Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Derozan

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

  • I'm not sure what this is suppose to mean.

    I assume I am being directed to the fact he is:

    19th in FG
    17th in FGA
    7th in FTM
    8th in FTA
    11th in Total Points
    17th in PPG
    17th in MPG


    To which I would reply:

    1) the totals are skewed by 36mpg and 82 games played.
    2) he was 225th in TS%
    3) he was 318th in eFG%

    Comment


    • Matt52 wrote: View Post
      I think Sacramento would be good except they drafted Ben McLemore.

      Detroit would see some of the worse spacing ever! lol Only Jennings could hit outside 22 ft.

      I'm sure there are teams that want a guy like DD but DD himself is a tough sell unless he really performs this season.... at which point I'll happily say keep him.
      What kind of numbers would you find a good year for DeMar. Makes him worthy of his new contract.
      @Chr1st1anL

      Comment


      • DeMar recently got help on the team when you are around better people you become more efficient. What's so hard to understand about that DeMar has been double and triple teamed for most of his career obviously his numbers won't look that impressive, every team that faced us knew "keep DeMar covered we win the game" Rudy Gay came in and a developing JV down low his numbers went up....Jesus Christ people DeMar is a great player to have and everyone's talking about him like he's goddam Hoffa.

        Comment


        • Rapstor4Life wrote: View Post
          DeMar recently got help on the team when you are around better people you become more efficient. What's so hard to understand about that DeMar has been double and triple teamed for most of his career obviously his numbers won't look that impressive, every team that faced us knew "keep DeMar covered we win the game" Rudy Gay came in and a developing JV down low his numbers went up....Jesus Christ people DeMar is a great player to have and everyone's talking about him like he's goddam Hoffa.
          Chill dude.
          I love Demar, he's one of my favourite players.
          But for this team to succeed he needs to play the best ball he's ever played in his life.
          A player like him with his athleticism and strength and size at the shooting guard position can be a lot better than he is. He is definitely capable of it, he just needs to do it.
          You come at the King, you best not miss.

          Comment


          • Rapstor4Life wrote: View Post
            DeMar recently got help on the team when you are around better people you become more efficient. What's so hard to understand about that DeMar has been double and triple teamed for most of his career obviously his numbers won't look that impressive, every team that faced us knew "keep DeMar covered we win the game" Rudy Gay came in and a developing JV down low his numbers went up....Jesus Christ people DeMar is a great player to have and everyone's talking about him like he's goddam Hoffa.
            Bold one: Double and triple teams for most of his career? No. Playing against solid NBA perimeter defenders and team defensive systems/rotations while lacking the skills to exploit rotations? Yes.

            Bold two: You're still not reading.

            You do raise a good point about the presence of Gay but that just leads back to the duplicity in their skill sets.

            Comment


            • Matt52 wrote: View Post
              I'm not sure what this is suppose to mean.

              I assume I am being directed to the fact he is:

              19th in FG
              17th in FGA
              7th in FTM
              8th in FTA
              11th in Total Points
              17th in PPG
              17th in MPG


              To which I would reply:

              1) the totals are skewed by 36mpg and 82 games played.
              11th in total points last season "skewed" ...

              lol.

              Comment


              • phez wrote: View Post
                11th in total points last season "skewed" ...

                lol.
                You must fail to see how someone can have the 11th most points in the league yet are just 17th in points PER GAME.

                lol. <----- great cop out

                Comment


                • Chr1s1anL wrote: View Post
                  What kind of numbers would you find a good year for DeMar. Makes him worthy of his new contract.
                  Again, numbers are not the be all and end all but here are some basic averages offensively for NBA SG's last season compared to DD:

                  http://www.thenbageek.com/players/compare?utf8=%E2%9C%93&player_ids[]=318

                  Then there are individual defensive stats.


                  So considering the average NBA contract is about $5M and the median is about $2.5-$3M, I would be expecting average to better than average across most categories, weaker in a few, and exceptional in a few.

                  Right now he is average to ever so slightly above average in less than half of his categories and below average in the rest.

                  Comment


                  • Its all about the three....

                    Comment


                    • Craig wrote: View Post
                      Its all about the three....
                      ..... and D.

                      Comment


                      • His d is fine, I mean really, I havent seen this team play D yet, so I cant tell if he is horrible, or if the team D just sucks.

                        Comment


                        • http://www.raptorsrepublic.com/2013/...point-shooter/


                          More mainpage DeRozan talk, this time from Blake Murphy.

                          Spoiler Alert: Once again we are putting all chips down on hope when that hope is the lesser outcome.

                          Comment


                          • Not knowing anything about basketball, I was jus wondering something. If DeRozan needs a 3 point shot to keep the defence honest and force his defender to stay closer to him, wouldn't developing his passing skills accomplish the same thing?

                            Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 4

                            Comment


                            • p00ka wrote: View Post
                              "Statistics are often pushed aside when they don't back one's opinion"

                              Conversely, statistics are almost always used to push one's opinion, regardless of sometimes veiled "objectivity" disclaimers like "don't tell the whole story" like what Tim stated, which is then ignored in this "not subjectivity" ranking.

                              "different players role. The problem is DD is not great at his"

                              I know you wish to simplify the "role" thing into stat like factors such as score, rebound, defend, but you seem to miss my major point about roles, and their difficulty factors, being significantly different for a guy starting (against opponent starters), playing 36 minutes, the team needing him to make 16 shots, vs a guy playing 26 minutes off the bench (against opponent bench guys), taking 6,7 shots. I don't care how extensive the list of stats used is, grouping these two types of players in the same ranking "system" is still comparing pommes (apples) to pommes de terre (potatoes). Tim also admits that some stats (DRtg?) are heavily influenced by team DRtg, yet still uses it as part of his non-subjective ranking of individuals. Huh? It's this ranking system that you're actually cross-promoting into these forums, and saying it's not subjective? Really?

                              "He has been given every opportunity to show differently."

                              This is an oft repeated refrain of yours, usually accompanied by how many minutes he's played, but it does nothing to illuminate the validity, or not, of Tim's ranking according to stats. How about addressing my point about the direct influence upon the number crunching of different teams, different styles of play, different teammates, etc., which are factors that are totally ignored when ranking players by stats. To transcribe a couple of examples that I posted as comments on Tim's post:

                              Paul Pierce. A likely HOFer, right?

                              In his 3rd year..454 FG%, .383 3P%
                              In his 4th year .442 FG%, .404 3P%
                              In his 5th year .416 FG%, .302 3P%
                              In his 6th year .402 FG%, .299 3P%

                              See any big drops there? Those 2 terrible shooting years were Jim OBrien's 2nd year coaching, and half of 3rd year before he was canned. A new coach (Doc Rivers) the following year, and Pierce's stats shot back up to approx. his 3rd year's. What, a guy of Pierce's quality had not 1, but 2 "off years"? At a young age, that seems rather unlikely. Perhaps his team and the way it was being run had something to do with it?

                              "Off years", yeah, Just like Tim W is saying about Afflalo. Some mysterious "off year malady",,,,,, or increased minutes, more responsibility, taking more shots, in a different system, with a different team. What's your guess?

                              Another HOF example: Jason Kidd. In his last 2 years, 1st with Dallas, 2nd with Knicks. He plays almost the same minutes, all of his basic stats stay close to the same, but is AST average drops from 5.5 to 3.3. What? He suddenly lost the skill to assist, and it's the only skill he lost,,,,,,, or different team, different teammates, different system?

                              There are many examples that could be cited, but the point is that every single one of this long list of stats used as "ranking" can, and are, skewed by the variables associated with different roles on different teams, playing different styles, etc.. I understand that these things are near impossible to quantify. I simply raise them to point out that there is nothing accurate about ranking players based on stats alone.
                              Omg you are my new favourite poster.

                              I think what people don't understand when looking at efficiency, is they try to compare guys who are forced to take a lot of shots and play a high volume game to role players. That's why you get people coming here and saying Danny Green is a better player than DeMar DeRozan. He only takes half the shots DeRozan has to, and most of them are wide open which is why he's so damn efficient.

                              The bigger your role in the offense, the more your efficiency is going to drop. This is a very simple concept (just look at Paul George's decreases in shooting efficiency as his role with Indiana increased). You can't compare players with usage ratings in the mid-20s like DeRozan to 3+D role players with usage ratings in the low-mid teens. I constantly see this crap about trading him for a 3+D player. Now you ask that guy to take 15 shots a game, good luck getting him to maintain his super-efficient percentages in that role.

                              Comment


                              • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                                I'm not sure what this is suppose to mean.

                                I assume I am being directed to the fact he is:

                                19th in FG
                                17th in FGA
                                7th in FTM
                                8th in FTA
                                11th in Total Points
                                17th in PPG
                                17th in MPG


                                To which I would reply:

                                1) the totals are skewed by 36mpg and 82 games played.
                                2) he was 225th in TS%
                                3) he was 318th in eFG%
                                Find me 1 player in DeRozan's range for usage, shot attempts and minutes played that is significantly more efficient and isn't a superstar. Just one.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X