Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

We already have the perfect SF

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

  • #31
    Perfect SF for this team plays for the Spurs btw. His name is Kawhi Leonard.

    Comment


    • #32
      On 2K yes, but in real life no. His health I believe should be the main concern, rather than his offense. He's a great locker room guy, class act, a professional. Plus he gets TV time on ABC!

      Comment


      • #33
        This might be off topic, but man... Could we stash T-Ross to the Spurs for a season? I mean, look at Kawhi Leonard - he developed to one of the leaders of NBA championship contenders (not saying champions, there's still one game to win). I see many similarities in him and Terrence. T-Ross needs to improve mentaly and coach Pop with his staff could make it happen
        (Sorry for poor English )

        Comment


        • #34
          imanshumpert wrote: View Post
          Perfect SF for this team plays for the Spurs btw. His name is Kawhi Leonard.
          almost. plays for the heat, name is lebron.

          kawhi a far third, after durant.



          i am surprised at how many people are giving fields a pass. i am just going to be happy when he is traded or let walk for 6 million off the books. that was 20 million dollars thrown down the toilet. i was excited year one when we talked about how he was injured and we expected him to go back to the mean. then last year i was like "well a year to heal and he should be good old landry". turns out the past three years are his mean, his rookie year was the anomaly. i mean grant will give us everything landry has the past two years for cheaper, for longer.

          done hyping this guy. anything he can give is gravy but don't expect him to return to form from four years ago.

          Comment


          • #35
            All I'm saying...and I speak with someone that has his EXACT same condition (ulnar nerve entrapment) I can tell you that the healing takes for fucking ever. His is actually much worse than mine. That being said...and I would like to repeat it...Landry Fields is going to be whatever it is that he is this upcoming season. If it hasn't healed and corrected by then there is a sky high chance it never will and he will take on defensive role player duties at minimum salaries until he retires.
            For still frame photograph of me reading the DeRozan thread please refer to my avatar

            Comment


            • #36
              imanshumpert wrote: View Post
              Perfect SF for this team plays for the Spurs btw. His name is Kawhi Leonard.
              There are several guys who would fit in well. I think you could argue Batum may be an excellent fit, similarly good to Leonard (ignoring MVPs like LeBron and KD).

              Comment


              • #37
                Given the choice, I'd take Kawhi over Batum 10/10.

                Comment


                • #38
                  golden wrote: View Post
                  You mean statistical evidence other than his 98 ORTG @ 12.4% USG? lol. That ORTG is terrible for the miniscule USG level.
                  His individual ORTG? Did you read what I wrote at all? No one is arguing that he scores at an efficient rate himself. The argument is that he does not typically hurt a team's offense by being on the floor.

                  If we were playing 4 on 5 with him on the court, you'd expect to see the team's overall ORTG plummet with him on the floor versus when he's off the floor, correct?

                  And yet, this year, he posted a -2.3 ORTG differential. So the team got worse, but not significantly. Salmons and Hansbrough both had worse ORTG differentials than Fields. How is that possible? Keep in mind this is with Fields playing most of the year injured or recovering from injury. And somehow even when he was healthy towards the end of the year, Salmons and Hansbrough got plenty of minutes (438 and 321 respectively), while Fields got none (48 total minutes). But, but, 4 on 5, right?

                  Even looking at last year (where his shot was just as broken), he actually posted a positive differential (+2.9). Only Amir and Lowry had better offensive impacts that year among players with meaningful minutes.

                  Heck, looking at his historical adjusted plus minus, Fields has posted decent offensive impact numbers. This year, -0.1 (practically a break even player, suggesting his negative value above was from who he played with - a lot of his minutes this year came prior to the Gay trade when the team was a mess). Last few years: -0.7, -0.4, 0.4. Still practically break even numbers. He is consistently not a problem for the offenses he plays in.
                  twitter.com/dhackett1565

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    DanH wrote: View Post
                    His individual ORTG? Did you read what I wrote at all? No one is arguing that he scores at an efficient rate himself. The argument is that he does not typically hurt a team's offense by being on the floor.

                    If we were playing 4 on 5 with him on the court, you'd expect to see the team's overall ORTG plummet with him on the floor versus when he's off the floor, correct?

                    And yet, this year, he posted a -2.3 ORTG differential. So the team got worse, but not significantly. Salmons and Hansbrough both had worse ORTG differentials than Fields. How is that possible? Keep in mind this is with Fields playing most of the year injured or recovering from injury. And somehow even when he was healthy towards the end of the year, Salmons and Hansbrough got plenty of minutes (438 and 321 respectively), while Fields got none (48 total minutes). But, but, 4 on 5, right?

                    Even looking at last year (where his shot was just as broken), he actually posted a positive differential (+2.9). Only Amir and Lowry had better offensive impacts that year among players with meaningful minutes.

                    Heck, looking at his historical adjusted plus minus, Fields has posted decent offensive impact numbers. This year, -0.1 (practically a break even player, suggesting his negative value above was from who he played with - a lot of his minutes this year came prior to the Gay trade when the team was a mess). Last few years: -0.7, -0.4, 0.4. Still practically break even numbers. He is consistently not a problem for the offenses he plays in.
                    Low usage / low efficiency players are harmful to your offense. I don't see how that can even be argued. These type of players necessitate having to have high usage players on the court (e.g. more DD ISOs), or even worse, having average guys have to increase their usage to the point of being inefficient (e.g. end-of-clock Vasquez airballs). Other guys end up taking the efficiency hit because Fields can't 'carry his weight' on offense.

                    I suspect that that the flaw in your 'statistical' argument is that we need the data when we replace Fields in the same lineups against the same competition with a higher usage / higher efficiency player. In the Raptors situation, the most likely replacement player is Salmons - who is equally horrific. Not sure where to find that type of data, but if anyone can, I'm sure it's you, Dan. :-)
                    Last edited by golden; Fri Jun 13, 2014, 09:11 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      golden wrote: View Post
                      Low usage / low efficiency players are harmful to your offense. I don't see how that can even be argued. These type of players necessitate having to have high usage players on the court (e.g. more DD ISOs), or even worse, having average guys have to increase their usage to the point of being inefficient (e.g. end-of-clock Vasquez airballs). Other guys end up taking the efficiency hit because Fields can't 'carry his weight' on offense.
                      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 suspect that that the flaw in your 'statistical' argument is that we need the data when we replace Fields in the same lineups against the same competition with a higher usage / higher efficiency player. In the Raptors situation, the most likely replacement player is Salmons - who is equally horrific. Not sure where to find that type of data, but if anyone can, I'm sure it's you, Dan. :-)
                      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.
                      Last edited by DanH; Fri Jun 13, 2014, 10:17 AM.
                      twitter.com/dhackett1565

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        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

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              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 13, 2014, 01:07 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                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.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X