall of Famers and Billups, but he played with 3 other potential hall of famers.

    Then we're talking about LeBron, Dirk, Kobe, Wade, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan and Olajuwon as the other #1 options who won titles since 1991. Pretty sure all of those guys were playing at a similar or better level than Duncan did in 2003 when they won their championships.

    My argument has more to do with people saying DeMar can't be a #2 option because he isn't a good 3 point shooter and can't play off ball. But the fact is that guys like Wade, Rip, Kobe, Parker weren't good three point shooters either when they won as second options and were still able to win championships. This is why I get annoyed when people say that DeMar wouldn't be able to play with a Durant type as a #2. Makes zero sense and has no basis whatsoever.

  8. #47
    Raptors Republic All-Star Yabadabayolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kitchener "Sketchener"
    Posts
    1,549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
    Difference is Teague can break down and rotate the defense and get himself shots or his teammates good shots.

    DD needs teammates to get him good perimeter shots and can only sometimes get into the paint, where he is good at finishing for himself, but does not pass it off his penetration and make his teammates better.
    What your explaining is a point guard. Every pg should be able to do that, does Lenron not use his teammates to get good perimeter shots. Honestly you just don't like dd so you amplify all his weaknesses
    In Swag we Trust

    -Nick Young

  9. Like imanshumpert liked this post
  10. #48
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote imanshumpert wrote: View Post
    Umm so Duncan is atypical? The #1 options that win titles are usually generational talents. There are a few exceptions: Pierce, although he played with two other Hall of Famers and Billups, but he played with 3 other potential hall of famers.

    Then we're talking about LeBron, Dirk, Kobe, Wade, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan and Olajuwon as the other #1 options who won titles since 1991. Pretty sure all of those guys were playing at a similar or better level than Duncan did in 2003 when they won their championships.

    My argument has more to do with people saying DeMar can't be a #2 option because he isn't a good 3 point shooter and can't play off ball. But the fact is that guys like Wade, Rip, Kobe, Parker weren't good three point shooters either when they won as second options and were still able to win championships. This is why I get annoyed when people say that DeMar wouldn't be able to play with a Durant type as a #2. Makes zero sense and has no basis whatsoever.
    In a strict sense of talent, Duncan is just one of maybe 10 best players of all time. But many of these players tried to win with a similar or even better supporting cast than Duncan's in 2003 and failed. There are very few cases in history that compare to Duncan's Spurs in 2003. Hakeem in 1994, maybe Rick Barry in the 70s, Dirk a few years ago. And I'd take those supporting casts ahead of Duncan's in 2003. So regardless of what you think about Duncan's talent level, his accomplishments in 2003 stand out.

    So IMO if you are making a case that "DeMar is an ideal 2nd option for a championship team," 2003 Spurs is a pretty extreme example to make. There was nothing ideal about Duncan's supporting cast in 2003. It was a rare case where a great player in his prime and a great coach got it done without much help.

    Imagine if some martial artist fights off a grizzly bear with bare hands. It does not mean that martial arts is an ideal weapon for fighting grizzly bears. It can maybe possibly happen, odds are against it.

    I think it's obvious that DeMar is worse than a typical no.2 on a championship team. And I don't think it's important if he's better than Tony Parker in 2003 or Kenny Smith or whoever in 1994.

    Now when it comes to midrange game in general, like I said, I think it's an important weapon for any volume scorer. Very few volume scorers are any good without a solid midrange game. But Bargnani shoots midrange jumpers, DeMar shoots midrange jumpers and prime Garnett shoots midrange jumpers. These players are all different caliber players. Just because they shoot midrange jumpers does not mean they are all ideal 2nd options on a championship team. DeMar is trending upwards but I think it's premature to call him ideal for that role.

  11. Like Fully liked this post
  12. #49
    Raptors Republic All-Star OldSkoolCool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Yabadabayolo wrote: View Post
    What your explaining is a point guard. Every pg should be able to do that, does Lenron not use his teammates to get good perimeter shots. Honestly you just don't like dd so you amplify all his weaknesses
    Honestly, DeMar DeRozan is a GUARD, and you treat him like he should never have to do that, when that should be one of his biggest responsibilities. In the playoffs, we needed another perimeter ball handler, and you know what, DD couldn't do it...instead the responsibilities got put on Greivis freaking Vasquez to help Lowry run the offense because the ball got stuck in the mud every time DD touched it. Step back and look at that, Vasquez was more important to the Raptors success than DeMar was. Vasquez. The unathletic, slow, heat-check, sometimes ball hog guy was a better option to have the ball in his hands than DD, our "all-star"

    The NBA is changing and you need 2 perimeter players who can get into the paint and break down the defense and rotate the ball. Right now all we have is Lowry (and Vasquez..........and De Colo, from what I've seen).

    There is a reason why I value pretty much any player who can break down the D and get into the paint and rotate the ball more than DD. They probably are worse statistically, but they probably would make the Raptors a better team than DD.

  13. #50
    Raptors Republic All-Star Yabadabayolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kitchener "Sketchener"
    Posts
    1,549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
    Honestly, DeMar DeRozan is a GUARD, and you treat him like he should never have to do that, when that should be one of his biggest responsibilities. In the playoffs, we needed another perimeter ball handler, and you know what, DD couldn't do it...instead the responsibilities got put on Greivis freaking Vasquez to help Lowry run the offense because the ball got stuck in the mud every time DD touched it. Step back and look at that, Vasquez was more important to the Raptors success than DeMar was. Vasquez. The unathletic, slow, heat-check, sometimes ball hog guy was a better option to have the ball in his hands than DD, our "all-star"

    The NBA is changing and you need 2 perimeter players who can get into the paint and break down the defense and rotate the ball. Right now all we have is Lowry (and Vasquez..........and De Colo, from what I've seen).

    There is a reason why I value pretty much any player who can break down the D and get into the paint and rotate the ball more than DD. They probably are worse statistically, but they probably would make the Raptors a better team than DD.
    First off Big balls vasquez is an amzing perimeter ball handler. You already said you like guys who can break down defenses, well GREIVAS FREAKING VASQUEZ does that. He is very important to the teams success but he isnt more important than demar!

    Take derozan out of game 3 and who scores. that game would have been a fucking blowout, NOBODY other than derozan could score. The only reson the raptors were successful this year was the play of lowry AND derozan and you out here acting like he was a liability. I recall you claiming ross to be better than dd, where is his ball handling breaking down defences moves. Im pretty sure i didnt see it during the playoffs. He just became a catch and shoot three type of guy. I kinda wanna see masai trade dd for a guy like waiters just to see you see how much better this team will get without him, we become a fringe playoff team if we are lucky.
    In Swag we Trust

    -Nick Young

  14. #51
    Raptors Republic All-Star JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote imanshumpert wrote: View Post
    Umm so Duncan is atypical? The #1 options that win titles are usually generational talents. There are a few exceptions: Pierce, although he played with two other Hall of Famers and Billups, but he played with 3 other potential hall of famers.

    Then we're talking about LeBron, Dirk, Kobe, Wade, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan and Olajuwon as the other #1 options who won titles since 1991. Pretty sure all of those guys were playing at a similar or better level than Duncan did in 2003 when they won their championships.

    My argument has more to do with people saying DeMar can't be a #2 option because he isn't a good 3 point shooter and can't play off ball. But the fact is that guys like Wade, Rip, Kobe, Parker weren't good three point shooters either when they won as second options and were still able to win championships. This is why I get annoyed when people say that DeMar wouldn't be able to play with a Durant type as a #2. Makes zero sense and has no basis whatsoever.
    As to whether Demar will be able to a legit number two option on a title team, I think it comes down to his next contract.

    As number two options, both Wade and Kobe, for example, provided elite defence in addition to their elite offence, while being paid max or near max contracts.

    As number two options, Parker and Hamilton were relatively one dimensional players, but were also being paid nowhere near max contracts.

    So the real hypothetical question is:

    What can the max yearly value of Demar's contract be before a team starts to suffer for the fact that he doesn't bring elite defence?

    It seems to me that $10 million/year could be ok. He provides a nice second scoring option without eating up too much cap space.

    But what if he maxes out on his next contract? At that point, is he taking up too much cap space given the value he brings to the defensive side of the ball? Historically, do we have any examples of max or near max (which I think DeMar will be) players who were second scoring options, but who weren't elite defenders?
    Last edited by JimiCliff; Sun Jun 8th, 2014 at 08:50 PM. Reason: whether/weather

  15. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Whoa Wade provided elite defense the last two finals?

    News to me.

  16. #53
    Raptors Republic All-Star JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Just tonight, Van Gundy mentioned that Miami had dropped to 11th in the league in defensive efficiency, and that this was the first year of the bron/wade/bosh era where they haven't been an elite defensive team. Then Van Gundy wondered why, and couldn't come up with an answer.

    Wade played significantly fewer minutes this year than he did in any of the previous three, and there have been no other major roster changes.

  17. #54
    Raptors Republic Starter TSF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Waterloo
    Posts
    594
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote JimiCliff wrote: View Post
    Just tonight, Van Gundy mentioned that Miami had dropped to 11th in the league in defensive efficiency, and that this was the first year of the bron/wade/bosh era where they haven't been an elite defensive team. Then Van Gundy wondered why, and couldn't come up with an answer.

    Wade played significantly fewer minutes this year than he did in any of the previous three, and there have been no other major roster changes.
    They took their foot off the throttle? Pretty easy answer. With a system so dependent on fast, well-timed rotations, when you ease up during the regular season to spare guys who haven't really had much time off in years, the defense slips.
    @Boymusic66

  18. Like imanshumpert liked this post
  19. #55
    Raptors Republic All-Star JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote TSF wrote: View Post
    They took their foot off the throttle? Pretty easy answer. With a system so dependent on fast, well-timed rotations, when you ease up during the regular season to spare guys who haven't really had much time off in years, the defense slips.
    Yup, pretty easy, and nothing more than a guess.

  20. #56
    Raptors Republic Starter TSF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Waterloo
    Posts
    594
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote JimiCliff wrote: View Post
    Yup, pretty easy, and nothing more than a guess.
    You could see it pretty often when you watched Heat games- It just didn't feel like their playoff defense. Sloppy rotations, aggressive pick and roll schemes but no crisp help, lazy transition D, all the little stuff.
    @Boymusic66

  21. #57
    Raptors Republic All-Star JimiCliff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,888
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote TSF wrote: View Post
    You could see it pretty often when you watched Heat games- It just didn't feel like their playoff defense. Sloppy rotations, aggressive pick and roll schemes but no crisp help, lazy transition D, all the little stuff.
    Again though - Wade missed significant time this year. All you mentioned could easily be attributed to that; as much as simply taking their foot off the throttle.

  22. #58
    Raptors Republic All-Star ezz_bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Kigali, Rwanda
    Posts
    1,687
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The rationale of the OP is very anecdotal. A lot of those players played different positions and had different roles. Saying both Garnett and Derozan shoot jumpers, therefore they are comparable, is wildly simplistic. Furthermore the importance of the 3 point shot is something that has grown exponentially over the last few years. Once you go back further than 2010, you can't compare it anymore because it wasn't something teams believed was important. There offensive schemes weren't designed around 3pt shooting. A lot of this has to do with the fact that teams didn't use to be able to play any zones. Once partial zoning was allowed 2001, offensive spacing was much harder to come by, because defenders could float away from their checks to provide help defense.


    Furthermore, It's not just a binary question "Can we win a championship with Demar?"At least it shouldn't be. For example, let's substitute myself (or anyone for that matter) and ask a similar question. Can an NBA team win a championship with me as a starter? Ridiculous right? But what about this team?

    A team of
    Chris Paul
    Me (for 3 point shooting!!!)
    Lebron James
    Anthony Davis
    Serge Ibaka

    Can win a Championship? Depending on who we had coming off bench,(Also, how amazing would it be to watch that team!?!?!?!)

    Saying that I'm a player that can be a starter on a championship team in the NBA doesn't really mean much, because it's not about individual players: It's also about how they fit, and whether one (or more) players weaknesses can be covered up by teammates or hidden in schemes.

    Anyone in the NBA can win a ring, and anyone in the right circumstances (JJ Barea/Mike Miller) can have a huge impact on a championship team. I think as a GM the goal is to create a team with few weaknesses as possible, and have players with complimentary skills sets that cover up for each others weaknesses, balance in starting and bench units is also important.

    Was my example ridiculous? Of course it was. The odds of a team be able to afford and acquire Paul, Lebron, Davis, and Serge, is next to impossible. But the point remains, in order for me to win a championship, I'd have to be playing with people who could cover up for my weaknesses defensively.

    With that said, I DO like the Jason Terry comparison and I think it's worth exploring a little more.

    If you look at their numbers from basketball-reference.com (per game/per36/advanced) they are extremely similar. Terry gets more assists, but Demar gets more rebounds. They have virtually identical points/efficiency/and advanced stats. Their Ortg/Drtg, and winshares are the same. There is one category where they differ widely: Games Started. In 2006-2007, Jason terry played 81 games and started in 80 of them. The following year he played all 82 games but only started 34. By 2010-2011 (the year they won) he played all 82 but only started 10. He averaged at least 31 min/game in all of those years.

    What does the Jason Terry experience tell us? I think it tells us that although he was their 2nd option offensively, he was not their 2nd option defensively. He was moved to the bench to provide a spark offensively, and add scoring to the 2nd unit.

    To me Demar falls in the same category.

    Yes the Raps can win with Demar BUT I think their chances would be better with he coming off the bench in the Manu/Terry role, where their defensive weakness doesn't matter as much because they are often matched up with 2nd unit players (Although, it would be nice to see some improvement in playmaking (aka a passing/assists).

    Also it's worth looking that their contracts...

    Jason Terry signed a 6 year deal at 9.5 million/year (not sure if it was front or back loaded) with the Mavs in 2006 at age 29. A year after he won the title he signed with Boston for a two years @ 5 mil/year (It was hoped that he'd be the missing piece to another finals appearance, he wasn't). Also, keep in mind that the person who put together that team (Cuban) let pretty much all of the key free agents of that team go, because he felt like under the new CBA he couldn't afford to keep them.

    Again, it's not a question of "Can we make the finals with Demar as second option" because the answer is yes. The question for me is "What would a team with Demar have to look like in order to make the finals"? and also, "Will it be easier to make that team if we trade Demar?"

    If we look at Jason Terry, who is probably the "2nd option offensively" who is closest to Demar, than we have to ask the question, would Demar be willing to move to the bench if it was in the best interests of the team? I'm not sure he'd be willing to (also I'm also not sure he wouldn't).

    With the restrictions of the new CBA is he willing to accept a new contract at a rate that will allow us to put together a championship team? If he's NOT (and why would he turn down a bigger paycheck?) are we better off getting rid of him now?

    These are the big complicated questions. It's impossible to know for sure, what the answers are.

    If I'm a GM, I'd rather NOT have to expect Derozan to play elite defense (or even above average defense) which means either getting players to make up for his defensive holes, OR moving him (to the bench or another team). If we traded or Signed a very good starting SF, would Demar be okay playing 30+ minutes but coming off the bench, if it made the team better (just like Dallas did with Terry, and SA did with Manu)?

    Demar might play himself into a contract that the Raptors can't afford AND put together a championship calibre team. AND that he DOES have defensive weaknesses that need to be made up for by other players and schemes. This year's team couldn't figure out a way to do that and Brooklyn exploited Demar, and Toronto's inability to counter that cost them the series. I do believe that is on the Coach, and Team, as much as it is on Demar, but that doesn't change the fact that it is Demar's weakness the team needs to figure out a way to compensate.

    Does this mean we must trade Demar? Absolutely not. But it does mean that it's worth seeing what other teams would give you for him. I just happen to be of the mind that there's a 50-50 chance that what you get for him is going to make it significantly easier to build that contender, than it will be by keeping him (A lot of that has to do with what I think other teams will offer him in free agency). Would I be mad if the Raps kept him, absolutely not, because again there's a 50% chance that you aren't offered a package that makes it worth it.

    But I am getting really really tired, of people throwing the word "hater" around. Especially, since I think everyone really likes Demar as a person, recognizes his durability, and thinks that he works really hard. Unfortunately, those are only part of the very very very complicated factors that GM's must evaluate when deciding how much a player is worth. In Demar's case this is complicated because there are several unknowns: How much growth is he going to make. How much he is going to command on the open market at the end of 2016. Just because we have different subjective opinions on those two unknowns doesn't make anyone a "hater".
    Last edited by ezz_bee; Mon Jun 9th, 2014 at 04:46 AM.
    "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon

  23. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,310
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I think it needs to be pointed out that I do not use the term "hater" for people that don't like DeMar's game. In fact I just searched to confirm, and I have never used it to describe another poster or group of posters on this forum.

    Why do I think DeRozan would be excellent as a 2nd option aside from just the examples I've posted? Because it would reduce the number of isolation plays that are drawn up for him/he decides to take for himself. DeRozan is much better when he isn't the one initiating the offensive play. What I mean by that isn't that he's bad with the ball, but he's better catching it in motion or coming off a screen and THEN doing something rather than dribbling at the 3 point line and taking a pull-up mid-range jumper.

    Having DeMar as a 2nd option would allow him to focus on his strengths:

    - More opportunities to shoot corner threes out of offensive sets, and basically eliminate above-the-break 3 pointers from his shot attempts. This could result in him being a high 30s three point shooter. I noticed from looking at some of Richard Hamilton's shot charts that his improvement in 3pt shooting from his 6th season onwards was primarily due to just shooting more of them from the corners and not necessarily entirely because he became a better shooter.

    - He excels at coming off screens and pin-downs. Why? Because either he can clear space to get a wide-open jumpshot or he gets to isolate 1 on 1 (not this is different than an isolation set where he is basically going 1 on 5), which usually results in a basket at the rim, a dish to an open man if someone cheats to help, or free throws.

    - Operating out of the high or low post. Say you have another great wing scorer, now the other team can't necessarily put their biggest defender on DeRozan. And we've seen that DeMar has the ability to punish smaller guards (and like 90% of shooting guards are smaller than him) on the block. Would also be much riskier for the other team to throw a second defender at him in this situation (because he's not the most dangerous scoring threat).

    - Pick and roll offense. DeRozan was the second most efficient pick and roll ballhandler in the league this year. What we would be looking at here isn't running a pick and roll from the top of the key, but rather in motion. Have DeRozan come off a screen, catch the ball, then have the screener (a guy like Amir or JV) set a ball screen now and roll to the basket. That's going to result in points the majority of the time.

    All of these things would be effective as a third option as well, so I don't really see the issue there, it would really depend on who we have on the roster. Right now DeRozan is paid like a third or fourth banana. And if you look around the league, most contenders have 3 or more guys making 8 figures a season. So even an extension 2 years from now in the 11-13M range per season would make sense in a 2nd or 3rd option role.

    I just think being a 2nd option would allow DeMar to really focus on and harness his strengths. People say his mid-range shots are the issue, no that's an over-simplification of the problem. It's not the fact that he's taking mid-range jumpers that's the problem, it's the type of jumpers he's getting. Those pull-up, isolation mid-range Js are what lower his efficiency (which is actually solid btw, not great but solid especially given his role). As a second option with a proper offense, you'd see less of those and more of him focussing on the strengths I outlined above.

    I also don't really get when people say he couldn't fit into an offense like the Spurs or whatever. He's a very good passer. Both the ye test and advanced metrics would tell you that.

  24. #60
    Raptors Republic All-Star Fully's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,159
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote imanshumpert wrote: View Post
    I think it needs to be pointed out that I do not use the term "hater" for people that don't like DeMar's game. In fact I just searched to confirm, and I have never used it to describe another poster or group of posters on this forum.

    Why do I think DeRozan would be excellent as a 2nd option aside from just the examples I've posted? Because it would reduce the number of isolation plays that are drawn up for him/he decides to take for himself. DeRozan is much better when he isn't the one initiating the offensive play. What I mean by that isn't that he's bad with the ball, but he's better catching it in motion or coming off a screen and THEN doing something rather than dribbling at the 3 point line and taking a pull-up mid-range jumper.

    Having DeMar as a 2nd option would allow him to focus on his strengths:

    - More opportunities to shoot corner threes out of offensive sets, and basically eliminate above-the-break 3 pointers from his shot attempts. This could result in him being a high 30s three point shooter. I noticed from looking at some of Richard Hamilton's shot charts that his improvement in 3pt shooting from his 6th season onwards was primarily due to just shooting more of them from the corners and not necessarily entirely because he became a better shooter.

    - He excels at coming off screens and pin-downs. Why? Because either he can clear space to get a wide-open jumpshot or he gets to isolate 1 on 1 (not this is different than an isolation set where he is basically going 1 on 5), which usually results in a basket at the rim, a dish to an open man if someone cheats to help, or free throws.

    - Operating out of the high or low post. Say you have another great wing scorer, now the other team can't necessarily put their biggest defender on DeRozan. And we've seen that DeMar has the ability to punish smaller guards (and like 90% of shooting guards are smaller than him) on the block. Would also be much riskier for the other team to throw a second defender at him in this situation (because he's not the most dangerous scoring threat).

    - Pick and roll offense. DeRozan was the second most efficient pick and roll ballhandler in the league this year. What we would be looking at here isn't running a pick and roll from the top of the key, but rather in motion. Have DeRozan come off a screen, catch the ball, then have the screener (a guy like Amir or JV) set a ball screen now and roll to the basket. That's going to result in points the majority of the time.

    All of these things would be effective as a third option as well, so I don't really see the issue there, it would really depend on who we have on the roster. Right now DeRozan is paid like a third or fourth banana. And if you look around the league, most contenders have 3 or more guys making 8 figures a season. So even an extension 2 years from now in the 11-13M range per season would make sense in a 2nd or 3rd option role.

    I just think being a 2nd option would allow DeMar to really focus on and harness his strengths. People say his mid-range shots are the issue, no that's an over-simplification of the problem. It's not the fact that he's taking mid-range jumpers that's the problem, it's the type of jumpers he's getting. Those pull-up, isolation mid-range Js are what lower his efficiency (which is actually solid btw, not great but solid especially given his role). As a second option with a proper offense, you'd see less of those and more of him focussing on the strengths I outlined above.

    I also don't really get when people say he couldn't fit into an offense like the Spurs or whatever. He's a very good passer. Both the ye test and advanced metrics would tell you that.
    I agree with a lot of what you're saying again. But this doesn't prove that DD is "the ideal second option for a championship team" as much as it says that he's better suited to be a number two option, period. There's a big difference in that.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •