Calderon and Amir

[er1csh3n]

DeRozan is a SG that has a weak jumper, no three point shot and non-existent defense. It just so happens that he is third in the pecking order (behind Bargnani & Calderon) for picking on his lack of D.

Also, JV and ED aren't untouchable, but it would take a pretty lopsided trade to pry them loose, IMO. If somebody offered a top-5 draft pick for DeRozan, I'd do it in a heartbeat given next year's draft pool. I wouldn't take that offer nearly as quickly if the other team was asking for JV or ED.

Derozan has a weak jumper? I'm pretty sure it was one of the biggest improvement and factor of his game. Also from the impact basketball stats Derozan has been pretty solid from Trey. Also at @ Tim W athleticism can't be taught however and derozan has a skill that he shares with the greats themselves....work ethic. A lot of athletic players don't make the league, because they are lazy. Derozan has shown his work ethic can double his scoring and rebounding......where will that take him? Sure derozan might not be a superstar, but he has already shown to be more then capable of a second option.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

Derozan has a weak jumper? I'm pretty sure it was one of the biggest improvement and factor of his game. Also from the impact basketball stats Derozan has been pretty solid from Trey. Also at @ Tim W athleticism can't be taught however and derozan has a skill that he shares with the greats themselves....work ethic. A lot of athletic players don't make the league, because they are lazy. Derozan has shown his work ethic can double his scoring and rebounding......where will that take him? Sure derozan might not be a superstar, but he has already shown to be more then capable of a second option.

You are right and I hope the jumper (including from beyond the arc) continues to improve. I really hope DeRozan can become a great all around player and a legitimate #2 scoring threat.

I don't think Tim or I were trying to hate on DeRozan, we were just trying to answer your question as to why neither of us would consider him "untouchable".

I think JV could be a stud C on both ends and ED could be the anchor of a team's defense with a nose for rebounding on both ends and garbage clean-up type of baskets from down low on offense. I like DeRozan, but I think he's at a tier below JV & ED, especially given he's had 2 years in the league already, compared to their 0 & 1 years, respectively.

I'm worried that DeRozan is following the same development route as Bargnani - improve the scoring, while continuing to be one-dimensional and a liability on defense. Perhaps the coaching staff is to blame for both Bargnani's and DeRozan's focus strictly on offensive development, who knows? In an ideal world, Bargnani would step on on defense/rebounding effort and DeRozan would develop a consisten jumper from 2-pt & 3-pt range, while also improving on defense... Raps fans can dream, right???

[Tim W.]

@ Tim W athleticism can't be taught however and derozan has a skill that he shares with the greats themselves....work ethic. A lot of athletic players don't make the league, because they are lazy. Derozan has shown his work ethic can double his scoring and rebounding......where will that take him? Sure derozan might not be a superstar, but he has already shown to be more then capable of a second option.

No, athleticism can't be taught, but that doesn't make a player, even one with a strong work ethic.

And neither his scoring nor rebounding doubled. He did increase his scoring, but that was more because he got more shots. And his rebounding rate actually went down a little over his rookie season. I'm not bashing the guy because I do like him as a player, but let's not overstate his skills and effectiveness. No one knows if he is capable of becoming a second option on a contender. Let's see if he can make an All-Star game first.

[NoPropsneeded]

You are right and I hope the jumper (including from beyond the arc) continues to improve. I really hope DeRozan can become a great all around player and a legitimate #2 scoring threat.

I don't think Tim or I were trying to hate on DeRozan, we were just trying to answer your question as to why neither of us would consider him "untouchable".

I think JV could be a stud C on both ends and ED could be the anchor of a team's defense with a nose for rebounding on both ends and garbage clean-up type of baskets from down low on offense. I like DeRozan, but I think he's at a tier below JV & ED, especially given he's had 2 years in the league already, compared to their 0 & 1 years, respectively.

I'm worried that DeRozan is following the same development route as Bargnani - improve the scoring, while continuing to be one-dimensional and a liability on defense. Perhaps the coaching staff is to blame for both Bargnani's and DeRozan's focus strictly on offensive development, who knows? In an ideal world, Bargnani would step on on defense/rebounding effort and DeRozan would develop a consisten jumper from 2-pt & 3-pt range, while also improving on defense... Raps fans can dream, right???

I think with D Case and his new staff he'll be able to help turn DeRozan into a superstar. I heard him talking about that after he got hired. I have high hopes for DeMar, lets see how it goes down and if he has a breakout season.

[er1csh3n]

His scoring went from 8.6 to 17.2, Im pretty sure 8.6x2 is 17.2. I am not talking about his effectiveness but when has a superstar player been effective, Kobe?, Joe Johnson?, Dirk Nowitzski?. His stats may be inflated, but how many people actually average 18 points their sophomore season.

[NoPropsneeded]

and i hate these arguements about being a great scorer on a bad team. IMO that makes no sense because that player is facing the same opponents as some star player like Kobe, it shouldn't matter what team your on. I know this was off topic but i just needed to put that out there

[Tim W.]

His scoring went from 8.6 to 17.2, Im pretty sure 8.6x2 is 17.2. I am not talking about his effectiveness but when has a superstar player been effective, Kobe?, Joe Johnson?, Dirk Nowitzski?. His stats may be inflated, but how many people actually average 18 points their sophomore season.

Why is it people just look at basic stats and not beyond that? DeRozan averaged 15 more mpg last season, which was a massive reason he doubled his scoring. He also took more shots per minute due to a larger role on offense. You stick anyone out there for 15 more mpg and give him more shots and he's going to increase his ppg.

Again, I'm not bashing the guy, and I believe he's got the makings of a good scorer, and have said so on numerous occasions. But 18 ppg on a bad team doesn't mean nearly as much as you make it seem. Lots of players can score if given the minutes and shots. What questions need to be asked are: How efficient is the scoring, do they score in the flow of the offense or have to force the issue, how effective are they when the game is close, and do they play with blinders on or do they make the right pass when they need to? Most importantly, can do help the team apart from scoring?

and i hate these arguements about being a great scorer on a bad team. IMO that makes no sense because that player is facing the same opponents as some star player like Kobe, it shouldn't matter what team your on. I know this was off topic but i just needed to put that out there

Unfortunately it makes a HUGE difference. As I stated above, a lot of players in the NBA, if given the shots, can score 20 ppg. Most NBA players have pretty damn good skills. My perfect player to bring up in this argument is Tony Campbell. Campbell was a deep bench player for Detroit and the Lakers in the 80's, but when he signed with Minnesota, an expansion team, he scored 23 ppg. In fact, in his 3 years in Minnesota, one of the worst teams in the league, he averaged 20.6 ppg. Then he was traded to New York, a contender, he never hit double digits in scoring again, and never again played 20 mpg.

The reason is that Campbell could score, when the offense revolved around him and he was given enough shots. But he wasn't a good enough scorer to warrant taking 19 shots per game on a good team, and he wasn't very good at much else, so if he wasn't scoring, he wasn't of that much use.

A current player example is Marcus Thornton. The last 3 months of his rookie season he averaged nearly 20 ppg. Of course the team went 10-24 in that period. The next season, with a healthy Chris Paul, the team became a playoff team, but he couldn't get consistent minutes and was traded to Sacramento, a bad team, where he averaged 21.3 ppg. The problem in New Orleans is that he can't play defense to save his life, and does absolutely nothing else other than score, and he's not really a good enough scorer to warrant taking 18 shots per game on a good team.

Other players in this category: Corey Maggette, Al Harrington, Bargnani, Monta Ellis. All these players are very good scorers, but aren't good enough PLAYERS to do it on a good team.

[Puffer]

I recall a fan site years ago talking about an incident one of the writers remembered vividly. Seems the biggest stiff in the NBA (at that time...can't remember the name) was coming to the local community to participate in a benefit game fund raiser. This guy couldn't shoot, had stone hands, always seemed to be last up the court etc. One of the fansite writers had been a good college player and he, along with a bunch of the local hotshots, was licking his chops at a chance to show up a real NBA player.

Of course, come the game and this big stiff made all of them look like a grade four intramural players trying their luck against the varsity super star. The point being that context is everything. Cut glass looks nice against a background of black construction paper, but if you want it to shine in a gold setting, it needs to be a diamond.

[er1csh3n]

Why is it people just look at basic stats and not beyond that? DeRozan averaged 15 more mpg last season, which was a massive reason he doubled his scoring. He also took more shots per minute due to a larger role on offense. You stick anyone out there for 15 more mpg and give him more shots and he's going to increase his ppg.

Again, I'm not bashing the guy, and I believe he's got the makings of a good scorer, and have said so on numerous occasions. But 18 ppg on a bad team doesn't mean nearly as much as you make it seem. Lots of players can score if given the minutes and shots. What questions need to be asked are: How efficient is the scoring, do they score in the flow of the offense or have to force the issue, how effective are they when the game is close, and do they play with blinders on or do they make the right pass when they need to? Most importantly, can do help the team apart from scoring?



Unfortunately it makes a HUGE difference. As I stated above, a lot of players in the NBA, if given the shots, can score 20 ppg. Most NBA players have pretty damn good skills. My perfect player to bring up in this argument is Tony Campbell. Campbell was a deep bench player for Detroit and the Lakers in the 80's, but when he signed with Minnesota, an expansion team, he scored 23 ppg. In fact, in his 3 years in Minnesota, one of the worst teams in the league, he averaged 20.6 ppg. Then he was traded to New York, a contender, he never hit double digits in scoring again, and never again played 20 mpg.

The reason is that Campbell could score, when the offense revolved around him and he was given enough shots. But he wasn't a good enough scorer to warrant taking 19 shots per game on a good team, and he wasn't very good at much else, so if he wasn't scoring, he wasn't of that much use.

A current player example is Marcus Thornton. The last 3 months of his rookie season he averaged nearly 20 ppg. Of course the team went 10-24 in that period. The next season, with a healthy Chris Paul, the team became a playoff team, but he couldn't get consistent minutes and was traded to Sacramento, a bad team, where he averaged 21.3 ppg. The problem in New Orleans is that he can't play defense to save his life, and does absolutely nothing else other than score, and he's not really a good enough scorer to warrant taking 18 shots per game on a good team.

Other players in this category: Corey Maggette, Al Harrington, Bargnani, Monta Ellis. All these players are very good scorers, but aren't good enough PLAYERS to do it on a good team.

I know your looking at advanced stats, but Derozan has also shot well this year as well(other than 3pt %), you cannot say he didn't improve, even if it was only on the offense side. You need a star on a team, and so far Derozan has proven that.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

I know your looking at advanced stats, but Derozan has also shot well this year as well(other than 3pt %), you cannot say he didn't improve, even if it was only on the offense side. You need a star on a team, and so far Derozan has proven that.

DeRozan is a long way from being a "star". At this point in time, he is no more of a "star" than Bargnani is. They can score points, but as of the end of last season, that's all either of them could do.

To be considered a true "star", you need to be an all-around player that contributes on both ends of the court. Toronto's problem is that they haven't had a "star" since Vince Carter, before he signed his fat contract. Toronto has continually elevated good role players onto the "star" pedestal - Bosh, Bargnani, DeRozan are the three latest stars. It is really unfair to them as players, as it puts unjustified expectations on them and causes fans to turn against them when they don't fulfill potential that was never really there to begin with.

On a team with a legitimate "star" as the focal point and a true defensive anchor (which I hope ED and JV can become in time), players like DeRozan and Bargnani could surely thrive, when only asked to score. They have skills and more room for improvement in all facets of their games, but they likely will never become "star" players. This is why neither of them should be considered untouchable. JV & ED have talent and potential, which could see them become "star" players, but only time and experience with determine whether or not it comes to fruition... and as fans, we should allow them that time and experince before branding them the next great this-or-that or busts... don't heap unwarranted expectations on their shoulders, just enjoy them as players and hope for the best for them and this team.

[NoPropsneeded]

Why is it people just look at basic stats and not beyond that? DeRozan averaged 15 more mpg last season, which was a massive reason he doubled his scoring. He also took more shots per minute due to a larger role on offense. You stick anyone out there for 15 more mpg and give him more shots and he's going to increase his ppg.

Again, I'm not bashing the guy, and I believe he's got the makings of a good scorer, and have said so on numerous occasions. But 18 ppg on a bad team doesn't mean nearly as much as you make it seem. Lots of players can score if given the minutes and shots. What questions need to be asked are: How efficient is the scoring, do they score in the flow of the offense or have to force the issue, how effective are they when the game is close, and do they play with blinders on or do they make the right pass when they need to? Most importantly, can do help the team apart from scoring?



Unfortunately it makes a HUGE difference. As I stated above, a lot of players in the NBA, if given the shots, can score 20 ppg. Most NBA players have pretty damn good skills. My perfect player to bring up in this argument is Tony Campbell. Campbell was a deep bench player for Detroit and the Lakers in the 80's, but when he signed with Minnesota, an expansion team, he scored 23 ppg. In fact, in his 3 years in Minnesota, one of the worst teams in the league, he averaged 20.6 ppg. Then he was traded to New York, a contender, he never hit double digits in scoring again, and never again played 20 mpg.

The reason is that Campbell could score, when the offense revolved around him and he was given enough shots. But he wasn't a good enough scorer to warrant taking 19 shots per game on a good team, and he wasn't very good at much else, so if he wasn't scoring, he wasn't of that much use.

A current player example is Marcus Thornton. The last 3 months of his rookie season he averaged nearly 20 ppg. Of course the team went 10-24 in that period. The next season, with a healthy Chris Paul, the team became a playoff team, but he couldn't get consistent minutes and was traded to Sacramento, a bad team, where he averaged 21.3 ppg. The problem in New Orleans is that he can't play defense to save his life, and does absolutely nothing else other than score, and he's not really a good enough scorer to warrant taking 18 shots per game on a good team.

Other players in this category: Corey Maggette, Al Harrington, Bargnani, Monta Ellis. All these players are very good scorers, but aren't good enough PLAYERS to do it on a good team.

but they are going up against the same competition as every other player. If u reduced lebrons or kobe's minutes they would average lower points too.

[Tim W.]

I know your looking at advanced stats, but Derozan has also shot well this year as well(other than 3pt %), you cannot say he didn't improve, even if it was only on the offense side. You need a star on a team, and so far Derozan has proven that.

Again, I'm not saying he's NOT going to be a star, but at this point he's definitely not. Not when all he can do at an above average rate is score. As I've said, I'm very optimistic about is future, but right now he's a very athletic shooting guard who can score at a pretty good rate and that's about it. I do expect him to make big improvements next season (whenever that might be). But we're not looking at the future. We're looking at right now.

[Tim W.]

but they are going up against the same competition as every other player. If u reduced lebrons or kobe's minutes they would average lower points too.

Yes, I understand they are going against the same competition, but what you don't seem to understand is that guys like LeBron and Kobe could score 40 ppg if they really wanted to, but their teams would probably lose a lot more games. It's not about how many points you score. It's how many points you score that are within the offense, that aren't forced and that help your team win. Plus, can you do anything else besides score. As I said, you give every player in the league enough minutes and shots and I'd guess a good percentage of them would be able to average 20 ppg. But their teams would lose.

[joey_hesketh]

Yes, I understand they are going against the same competition, but what you don't seem to understand is that guys like LeBron and Kobe could score 40 ppg if they really wanted to, but their teams would probably lose a lot more games. It's not about how many points you score. It's how many points you score that are within the offense, that aren't forced and that help your team win. Plus, can you do anything else besides score. As I said, you give every player in the league enough minutes and shots and I'd guess a good percentage of them would be able to average 20 ppg. But their teams would lose.

Though I do fully agree with the premise of your argument, I'm not sure all of this applies to Demar.
Demar DOES score within the Offense, he does so within his own abilities; and generally does not force any shots.
He puts forth effort on the defensive end, and though he may not be the Kobe-stopper we need RIGHT NOW, I think he has the tools to develop a VERY good defensive game.

I think having a guy like Jose helps control that problem a little bit as well, as he decides who gets the ball, and where they get it.
Unlike in Milwaukee, (and OKC with Westbrook) where Jennings has the ability to bring the ball up AND kill the possesion all in a matter of 7 seconds, can be VERY detrimental to the team.

Demar is not in the position, and thus he MUST wait for this shots, or work hard to get them.
He improved trumendously on his movement off the ball last year, and I expect it to only get better this season.

He has proven he can score, and do so fairly efficiently.
And while some put TOO MUCH weight on this ability, I think some put TOO LITTLE weight on it as well.

As a 22 year old, I don't think ANY of us really know what type of player he can potentially be, except for Demar. And I think he has some VERY lofty goals for himself.

[Tim W.]

Though I do fully agree with the premise of your argument, I'm not sure all of this applies to Demar.
Demar DOES score within the Offense, he does so within his own abilities; and generally does not force any shots.
He puts forth effort on the defensive end, and though he may not be the Kobe-stopper we need RIGHT NOW, I think he has the tools to develop a VERY good defensive game.

I think having a guy like Jose helps control that problem a little bit as well, as he decides who gets the ball, and where they get it.
Unlike in Milwaukee, (and OKC with Westbrook) where Jennings has the ability to bring the ball up AND kill the possesion all in a matter of 7 seconds, can be VERY detrimental to the team.

Demar is not in the position, and thus he MUST wait for this shots, or work hard to get them.
He improved trumendously on his movement off the ball last year, and I expect it to only get better this season.

He has proven he can score, and do so fairly efficiently.
And while some put TOO MUCH weight on this ability, I think some put TOO LITTLE weight on it as well.

As a 22 year old, I don't think ANY of us really know what type of player he can potentially be, except for Demar. And I think he has some VERY lofty goals for himself.

This is one of the things I like about DeRozan, is that he usually doesn't force the issue and try and do too much (although not always). And you comment about Calderon highlights why I would like to keep him, if possible. Bayless has talent, but he'll put his head down and try and score a little too much. Calderon is better for the development of the young players.