Everything Demar Derozan

[minks77]

DD blew past Kobe a few times in that game, twice using spin moves. Why is it Raps fans seem to think the only players who aren't busts are the ones with obvious HOF potential?

BTW Jordan didn't dominate the L from game 1. He was a very good volume scorer who relied on athletic ability at first. He learned (over the following 5 years) how to shoot with range, how to incorporate the passing game and most importantly how to defend. He wasn't GOAT right from the get-go.

[Trife76]

Q Rich blew by Kobe once too, doesn't mean anything.

How far DeRozan will go in this league is directly proportional to how much he improves his dribbling and jumper, and inversely proportional to how much time he wasts on the YGZ bullshit.

No he didnt...Q Rich is a spot up shooter has been for 7 years now...clearly you can see what DD can do when he wants to do it..if you cant see it thats on you...i agree his jumper is broke as shit and he needs to work on his game but the tools are there...Q Rich comparisons are just stupid tho....

[Tim W.]

No he didnt...Q Rich is a spot up shooter has been for 7 years now...clearly you can see what DD can do when he wants to do it..if you cant see it thats on you...i agree his jumper is broke as shit and he needs to work on his game but the tools are there...Q Rich comparisons are just stupid tho....

Uh, he wasn't comparing the two. I thought that was pretty clear. He was commenting on the fact that you can't extrapolate how a player is going to be based on one game (or one move, for that matter). And I agree with him.

Are we judging a player based on single games, now? Can we choose the game, or is there some predetermined formula that must be used?

[Introcollapse]

it just seems like nothing is coming easy - shot mechanics, dribble, etc.

His handle is MUCH improved over last year. Give it time. Shots will come, his form is good.

[Trife76]

Uh, he wasn't comparing the two. I thought that was pretty clear. He was commenting on the fact that you can't extrapolate how a player is going to be based on one game (or one move, for that matter). And I agree with him.

Are we judging a player based on single games, now? Can we choose the game, or is there some predetermined formula that must be used?

Ugh why are you talking on behalf of other ppl and telling me what THEY meant to say ?
His example doesnt work,its not based on ONE game but you can see a players tool set and abilities during certain times in a game and that was one....i never once said DeMar was definitely is going to be a superstar i said he shows the ability that he could be a star with some other developments in his game...theres no hyperbole there unless ur looking for it...

I see a progression in his game and with more touches and responsibility it should continue to improve..i can see it in the games i have watched and that single play was an example of how his game has improved over last year....

*** @ dudes putting words in my posts and exaggerating what i didnt say...

[big red]

No great players ever take longer than a couple years to develop, and I don't see any improvement so far.

Generally, you do see pretty clearly what a player will be very early on in his career, but there are some exceptions. Steve Nash and Chauncey Billups come to mind.

[Tim W.]

Ugh why are you talking on behalf of other ppl and telling me what THEY meant to say ?
His example doesnt work,its not based on ONE game but you can see a players tool set and abilities during certain times in a game and that was one....i never once said DeMar was definitely is going to be a superstar i said he shows the ability that he could be a star with some other developments in his game...theres no hyperbole there unless ur looking for it...

I see a progression in his game and with more touches and responsibility it should continue to improve..i can see it in the games i have watched and that single play was an example of how his game has improved over last year....

*** @ dudes putting words in my posts and exaggerating what i didnt say...

If it was a private conversation, I apologize, but since it was in the forum, and not through private messages, I figured adding my opinion was okay. Especially since I felt it was pretty clear what Arsenalist was saying.

He said...
"Q Rich blew by Kobe once too, doesn't mean anything. "

You said...
"No he didnt...Q Rich is a spot up shooter has been for 7 years now."

Well, first of all you are arguing the fact that Richardson blew by Kobe once, which is a little inane. And the point of him bringing him up wasn't to make a comparison. You, as well as others, kept bringing up DeMar making a couple of moves on Kobe as proof he's going to be great....
"As soon as i saw him blow by Kobe in the lane with that spin move and finish with that driving layup i had no doubts he has that ability to be the guy."

I'm not putting words in your posts. I'm quoting exactly what you said.

Personally, I think he's got a chance to be a very good player, but I'd never look at one game as proof of why.

[Trife76]

If it was a private conversation, I apologize, but since it was in the forum, and not through private messages, I figured adding my opinion was okay. Especially since I felt it was pretty clear what Arsenalist was saying.

He said...
"Q Rich blew by Kobe once too, doesn't mean anything. "

You said...
"No he didnt...Q Rich is a spot up shooter has been for 7 years now."

Well, first of all you are arguing the fact that Richardson blew by Kobe once, which is a little inane. And the point of him bringing him up wasn't to make a comparison. You, as well as others, kept bringing up DeMar making a couple of moves on Kobe as proof he's going to be great....
"As soon as i saw him blow by Kobe in the lane with that spin move and finish with that driving layup i had no doubts he has that ability to be the guy."

I'm not putting words in your posts. I'm quoting exactly what you said.

Personally, I think he's got a chance to be a very good player, but I'd never look at one game as proof of why.

Thanks for making my point for me....
"ability to be great"
not proof cuz there is no proof but ability to be...

good day !

Meh i was going to let him use Richardson as a reference point to downplay DD...cuz dudes been bum status for a minute...

[LeeZ]

His handle is MUCH improved over last year. Give it time. Shots will come, his form is good.

Huh??? While I'll grant you his handle has improved (I'd take issue with the "much"), his form is good in Bizzaro World, perhaps, but back here on planet Earth, nothing about his form on his jumper could even REMOTELY be associated with the word "good". Have you WATCHED the guy shoot? I won't regurgitate my earlier post in this thread, but he has a bad hitch in his stroke that causes him to fling the ball from behind his head.

[WhatWhat]

7 games. Seven games. SEVEN games...

[jamesk]

DeWho?

[Brandon]

BTW Jordan didn't dominate the L from game 1. He was a very good volume scorer who relied on athletic ability at first. He learned (over the following 5 years) how to shoot with range, how to incorporate the passing game and most importantly how to defend. He wasn't GOAT right from the get-go.

Jordan was the best 2 in the league from the first appearance he made on the court. He refined the enormous talent he was given so that his shooting, passing etc. were a little better. A little. But he didn't "develop" or "learn" that talent while already in the league. No one develops or learns talent. They have what they have, and that's that. Jordan dominated because it was in his nature to do so. Just look at the numbers. 14 win shares, and a 25.8 PER in his rookie year. Second highest PER in the league as a rookie, behind Larry Bird, ahead of Magic, Kareem et al.

So far in his career DDR has accounted for 2.4 win shares and a 12.3 PER. Players just do not deviate that much across their careers from the starting point. It's in DDR's nature to be a benchwarmer.

[minks77]

Jordan was the best 2 in the league from the first appearance he made on the court. He refined the enormous talent he was given so that his shooting, passing etc. were a little better. A little. But he didn't "develop" or "learn" that talent while already in the league. No one develops or learns talent. They have what they have, and that's that. Jordan dominated because it was in his nature to do so. Just look at the numbers. 14 win shares, and a 25.8 PER in his rookie year. Second highest PER in the league as a rookie, behind Larry Bird, ahead of Magic, Kareem et al.

So far in his career DDR has accounted for 2.4 win shares and a 12.3 PER. Players just do not deviate that much across their careers from the starting point. It's in DDR's nature to be a benchwarmer.

Dude, I didn't say he wasn't a great scorer coming in. He was but he was a volume scorer from inside the arc and he didn't defend anywhere near as well coming in as he did later on. He wasn't dominating the entire League like the original post said. The bulls finished 6 games under .500 and were swept in the first round as they were in the 2 following years. He did develop and he did learn and he did get much better. He became much more than the one man scoring machine he was in Y1, the playoffs of Y2, and Y3. One on one the man was unstoppable, but it's like Lebron today: 60 wins is nice but what everyone remembers are the flame outs in the post season.

Don't take this as a knock against MJ, Because it's not. I watched him as much as possible being a Canadian kid without a satellite dish could back then. I was a huge fan and watching him develop and expand his game was amazing. Lots of guys come in with a bucket of talent but what do they do with it? Jordan was a student of the game and always improved.

I don't know how this came to be a Jordan topic but DD doesn't belong in the same sentence. He can and will improve but I think his ceiling is more at a borderline starter level than an all star.

As for guys being set in stone from their rookie year, I give you Tracy McGrady. his first 2 years in the L were a washout with his own coach openly questioning if he'd even get a second contract after his rookie deal was up. By year 3 he was starting to really show his stuff. After that he was vaulted into the discussion of top 5, some would say top 3 players in the league. No one was even thinking that in 98.

Oh and btw, FUCK PER and FUCK Win shares.

[Brandon]

but I think his ceiling is more at a borderline starter level

In other words, what he already is. BTW, T-Mac didn't play enough minutes his first two years to do anything substantial. That was a mistake by the coaching staff. By year 4(age 21, DDR's age now) he was an MVP candidate.

[JoePanini]

LOL. I'm gone a few days and this thread has gone all over the place :P

I think people are expecting too much out of DeRozan. He will be decent, he won't be a superstar, but how many 9th overall picks end up a perennial all-star? (Buddha?? ) I think some people should understand that the lad is just 21, many rookies are OLDER than him. He has had a decent start to the season, had a few bad games but he was very important in almost every bench spark we've had this season. Plus he works very hard on his game, apparently, and he will most definitely improve. When he gets his jumpshot up to standard then he will be a huge threat. He won't be getting to the line 8 times a game, but he is by far the most athletic and aggression (towards the rim) player on our team.

And on everything else being discussed here, LOL.

[minks77]

Dude, you have to earn minutes...well you used to before BC started telling his coaches to play young guys too early. Tracey didn't do enough early on...sometimes it takes guys a couple of years is all. I watched nearly every game during his time here and although you could see flashes it wasn't all because of the coaches. He was weak, frail and didn't defend well and his scoring ability took time to mature.

[Tim W.]

LOL. I'm gone a few days and this thread has gone all over the place :P

I think people are expecting too much out of DeRozan. He will be decent, he won't be a superstar, but how many 9th overall picks end up a perennial all-star? (Buddha?? ) I think some people should understand that the lad is just 21, many rookies are OLDER than him. He has had a decent start to the season, had a few bad games but he was very important in almost every bench spark we've had this season. Plus he works very hard on his game, apparently, and he will most definitely improve. When he gets his jumpshot up to standard then he will be a huge threat. He won't be getting to the line 8 times a game, but he is by far the most athletic and aggression (towards the rim) player on our team.

And on everything else being discussed here, LOL.

Wait, are you saying to be realistic, don't overreact and to be patient? That's simply nonsense and has no place around here!

[Matt52]

DeMar played outstanding versus Orlando. It is only one game but you have to give credit where credit is due.

[heinz57]

DeMar played outstanding versus Orlando. It is only one game but you have to give credit where credit is due.

most of them played great tonight... spotty defense, pietrus got WAY too many open 3s in the 4th... but a W is a W

Jose sealing it with defense confused everything i know about him though

[Buddahfan]

DeMar played outstanding versus Orlando. It is only one game but you have to give credit where credit is due.

DeRozan is second in scoring for the Raptors at 13.1 ppg

This is up considerably from 8.6 ppg as a rookie.

More good things to come.

The iPhone/Android generation needs to slow down and not live and die on his every possession.

Raptors Stats