Everything Dwane Casey

[Gambino]

Hypothetically, if we faced off against Portland and how they played in this years playoffs, they would have swept us.

The Playoff East is hilariously bad compared to the Playoff West, so to be taken to two game sevens against Indiana, and Miami (who played Winslow at C [seriously])? That's downright pathetic with the roster we had.

The difference was coaching and DD.

Regular season it does work, when teams are at half throttle and scouting reports are more general. Playoffs are a different animal....and Casey, despite his ring, doesn't get it.

The best way I can describe Casey's coaching is over-structured. It is very mechanical and he hasn't taught players how to read and react to defenses. That's poor for NBA caliber coaching.

Portland would've swept us?

*chuckle* *sip*

[JimiCliff]

You could have stopped there, since that's really the crux. The rest is conjecture and opinion. The objective results tell a different story.

Whether you think they got to the ECF because of, or in spite of, anything is beside the point. They DID get to the ECF. They DID exceed all reasonable expectations for this roster at the beginning of the year. They DID do all of that with their 2 best players playing well below their season production, and without their starting C, and with their key off-season SF acquisition just returning from a season-long injury.

Those are subjective facts. You can ignore that and pretend that all of this is unsustainable, the 56 wins were a freak accident, or whatever. But it's been sustainable and on an upward curve since Casey arrived.

Also on an upward curve since Casey arrived: the total amount of talent on the roster.

[slaw]

Thats why I hate the "it's ugly to watch" argument; it distracts from the argument that Caseyball is not championship-caliber basketball.

Objectively the facts are:
-we lost twice to a lower-seeded team, getting swept once
-we got taken to a 7th game by Paul George and a bunch of scrubs
-we got taken to a 7th game by a team missing arguably its two best players in Both and Whiteside
-we won two games against a team whose coach has half a season's experience, a team which is getting taken to the woodshed by an actual championship-quality contender

I definitely agree that Caseyball can lead to sustainable regular season and first/second round success. But I do not believe Caseyball can lead to late round playoff success year in and year out. This is the first year we've had playoff success under his leadership. That doesn't prove sustainability or an upward curve; this year could very well be lightning in a bottle. One data point doesn't make a trend.

I am not sure why people keep raising 2014 and 2015 results as thought they occurred in some sort of vacuum and/or are relevant to the team in 2017. Clearly, the trend is upward.

The idea that beating Miami in 7 somehow diminishes the achievement is strange. Toronto didn't have JV, had an injured Carroll and a hobbled Lowry. Everyone has injuries.

The idea that somehow Cleveland is not an actual championship contender despite being in the championship is so ridiculous it demonstrates the depths that are being mined to discredit the Raptors at this point.

Yes, it's the first they've had playoff success under Casey but it's also the first year they didn't have their best player injured to the point of uselessness (2015) or were playing the hottest team in basketball that was a veteran-laden squad. The trends are more regular season wins, constantly better rosters, improving players, and, now, ECF. It's not one data point. It is a trend,

You may think their style of play can't get them any further than an ECF but you also thought their style of play couldn't get them 56 wins or to an ECF. Why are you so sure of yourself now?

[slaw]

Do you seriously think that we have the personnel to effectively run an offense with a large portion of our plays as such?

Yes. Why? Cause they've been doing it for three years straight and have one of the most efficient offenses in the NBA over that stretch.

[Axel]

Casey deserves to be back next year because he was very good in the playoffs. He also deserves a high degree of skepticism because the reason he looked so good in the playoffs is that he finally made the obvious adjustments that were warranted months (if not years) ago. Very much has a "fear the contract year" flavour to it, especially since the man deserved to be fired last summer.

Hopefully he has actually learned from these playoffs and actually brings the changes to training camp next year. Team would be better prepared to play the matchup advantage in the playoffs if they actually had some diversity on offence during the season. Ride or die needs to end.

[MixxAOR]

Casey deserves to be back next year because he was very good in the playoffs. He also deserves a high degree of skepticism because the reason he looked so good in the playoffs is that he finally made the obvious adjustments that were warranted months (if not years) ago. Very much has a "fear the contract year" flavour to it, especially since the man deserved to be fired last summer.

Hopefully he has actually learned from these playoffs and actually brings the changes to training camp next year. Team would be better prepared to play the matchup advantage in the playoffs if they actually had some diversity on offence during the season. Ride or die needs to end.

LOL in interview he said he went against his instincts. so yeah....

[Axel]

Everything Dwane Casey

LOL in interview he said he went against his instincts. so yeah....

Worked for George Costanza, maybe we can bring him in as an assistant.

That is seriously concerning though.

[Miekenstien]

Worked for George Costanza, maybe we can bring him in as an assistant.

That is seriously concerning though.

"Who are you George costanza?" Haha

Sent from my HUAWEI TAG-TL00 using Tapatalk

[CalgaryRapsFan]

There is a large cohort on this board who can't get their heads around the success that this team has had with Casey as coach and Demar as one of the lead players (add in Lowry for some folks, due to his proclivity to 'only pass to Demar', engage in hero ball, etc.). Simply can't get their heads around it, because they can't explain the objective success through the subjective lens through which they view the game. Has little to do with results, team progression, continuity or anything else. It's an aesthetic/emotional argument ('I don't like iso-ball, therefore Casey and Derozan are shit', for example). Rationality seldom enters the equation.

That's an awfully condescending argument.

A lot of the same posters who are frustrated by the ISO ball offense this season, were the ones complaining about the scramble defense from last season. The Raptors were much better this year, as a result of completely revamping their defensive game plan. Casey gets a lot of credit (either directly or indirectly, via his assistant coaches) for the strategic shift. Do those posters also deserve some credit?

I've been vocal about the offensive system with the Casey/DeRozan/Casey core. My main reason for pushing for at least one of them to leave, is that when together, they seem too reluctant to consistently implement a more efficient, team-first offense. The biggest frustration is that the team has shown glimpses of how good they can be when passing the ball and looking for a better shot. DeRozan has looked at his best when looking to facilitate for his teammates, rather than just forcing his own game.

If the offense gets revamped this offseason, I think the team could be much improved, and the three-headed monster could all look better - individually and as the core (along with an emerging JV). The concern is that the three-year trend shows no signs of this Casey/DeRozan/Lowry lead team changing their approach, either by word (ie: "ride or die", "empty the clip", etc...) or deed. If the core does stay together, I just hope that they do change, because I think they're capable of doing so and would all become far better if they did.

Get past the hyperbole and try to better understand the underlying issues. An offensive change may not even make the team better (record wise or playoff result wise) overnight, but a more team-oriented approach could fast-track the organic growth of many young players, which could lead to a profound improvement a season from now, or two, or three. It's a process, just as the defense was last offseason.

[jimmie]

That's an awfully condescending argument.

A lot of the same posters who are frustrated by the ISO ball offense this season, were the ones complaining about the scramble defense from last season. The Raptors were much better this year, as a result of completely revamping their defensive game plan. Casey gets a lot of credit (either directly or indirectly, via his assistant coaches) for the strategic shift. Do those posters also deserve some credit?

I've been vocal about the offensive system with the Casey/DeRozan/Casey core. My main reason for pushing for at least one of them to leave, is that when together, they seem too reluctant to consistently implement a more efficient, team-first offense. The biggest frustration is that the team has shown glimpses of how good they can be when passing the ball and looking for a better shot. DeRozan has looked at his best when looking to facilitate for his teammates, rather than just forcing his own game.

If the offense gets revamped this offseason, I think the team could be much improved, and the three-headed monster could all look better - individually and as the core (along with an emerging JV). The concern is that the three-year trend shows no signs of this Casey/DeRozan/Lowry lead team changing their approach, either by word (ie: "ride or die", "empty the clip", etc...) or deed. If the core does stay together, I just hope that they do change, because I think they're capable of doing so and would all become far better if they did.

Get past the hyperbole and try to better understand the underlying issues. An offensive change may not even make the team better (record wise or playoff result wise) overnight, but a more team-oriented approach could fast-track the organic growth of many young players, which could lead to a profound improvement a season from now, or two, or three. It's a process, just as the defense was last offseason.

And yet, what they've been doing for the past 3+ years has been, subjectively speaking, working. So yeah, any number of different approaches could work, but discounting the one that IS working as being idiotic and unsustainable is disingenuous at best. That's all I'm saying. You don't like how it looks, and you think it can't possibly be winning formula. That's in direct contrast to the actual results.

Look, I prefer a more ball-sharing style of ball myself, and I'm actually surprised it's been working as well as it has. But it has, and if I ignored that fact, I wouldn't feel like I was being fair to both sides of the argument.

[CalgaryRapsFan]

And yet, what they've been doing for the past 3+ years has been, subjectively speaking, working. So yeah, any number of different approaches could work, but discounting the one that IS working as being idiotic and unsustainable is disingenuous at best. That's all I'm saying. You don't like how it looks, and you think it can't possibly be winning formula. That's in direct contrast to the actual results.

Look, I prefer a more ball-sharing style of ball myself, and I'm actually surprised it's been working as well as it has. But it has, and if I ignored that fact, I wouldn't feel like I was being fair to both sides of the argument.

Has the guard-centric, ISO style of play really worked?

2014 - 1st round loss

2015 - 1st round sweep

2016 - would have been a 1st round loss if not for JV (definitely not 'plan A')

The team was more talented and deeper this year, and they were able to overcome the exact deficiency that so many posters were fearing would rear its ugly head - ie: inefficient, easy to shut down, hero-ball. When that style of play failed them (as many predicted it would, come playoff time), they found a specific matchup to exploit, and relied on their defense to carry them (the completely rebuilt defense that so many were clamoring for last year - rightfully so).

The team won and did well this playoff. The team didn't win by playing ISO-ball though. They won in spite of it, and by finding other ways to win. Casey deserves some credit for going to those alternative options (ie: benching DeRozan, feeding JV, doubling-down on defense), but that's probably the biggest indicator that the ISO style of play can't work - it didn't.

[Deino]

Casey deserves to be back next year because he was very good in the playoffs. He also deserves a high degree of skepticism because the reason he looked so good in the playoffs is that he finally made the obvious adjustments that were warranted months (if not years) ago. Very much has a "fear the contract year" flavour to it, especially since the man deserved to be fired last summer.

Hopefully he has actually learned from these playoffs and actually brings the changes to training camp next year. Team would be better prepared to play the matchup advantage in the playoffs if they actually had some diversity on offence during the season. Ride or die needs to end.

Hmmm... you're giving me a motive to be optimistic and a reason to be concerned altogether ,if you're suggesting it took Casey years to make obvious adjustments (which is true)where most coaches(if not all) would have made them a lot sooner than that,but was due to learning process(as he kept saying all season),excuse me someone is either really slow or "stubborn" in his own way ,however if he finally did them(also years late) cause of
"fear the contract year" then a same old concern becomes valid again,the big question is what version of Casey will we see next year.
I have no choice but hope for the positive optimistic approach(with the help of some smart assistants).

[Gambino]

The offense doesn't need to be revamped it needs to be diversified (and that diversity needs to be more Jonas in the post and more passes to him in the roll). We don't need to drastically change how we play.

[ogi]

Has the guard-centric, ISO style of play really worked?

2014 - 1st round loss

2015 - 1st round sweep

2016 - would have been a 1st round loss if not for JV (definitely not 'plan A')

The team was more talented and deeper this year, and they were able to overcome the exact deficiency that so many posters were fearing would rear its ugly head - ie: inefficient, easy to shut down, hero-ball. When that style of play failed them (as many predicted it would, come playoff time), they found a specific matchup to exploit, and relied on their defense to carry them (the completely rebuilt defense that so many were clamoring for last year - rightfully so).

The team won and did well this playoff. The team didn't win by playing ISO-ball though. They won in spite of it, and by finding other ways to win. Casey deserves some credit for going to those alternative options (ie: benching DeRozan, feeding JV, doubling-down on defense), but that's probably the biggest indicator that the ISO style of play can't work - it didn't.

This whole "would've lost in the first round" thing really makes no sense to me. There's really nothing wrong with winning in 7 games especially when the best player on your team who's been a deadly three point shooter can't hit wide open shots. That really isn't on the offensive system or the opposing defense completely locking us down. That kind of drop in efficiency is your top guy horribly underperforming. Top that off with the second most ball dominant guy deciding to play like an idiot and not playing like he did during the season and Paul George playing his best ball of the season and you get a full 7 game series.

That being said its always possible for guys to just have cold stretches and play badly which is why it's important to diversify the offense, but I don't agree that the system itself is unsustainable.

I also don't think that comparing what people said about last year's defense to what they're saying about this year's offense is really a fair comparison. Last year's defense was atrocious and all of the numbers as well as the eye test showed it. I don't think a single person on this board had anything positive to say about the defense last year.

[Gambino]

I'm so tired of people acting like we were lucky to win our series. We won. Period. End of story. Nobody was feeling sorry for us when we lost our series by 1 point in 2014 to the Nets. All that matters is who advances, not how pretty it looked when you advanced.