Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 84

Thread: We already have the perfect SF

  1. #41
    Raptors Republic Rookie RobertArchibald's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    190
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    If the Raptors moved the ball like the Spurs, then Landry would be perfect, even with his lack of shot. Watching the Spurs ball movement these playoffs is a thing of beauty. I have no doubt that the current version of Fields would be playing minutes for Pop in the Finals. He wouldn't need to shoot anything outside of 3 feet with that type of movement.

    Sadly, the Raps aren't even close to that type of team offensively. The way they're built now, they need outside shooters to kick to after iso penetration. Don't see Landry cracking the lineup next year. Feel like Masai will go hard for a SF this offseason.
    There's math, and everything else is debatable.

    @clericalbeats

  2. Like Kuh, caccia, Cody73 liked this post
  3. #42
    Raptors Republic Veteran white men can't jump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    7,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Joey wrote: View Post
    Given the choice, I'd take Kawhi over Batum 10/10.
    And I bet if Batum had been playing on the Spurs for the last 3 seasons and Kawhi somewhere that didn't have such a strong system, this could easily be flipped around.

    Seriously, I think Kawhi is a great player, but especially offensively he benefits hugely from being on the Spurs, as most guys do, as much of their offence comes in the form of wide open opportunities.

  4. Like Letter N, ceez, Joey liked this post
  5. #43
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,662
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    And I bet if Batum had been playing on the Spurs for the last 3 seasons and Kawhi somewhere that didn't have such a strong system, this could easily be flipped around.

    Seriously, I think Kawhi is a great player, but especially offensively he benefits hugely from being on the Spurs, as most guys do, as much of their offence comes in the form of wide open opportunities.
    Touche. Great points.
    In Masai we Trust.

  6. #44
    Super Moderator CalgaryRapsFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    4,288
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote white men can't jump wrote: View Post
    And I bet if Batum had been playing on the Spurs for the last 3 seasons and Kawhi somewhere that didn't have such a strong system, this could easily be flipped around.

    Seriously, I think Kawhi is a great player, but especially offensively he benefits hugely from being on the Spurs, as most guys do, as much of their offence comes in the form of wide open opportunities.
    I completely agree with your point about being drafted by the Spurs, but it goes beyond that. He was drafted later in the first round, so expectations coming in weren't where they would automatically be for a player drafted in the lottery. He was also drafted to a good team, so their 1st round pick wasn't needed to be a savior and he was able to carve out a niche as a role player, allowing him to focus on certain aspects of his game.

    I really think circumstances - the player, the team, the draft slot - play a huge role in not only player development, but also in the perceptions that get developed around the league, by media and by fans.

    I look at Rondo as benefiting greatly from his situation in the same way that Leonard has. I was quite high on Leonard in that draft and was hoping the Raps could find a way to acquire a second 1st round pick to grab him, but he would have been a big reach at the Raps' draft slot. Had the Raps drafted him, I think a lot more would have been expected of him, due to both the higher draft slot and the Raptors' significant laundry list of team needs. I don't think he would've developed the way he has in San Antonio and I don't think he would be as highly regarded as he is.

    That's why I always laugh when past drafts are revisited, since player development - for both better and worse - would not be the same, had players been drafted at different places in the draft, by different teams. Some people would say that hindsight is 20/20, but the moment you change the development trajectory of young players, that hindsight becomes pretty worthless.
    Last edited by CalgaryRapsFan; Fri Jun 13th, 2014 at 01:07 PM.

  7. #45
    Raptors Republic Veteran white men can't jump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    7,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote CalgaryRapsFan wrote: View Post
    I completely agree with your point about being drafted by the Spurs, but it goes beyond that. He was drafted later in the first round, so expectations coming in weren't where they would automatically be for a player drafted in the lottery. He was also drafted to a good team, so their 1st round pick wasn't needed to be a savior and he was able to carve out a niche as a role player, allowing him to focus on certain aspects of his game.

    I really think circumstances - the player, the team, the draft slot - play a huge role in not only player development, but also in the perceptions that get developed around the league, by media and by fans.

    I look at Rondo as benefiting greatly from his situation in the same way that Leonard has. I was quite high on Leonard in that draft and was hoping the Raps could find a way to acquire a second 1st round pick to grab him, but he would have been a big reach at the Raps' draft slot. Had the Raps drafted him, I think a lot more would have been expected of him, due to both the higher draft slot and the Raptors' significant laundry list of team needs. I don't think he would've developed the way he has in San Antonio and I don't think he would be as highly regarded as he is.

    That's why I always laugh when past drafts are revisited, since player development - for both better and worse - would not be the same, had players been drafted at different places in the draft, by different teams. Some people would say that hindsight is 20/20, but the moment you change the development trajectory of young players, that hindsight becomes pretty worthless.
    It actually wasn't so much about the "being drafted" aspect as much as being a part of a team that tries to play to the strengths of every player and tries to make the game as easy as possible. The first principle in this on the offensive end is ball movement. Guys are taught to move to the right spots (and right spots for them), and taught to pass the ball quickly to the next guy if they're not in a situation to take a good shot.

    Any wing with discipline and skills to contribute would at least be more efficient in their system. And a guy like Batum, who can score in different ways and is a terrific passer would probably fit in very well.

  8. #46
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote DanH wrote: View Post
    It can be argued by presenting evidence of a low-usage/low-efficiency guy who does not hurt the offense. And your reasoning appears to apply to low usage players in general, not just low efficiency ones - whether the low usage player is efficient or not, his teammates end up using the same amount of possessions since he isn't using them. And yet I doubt you'd expect a negative impact from low usage, high efficiency players like Battier or even our own Amir Johnson. Your expectations are valid (although ultimately I would argue incorrect), but your reasoning appears to be flawed.



    I can do that! Here is how the team played for each of the starters when they played with and without Fields.

    With Fields / Without Fields [Fields Impact]

    DeMar: 110 ORTG 103.3 DRTG / 108.9 ORTG 106.5 DRTG [+1.1 ORTG, -3.2 DRTG, +4.3 RTG]
    Lowry: 110.9 ORTG 100.7 DRTG / 110.9 ORTG 106.5 DRTG [0.0 ORTG, -5.8 DRTG, +5.8 RTG]
    Amir: 111.9 ORTG 97.7 DRTG / 109.1 ORTG 106.8 DRTG [+2.8 ORTG, -9.1 DRTG, +11.9 RTG]

    Jonas and Ross both had very small samples playing with Fields so I excluded them*. Note the tremendous defensive impact, and the overall positive though close to neutral offensive impact. This support the APM data I quoted above - any negative impact is probably due to the crap lineups he tends to play with, as his individual impact is generally very positive overall and close to break-even on offense.

    * Full disclosure, JV and Ross both had negative impacts from playing with Fields (very large ones actually) but I really do attribute that to them playing a very small sample size together. Thought it best to add this note nonetheless to be transparent. Don't want to hide data to prove a point.
    LOL. I knew you'd come through with some data - but we're still sort of mis-communicating here. I want an example not just where we are swapping Fields in and out of the lineup, but where he is being swapped out for higher efficiency / higher usage player. As I mentioned, in many cases, he's the alternative to Salmons, who is pretty much identical and equally horrific on offense (12.6 USG / 100 ORTG). So, you wouldn't expect to see much difference there, as both guys hurt the offense just as bad - which doesn't mean Fields is a positive, as you are arguing.

    And to the first statement that low usage players generally hurt the offense - absolutely not! High efficiency, low usage guys like Tyson Chandler, Shane Battier (in his prime), Amir etc..., are great compliments to high usage (average to above average efficiency players, like Melo, or Kobe, for instance). Low efficiency is never good in any circumstance for any offense and doubly bad when it's coupled with low usage.

  9. #47
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote golden wrote: View Post
    LOL. I knew you'd come through with some data - but we're still sort of mis-communicating here. I want an example not just where we are swapping Fields in and out of the lineup, but where he is being swapped out for higher efficiency / higher usage player. As I mentioned, in many cases, he's the alternative to Salmons, who is pretty much identical and equally horrific on offense (12.6 USG / 100 ORTG). So, you wouldn't expect to see much difference there, as both guys hurt the offense just as bad - which doesn't mean Fields is a positive, as you are arguing.
    OK. Except that each of those players actually plays mostly with the other starters, so Fields playing beside DD would mostly be in place of Ross, for example. Or in place of either Ross or DD when playing with Amir or Lowry. But sure, I'll go deeper. Here is Fields' top lineup this season in terms of minutes played (this is really the only one of decent sample size due to Casey benching him for no reason).

    DD-Fields-Amir-Lowry-JV: 45 MP, 114.6 ORTG

    And the lineup with various players subbed in for Fields:
    Ross: 110.6
    Gay: 100.9
    Salmons: 105.3
    Vasquez: 118.6
    Novak: 88.9 (SSS)

    So you can see that the group performed better with Fields than with Ross (his polar opposite in terms of spreading the floor), Gay (no surprise there), or Salmons (by a long shot), and was just a little worse than with Vasquez. There was no other player that slotted into that lineup. Of the 5 significant lineups based on DD-Lowry-Amir-Valansiunas, the one involving Fields had the 2nd highest scoring rate.

    The only other lineup with a decent sample size was including Gay, so it may not be applicable to the team's current construction, but here's the same results for that comparison (these sample sizes are smaller and less reliable).

    DD-Fields-Amir-Lowry-Gay: 38 MP, 122.4 ORTG

    And the lineup with various players subbed in for Fields:
    JV: 100.9
    Novak: 94.3
    Hansbrough: 80.5
    Ross: 94.6

    The sample is smaller which is why the results seem extreme, but it is interesting that during the debacle of the Gay era, when the offence was a complete mess, somehow Fields being in the lineup made everything better. You'd think to see the opposite impact, even in a small sample, if his negative impact on the offence were so extreme.

    And to the first statement that low usage players generally hurt the offense - absolutely not! High efficiency, low usage guys like Tyson Chandler, Shane Battier (in his prime), Amir etc..., are great compliments to high usage (average to above average efficiency players, like Melo, or Kobe, for instance). Low efficiency is never good in any circumstance for any offense and doubly bad when it's coupled with low usage.
    Uh, I agree. I was just saying all the descriptors you were using to explain why low-usage low-efficiency guys are bad for an offence would apply to high efficiency guys as well, as you really just addressed the usage impacts. My point was not that they were actually bad for an offence, but that you were not really presenting an argument for why low-efficiency low-usage players are bad for an offence. And you still aren't - you just keep saying that they are, and I'm not inclined to take your word for it.

  10. Like Puffer, Miekenstien liked this post
  11. #48
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote DanH wrote: View Post

    Uh, I agree. I was just saying all the descriptors you were using to explain why low-usage low-efficiency guys are bad for an offence would apply to high efficiency guys as well, as you really just addressed the usage impacts. My point was not that they were actually bad for an offence, but that you were not really presenting an argument for why low-efficiency low-usage players are bad for an offence. And you still aren't - you just keep saying that they are, and I'm not inclined to take your word for it.
    Actually I did present the argument in the post before the last one - the DD/GV usage example. It is pretty obvious, and I mentioned it already: low usage players force the 'other guys' to carry a higher usage. As Dean Oliver and other showed, when you force players to carry a higher usage than their 'skill level', their offensive efficiency drops off rapidly - and hence, the total efficiency of the unit drops off. With low usage, high efficiency players (like Tyson Chandler, ORTG > 120, typically), that's no problem because they make up for the other guys ORTG drop with their own high ORTG, so the overall efficiency remains high.

    But guys like Fields are a negative, because they drag down the collective ORTG doubly - with their own inefficiency (ORTG = 98 vs. league average = 105) and at the same time cause other players to lower theirs by forcing them above their normally efficient usage levels. This fact seems pretty obvious to me, but don't take my word for it. It comes from Dean Oliver, who is one of the godfathers of advanced analytics for basketball, and who has all the data and analysis to back it up.

  12. #49
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote golden wrote: View Post
    Actually I did present the argument in the post before the last one - the DD/GV usage example. It is pretty obvious, and I mentioned it already: low usage players force the 'other guys' to carry a higher usage. As Dean Oliver and other showed, when you force players to carry a higher usage than their 'skill level', their offensive efficiency drops off rapidly - and hence, the total efficiency of the unit drops off. With low usage, high efficiency players (like Tyson Chandler, ORTG > 120, typically), that's no problem because they make up for the other guys ORTG drop with their own high ORTG, so the overall efficiency remains high.

    But guys like Fields are a negative, because they drag down the collective ORTG doubly - with their own inefficiency (ORTG = 98 vs. league average = 105) and at the same time cause other players to lower theirs by forcing them above their normally efficient usage levels. This fact seems pretty obvious to me, but don't take my word for it. It comes from Dean Oliver, who is one of the godfathers of advanced analytics for basketball, and who has all the data and analysis to back it up.
    So... No response to my evidence that a) Fields is not dragging down the offence and b) Fields is a low usage, low efficiency player and therefore c) low usage low efficiency players do not necessarily drag down an offence, if they provide other things to said offence (ball handling, offensive rebounding, cutting, screen setting).

  13. #50
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote golden wrote: View Post
    Actually I did present the argument in the post before the last one - the DD/GV usage example. It is pretty obvious, and I mentioned it already: low usage players force the 'other guys' to carry a higher usage. As Dean Oliver and other showed, when you force players to carry a higher usage than their 'skill level', their offensive efficiency drops off rapidly - and hence, the total efficiency of the unit drops off. With low usage, high efficiency players (like Tyson Chandler, ORTG > 120, typically), that's no problem because they make up for the other guys ORTG drop with their own high ORTG, so the overall efficiency remains high.

    But guys like Fields are a negative, because they drag down the collective ORTG doubly - with their own inefficiency (ORTG = 98 vs. league average = 105) and at the same time cause other players to lower theirs by forcing them above their normally efficient usage levels. This fact seems pretty obvious to me, but don't take my word for it. It comes from Dean Oliver, who is one of the godfathers of advanced analytics for basketball, and who has all the data and analysis to back it up.
    Oh, and Oliver's suggestion is not that low usage and low efficiency players always do anything. It is an observed pattern that generally, higher usage and higher efficiency is better - as a trend. Obviously there are exceptions, and Oliver (nor any other stats guy) would never argue otherwise. ORTG and Usage do NOT capture the effectiveness of an offensive player entirely, nor are they meant to. As such, Fields CAN be a positive contributor offensively in spite of those two metrics, as I've shown.

    If you still insist Fields is a drag on an offence, I think maybe it is time for you to present some evidence that supports that, because I can't find any myself.

  14. #51
    Raptors Republic All-Star ezz_bee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Kigali, Rwanda
    Posts
    1,678
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote mcHAPPY wrote: View Post
    If he could return to his rookie season form, that would be amazing.

    I'm not holding out much hope though.

    Even at his best I think he is best suited off the bench if we're talking about building a championship contending team.
    I'm inclined to believe you, but if Diaw can start for the Spurs in the Finals, (and have the largest plus/minus of both teams), I makes me rethink that position a little bit. Diaw is a unique player, not sure if you watched game four (and a lot of game three) but the Spurs are running their offense through Diaw more than any other player. Yes Diaw can shoot, but last night he only took 6 shots, which is a very small amount considering how much the ball was in his hands. Not saying that Fields=Diaw, just that the more playoff games I watch, the more valuable players with complete skillsets seem to be. Even if Fields is a bench player most of the season (like Diaw) depending on matchups and other players, Fields could be a difference maker (basically Garbo version 2).
    "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

  15. Like Puffer liked this post
  16. #52
    Raptors Republic All-Star stooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    1,967
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Fields only played 322 minutes this year, and I have to think a lot of that was in garbage time, so I'm not sure how useful his stats necessarily are.

  17. Like 007, Fully liked this post
  18. #53
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote stooley wrote: View Post
    Fields only played 322 minutes this year, and I have to think a lot of that was in garbage time, so I'm not sure how useful his stats necessarily are.
    Fair enough. I could use previous years' stats, which as I quoted before, show an identical pattern when looking at RAPM and other metrics (he's very consistent year to year in impact stats), so I would expect the same results. Do people really want me to go through it again for previous years?

  19. #54
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote stooley wrote: View Post
    Fields only played 322 minutes this year, and I have to think a lot of that was in garbage time, so I'm not sure how useful his stats necessarily are.
    Oh, and my lineup substitution comparison only compared how effective the starters (DD, Lowry, JV, Amir) were with him and with other players. Sound like garbage time minutes to you? It's a small sample (as mentioned in my post), but if a player were having an extreme impact on the offense (playing 4 on 5), you'd see that even in a small sample.

  20. #55
    Raptors Republic All-Star JawsGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,315
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote DanH wrote: View Post
    Fair enough. I could use previous years' stats, which as I quoted before, show an identical pattern when looking at RAPM and other metrics (he's very consistent year to year in impact stats), so I would expect the same results. Do people really want me to go through it again for previous years?
    I wouldn't waste your time. At the end of the day, Fields is gonna have to get consistent playing time and contribute meaningfully in order for most to be convinced he can still play. Regardless of his previous stats, he will have to earn the chance and prove he is a useful player to this team. Hopefully, his nerve issue has improved and he gets that opportunity.

  21. #56
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Alrighty, let's see how Fields's 2012-13 season holds up using the same lineup substitution approach. I've already shown the raw RAPM data before that shows he held his own offensively.

    Fields' top 4 lineups that season:

    Jose - ED - DD - Fields - Amir : 113.5 ORTG
    DD - Fields - Gay - Lowry - JV : 105.1 ORTG
    Bargs - DD - Fields - Lowry - JV : 105.6 ORTG
    Jose - ED - DD - Fields - Gray : 121.4 ORTG

    And each lineup with other players subbed in:

    Jose - ED - DD - Fields - Amir : 113.5 ORTG
    Subbed for Fields:
    Pietrus: 98 ORTG
    Ross: 100 ORTG

    DD - Fields - Gay - Lowry - JV : 105.1 ORTG
    Subbed for Fields:
    Amir: 109.4 ORTG
    Bargs: 112.6 ORTG

    Anderson: 75.5 ORTG

    Bargs - DD - Fields - Lowry - JV : 105.6 ORTG
    Subbed for Fields:
    McGuire: 97.5 ORTG
    Gay: 112.6 ORTG
    Pietrus: 101.2 ORTG
    Kleiza: 105.3 ORTG
    Jose: 85.9 ORTG
    Ross: 86.0 ORTG
    Anderson: 96.6 ORTG

    Jose - ED - DD - Fields - Gray : 121.4 ORTG
    Subbed for Fields:
    Pietrus: 104.4 ORTG
    Anderson: 81.3 ORTG
    Ross: 90.5 ORTG

    Note how I've highlighted the 3 slots where the substitute makes the lineup better without Fields. Note that two of those are actually the same substituted lineup. So although the quality of teammates is low, most of the players substituting for Fields are floor-spreading types who would impact the offense entirely different from Fields. Note that several of those players have a similar individual ORTG to Fields, and similar low usage, and yet when Fields is substituted in the lineup, the team overall performs much better offensively.

  22. #57
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    7
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Are you guys really debating how a SF who can't shoot, and has barely played is an answer to your problems?

    LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

  23. #58
    Raptors Republic All-Star Yabadabayolo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Kitchener "Sketchener"
    Posts
    1,432
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Brooklyn Baller wrote: View Post
    Are you guys really debating how a SF who can't shoot, and has barely played is an answer to your problems?

    LOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
    He shut down joe penis didnt he? That id our problem. Stopping other small forwards that have big asses

    Sent from my GT-S7560M using Tapatalk
    In Swag we Trust

    -Nick Young

  24. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    7
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Yabadabayolo wrote: View Post
    He shut down joe penis didnt he? That id our problem. Stopping other small forwards that have big asses

    Sent from my GT-S7560M using Tapatalk
    Yeah, shut him down, which is why we won the series and Johnson was one of the biggest reasons why.

  25. #60
    Raptors Republic All-Star
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Cambridge, ON
    Posts
    1,390
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Brooklyn Baller wrote: View Post
    Yeah, shut him down, which is why we won the series and Johnson was one of the biggest reasons why.
    I guess you didn't watch then. Fields sat the last 3 games (the deciding 3 wherein the Nets won 2 of 3 to take the series) because Casey is an idiot, and Johnson had some of his most effective games of the series. Shock of all shocks.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 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
  •