Game #50: Toronto Raptors 110 - Portland Trail Blazers 103

[Superjudge]

As of the last week, we're now averaging less assists per game than the Raptors have ever averaged in our history. We're officially the worst passing team the Raptors have ever had.

Think of the shitty lineups and teams we've fielded... they all passed better than this group.

15 games over .500.

put that in your stat pipe and smoke it.

While you're busy looking at a book, they are busy getting wins.

[Barolt]

15 games over .500.

put that in your stat pipe and smoke it.

While you're busy looking at a book, they are busy getting wins.

Did we learn NOTHING from last year? Winning early in the season means NOTHING if you can't win in the playoffs.

Looking at the negatives helps figure out if the record is real or fool's gold, like last year.

[jimmie]

Did we learn NOTHING from last year? Winning early in the season means NOTHING if you can't win in the playoffs.

Looking at the negatives helps figure out if the record is real or fool's gold, like last year.

Except it's not really helping you figure out anything, is it? You still can't predict what will happen, and everything is a risk. Toronto could just as easily beat GSW for the championship, given everything that could occur league-wide between now and the playoffs. You will never know whether today's record is "real or fools gold". Not now, not at the end of the season. If they exceed your expectations and win a playoff series or more, you won't retroactively admit that the record was real, will you? Vice versa, though, if they tank for whatever reason, you'll crow about how the stats showed this was going to happen all along, right?

Also, as has been mentioned, this IS NOT the same team, it's not playing the same way, so the 'predictive' nature of your stats is highly questionable. This is where experience and depth of information can help. Stuff Casey and Ujiri have in spades. Which makes it even stranger that some people continue to believe they're operating in some kind of netherworld where they ignore all the stats you have access to, or worse, they analyse it and come away with a different conclusion...

I would argue that people in the front office learned not NOTHING, but rather A LOT from last year. They went out and got rid of two of their worst defensive players, one of whom was a complete ball-stopper, and procured the consensus top defensive SF in the game today, one of the best up-and-coming D-first PGs, and one of the best shot-blockers. They drafted a defensive-minded SG and PG. They shifted their defensive strategy to suit the better defensive players they have. And so far, so good.

That suggests a lot less than learning NOTHING from last year, and suggests that maybe, just maybe, there's a method to this franchise's madness.

[Barolt]

Except it's not really helping you figure out anything, is it? You still can't predict what will happen, and everything is a risk. Toronto could just as easily beat GSW for the championship, given everything that could occur league-wide between now and the playoffs. You will never know whether today's record is "real or fools gold". Not now, not at the end of the season. If they exceed your expectations and win a playoff series or more, you won't retroactively admit that the record was real, will you? Vice versa, though, if they tank for whatever reason, you'll crow about how the stats showed this was going to happen all along, right?

Also, as has been mentioned, this IS NOT the same team, it's not playing the same way, so the 'predictive' nature of your stats is highly questionable. This is where experience and depth of information can help. Stuff Casey and Ujiri have in spades. Which makes it even stranger that some people continue to believe they're operating in some kind of netherworld where they ignore all the stats you have access to, or worse, they analyse it and come away with a different conclusion...

I would argue that people in the front office learned not NOTHING, but rather A LOT from last year. They went out and got rid of two of their worst defensive players, one of whom was a complete ball-stopper, and procured the consensus top defensive SF in the game today, one of the best up-and-coming D-first PGs, and one of the best shot-blockers. They drafted a defensive-minded SG and PG. They shifted their defensive strategy to suit the better defensive players they have. And so far, so good.

That suggests a lot less than learning NOTHING from last year, and suggests that maybe, just maybe, there's a method to this franchise's madness.

I would love to see us succeed in the playoffs. I'm a fan.

But winning in January doesn't necessarily mean winning in April and May. It's a different team, but largely it's the same offense. Our defensive improvements have come from the bench, which, as people keep pointing out, will be used less in the playoffs.

[jimmie]

I would love to see us succeed in the playoffs. I'm a fan.

But winning in January doesn't necessarily mean winning in April and May. It's a different team, but largely it's the same offense. Our defensive improvements have come from the bench, which, as people keep pointing out, will be used less in the playoffs.

Oh, FFS. Everyone knows winning now doesn't mean winning in the playoffs. Platitudes much?

You admit that it's a different team, that's a start. It's really not largely the same offense, because it's being run by completely different players in different roles. The defensive improvements are not limited to the bench. Come on, man, if you're going to try to convince me that this team is not VERY different -- character, roster fit for the both the offense and defense that this team is running, etc. -- you're going to have to do better than platitudes. And if you're going to try stats, at least make sure you can actually show some causality -- that is, that you can be confident that the assumption/hypothesis you're taking away from them is actually valid. Otherwise they're just measurements of things that have happened, not predictors of what is going to happen...

[Barolt]

Oh, FFS. Everyone knows winning now doesn't mean winning in the playoffs. Platitudes much?

You admit that it's a different team, that's a start. It's really not largely the same offense, because it's being run by completely different players in different roles. The defensive improvements are not limited to the bench. Come on, man, if you're going to try to convince me that this team is not VERY different -- character, roster fit for the both the offense and defense that this team is running, etc. -- you're going to have to do better than platitudes. And if you're going to try stats, at least make sure you can actually show some causality -- that is, that you can be confident that the assumption/hypothesis you're taking away from them is actually valid. Otherwise they're just measurements of things that have happened, not predictors of what is going to happen...

But if speculation is all we have, then why is speculation bad? Why is it inherently bad to be critical and want the team to keep getting better?

Why can't it be equally acceptable to be happy with winning, and still want things to improve as we move towards the playoffs?

[jimmie]

But if speculation is all we have, then why is speculation bad? Why is it inherently bad to be critical and want the team to keep getting better?

Why can't it be equally acceptable to be happy with winning, and still want things to improve as we move towards the playoffs?

I want things to improve. I just don't need to nitpick where there's no big problem.

[Barolt]

I want things to improve. I just don't need to nitpick where there's no big problem.

You don't see the fact that we haven't had a starting lineup with a positive net rating this season as a problem?

[jimmie]

Nope. All I see are happy players who like each other, an improving head coach, a kick-ass record, and no indication that this team is remotely like last year's team.

I think the view from my couch must be nicer than yours. ;-)

[Scraptor]

Our three highest usage players are holdovers from last year and our coach remain the same, and there's no indication that this team is remotely like last year's team. Except for, you know, the major players and the coach.

[Joey]

You don't see the fact that we haven't had a starting lineup with a positive net rating this season as a problem?

When was the last time we actually had our real starting lineup? And how many minutes have they actually played together?

[Barolt]

When was the last time we actually had our real starting lineup? And how many minutes have they actually played together?

Believe it or not, Lowry/DeMar/DeMarre/Scola/JV is still our most played lineup this season.

[Joey]

Believe it or not, Lowry/DeMar/DeMarre/Scola/JV is still our most played lineup this season.

I do believe that. Not my point though. Lol

[Barolt]

I do believe that. Not my point though. Lol

I'd love to believe that putting DeMarre in that lineup will suddenly fix it, but is he going to be 100% at all this season after missing several months? Are we even sure he's going to be back for the playoffs?

Does DeMarre coming back fix the fact that Scola is a pylon?

[MixxAOR]

I'd love to believe that putting DeMarre in that lineup will suddenly fix it, but is he going to be 100% at all this season after missing several months? Are we even sure he's going to be back for the playoffs?

Does DeMarre coming back fix the fact that Scola is a pylon?

So should we trade our picks and picks for players that will address those issues. Or are we still on long term strategy