Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Dalano Banton

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

  • #46
    slaw wrote: View Post
    How do you determine whether a team/organization has developed a guy's shooting as opposed to a player doing it himself? What constitutes 'success'? Pointing out one or two players that improved their shooting at the NBA level and concluding the organization deserves credit for that seems pretty wild to me. Like, Brissett. Indy developed a multi-year player pro in weeks? Right. More likely he just got a chance to show what he could do in a system that suited him.

    The biggest difference I see with certain organizations (Toronto included) is that they are willing to give young guys time and they have used their minor league system better than other teams. No team is ever going to hit 100% success but if you bring 5 or 6 projects annually and you hit on even 1 who turns into a rotation player for you in a year, you are probably way ahead of the game.
    Your first comment kind of proves the point. There seems to be this general acceptance that "Toronto fixes shooters" more than other organizations. I'd love to truly believe we have that competitive advantage, but I don't see any hard evidence that it's true. I mean even a great success story like Powell got off to a nice start in year 1 and then sucked for 2 whole seasons, before improving again for good. Was that Norm, or was that Toronto's vaunted shooter development system? Great question.

    Not gonna argue that we had great success in the Casey era developing late-round and un-drafted picks into rotation players punching above their expected weights. That's definitely true. But the concept that we "fix shooters" seems more like fancy than fact.

    Comment


    • #47
      Ya every team has shooting coaches. Almost every player gets better at shooting with experience. I think its a myth too. You guys have played sports where you need a shot. Golf comes to mind played a fair bit. Some days maybe a few days the shot is fukd. Try to adjust. Generally though its a constant improvement

      By the looks of things this team still sucks mid range. Flynns mid range shooting might be the best on the team. Maybe Trent. Our shooting coaches have a helluva lot of work to do.

      Comment


      • #48
        golden wrote: View Post

        Your first comment kind of proves the point. There seems to be this general acceptance that "Toronto fixes shooters" more than other organizations. I'd love to truly believe we have that competitive advantage, but I don't see any hard evidence that it's true. I mean even a great success story like Powell got off to a nice start in year 1 and then sucked for 2 whole seasons, before improving again for good. Was that Norm, or was that Toronto's vaunted shooter development system? Great question.

        Not gonna argue that we had great success in the Casey era developing late-round and un-drafted picks into rotation players punching above their expected weights. That's definitely true. But the concept that we "fix shooters" seems more like fancy than fact.
        Agreed. I think what sets Toronto apart from others is that the front office is patient and gives guys more time and opportunity than a lot of other places (where if you don't show something straightaway/year 1, then they basically move on). They will take a guy like Fred and stash him on the GLeague team for 95% of his first year and ease him into a role for year 3, for example. There is definitely a perception in NBA-land (media, players, college coaches) that Toronto does a really good job developing players, so there must be something to it.

        Comment


        • #49
          slaw wrote: View Post
          How do you determine whether a team/organization has developed a guy's shooting as opposed to a player doing it himself? What constitutes 'success'? Pointing out one or two players that improved their shooting at the NBA level and concluding the organization deserves credit for that seems pretty wild to me. Like, Brissett. Indy developed a multi-year player pro in weeks? Right. More likely he just got a chance to show what he could do in a system that suited him.

          The biggest difference I see with certain organizations (Toronto included) is that they are willing to give young guys time and they have used their minor league system better than other teams. No team is ever going to hit 100% success but if you bring 5 or 6 projects annually and you hit on even 1 who turns into a rotation player for you in a year, you are probably way ahead of the game.
          Yeah you're second paragraph is bang on. We really provide opportunities for our younger players to develop. The coaches are committed and the organization values its G-league team and uses it wisely. Since bruno, it seems we focus on getting players that are hard working and determined to improve. That helps too of course, it might be the most important factor in the equation, but if there isnt time for some of the young guys to play, the G-league is there to get guys on the floor and get them the reos they need to improve.

          I look at the celtics, with all those pics, yeah sure they got tatum and brown, but if you werent one of those guys you got lost in the shuffle. It maybe one of the worst places to be drafted if you needed seasoning and development time over the 5+ seasons. I swear if the raps had gotten some of those guys, like ojeleye or rozier and others i dont recall, they might have more promising careers then they do right now. I think the celtics really wasted most of those pics, not really caring about the players specifically while Ainge rotated through PGs and bigs.

          Comment


          • #50
            JawsGT wrote: View Post

            Yeah you're second paragraph is bang on. We really provide opportunities for our younger players to develop. The coaches are committed and the organization values its G-league team and uses it wisely. Since bruno, it seems we focus on getting players that are hard working and determined to improve. That helps too of course, it might be the most important factor in the equation, but if there isnt time for some of the young guys to play, the G-league is there to get guys on the floor and get them the reos they need to improve.

            I look at the celtics, with all those pics, yeah sure they got tatum and brown, but if you werent one of those guys you got lost in the shuffle. It maybe one of the worst places to be drafted if you needed seasoning and development time over the 5+ seasons. I swear if the raps had gotten some of those guys, like ojeleye or rozier and others i dont recall, they might have more promising careers then they do right now. I think the celtics really wasted most of those pics, not really caring about the players specifically while Ainge rotated through PGs and bigs.
            Celtics developed Rozier just fine, but they didn't want to pay him because they had to pay Kyrie and Hayward. He's one of the best shot-creators in the NBA. Ojeleye is the 37th overall pick and is an NBA rotation player. He beat the odds.

            I do get your point, but using the Celtics might be the worst possible example. Pritchard, Grant Williams, Robert Williams, Theis, Ojeleye, Tatum, Brown and Smart are all internally developed players on last year's Celtics squad. That's 8 rotation players at ~1000 minutes or more developed internally. That's outstanding.

            Comment


            • #51
              Every team will have developing strategies on a bunch of different areas (shooting, defence, off ball movement etc), but at the end of the day it will be mostly about the player. I think the raps have had some success there, but also some duds, like every other team.

              Right now they seem to be betting on being able to develop offence because all they've been getting is defence- first guys. We'll see if it pans out, but I'd personally like to see things balanced out a little bit with a natural scorer next draft.
              2019 NBA Champions. Glad to have doubted the doubters.

              Comment


              • #52
                I think the Raps development success is more about selecting guys with work ethic and love for basketball. As many of you noted every team has shooting specialists to help players out, but it's the players mindset that really matters if they'll develop or not, and the Raptors have a knack for getting guys that will put in the work. That's why a lot of our surprising picks ended up being steals, and the guys we passed on flamed out.

                Comment


                • #53
                  golden wrote: View Post

                  OG shot over 40% from 3 in his first year of college. He wasn't a bad shooter, so I don't think the team can claim success, like Powell, for example. Pascal isn't a success story yet... still up and down.

                  Regardless, I don't think there is any evidence that the Raptors are better at developing shooting than any other organization. There are lots of examples around the league... just quickly going down a list, mostly in the east:

                  Celtics: Jaylen Brown, Rozier
                  Knicks: Barrett
                  Sixers: Embiid, Korkmaz
                  Hornets: Lamelo Ball
                  Pelicans: Lonzo Ball
                  Pacers: Oladipio, Brissett (who we couldn't develop)
                  Bucks: Lopez

                  That's pretty much off the top of my head and you could probably find 2-3 guys on every team to put in the category of guys who developed as shooters.
                  OG shot over 40% from three on less than 30 total attempts (less than one a game). He had no history as a shooter and his free throw success rate (or lack thereof) was way more reason to be concerned about the shooting.
                  twitter.com/dhackett1565

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    For a guy with centre length Banton can really get downhill eh?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      SkywalkerAC wrote: View Post
                      For a guy with centre length Banton can really get downhill eh?
                      Apparently he's rangy (won't make sense unless you're watching the broadcast)

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Ebonhawke wrote: View Post

                        Apparently he's rangy (won't make sense unless you're watching the broadcast)
                        That was a great call all game. The guys were having fun with a meaningless and frankly awful game.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Maury wrote: View Post

                          That was a great call all game. The guys were having fun with a meaningless and frankly awful game.
                          I was quite upset the only Raptors summer league game I had time to watch the whole thing was that game. Turned it off in the 2nd quarter and started reading a book, it was that bad.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Dalano sounds like the Drake SNL parody of a black Torontonian. lol.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              golden wrote: View Post

                              Celtics developed Rozier just fine, but they didn't want to pay him because they had to pay Kyrie and Hayward. He's one of the best shot-creators in the NBA. Ojeleye is the 37th overall pick and is an NBA rotation player. He beat the odds.

                              I do get your point, but using the Celtics might be the worst possible example. Pritchard, Grant Williams, Robert Williams, Theis, Ojeleye, Tatum, Brown and Smart are all internally developed players on last year's Celtics squad. That's 8 rotation players at ~1000 minutes or more developed internally. That's outstanding.
                              Tatum is a Drew Hanlen guy.
                              And he's already skilled even at the college level.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X