Are Raptors Creating A New Trend?

[golden]

Well, I mean the old four factors includes turnovers and OREBs for a reason.... not sure this is new thinking in terms of the Raptors.

Sure, but of those 4 factors, teams usually make eFG% (i.e. getting high percentage shots & now 3-pt shooting) the priority. Some teams/players (*cough* Harden/Trae) focus on getting to the FT line. But I don't know if a team has put such an emphasis on generating turnovers and grabbing OREBs and building a roster with players who have the physical tools and mindset to execute.

[KeonClark]

Sure, but of those 4 factors, teams usually make eFG% (i.e. getting high percentage shots & now 3-pt shooting) the priority. Some teams/players (*cough* Harden/Trae) focus on getting to the FT line. But I don't know if a team has put such an emphasis on generating turnovers and grabbing OREBs and building a roster with players who have the physical tools and mindset to execute.

Which just seems insane to me that it took this long. Possession is 9/10th of the law. Best defense is a good offense. You can't get scored on when you have the ball. Yada yada.

It's been the rule of thumb in football and hockey for awhile now, and it to me, that type of defense and aggressive play has way less variance than the Moreyball "just keep shooting 3s!!!" model. Eventually others will probably catch on, but then again, this is the league that took over 30 years to figure out 35% from 3 > 45% from 2

[LJ2]

Sure, but of those 4 factors, teams usually make eFG% (i.e. getting high percentage shots & now 3-pt shooting) the priority. Some teams/players (*cough* Harden/Trae) focus on getting to the FT line. But I don't know if a team has put such an emphasis on generating turnovers and grabbing OREBs and building a roster with players who have the physical tools and mindset to execute.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. The entire Raptors approach seems focused on generating additional shots as a way to get an advantage. My goodness once our non shooters learn to shoot we will lay waste to the NBA. Okay I might be getting carried away....but I'm excited.

[inthepaint]

Good thread.

Adjusting your defence to actually try to force turnovers only works on well grounded defences (as the raps defence this year). The reason is that when you're actually actively trying to get the opponent to fumble the ball (as opposed just focusing on making their path to the basket more difficult), you're taking a risk (often referred to as "gambling"), that when you don't get the steal/turnover, it opens the path to your basket. The thing is the raps have an intricate, physically demanding, positionless defensive rotation of guys on any given possession that typically closes the door for that, with fast, lengthy help defenders, if the steal doesn't happen.

Doesn't work with a bunch of 32+ year old players taking breaks on D, but it works with this group.

[golden]

Which just seems insane to me that it took this long. Possession is 9/10th of the law. Best defense is a good offense. You can't get scored on when you have the ball. Yada yada.

It's been the rule of thumb in football and hockey for awhile now, and it to me, that type of defense and aggressive play has way less variance than the Moreyball "just keep shooting 3s!!!" model. Eventually others will probably catch on, but then again, this is the league that took over 30 years to figure out 35% from 3 > 45% from 2

The question is if it's a sustainable strategy.... because there is an potential flaw on largely relying on turnovers and OREBs as a way for your team to win in the margins: the success of that approach can be largely out of your control. If the opposition coach decides to make taking care of the ball, boxing out, gang rebounding and getting back in transition a top priority, then those are all coachable problems that can be corrected.

You can already see this approach catching teams off guard in the regular season, but if you have to play the same team back-to-back, they'll remember how they got punched in the mouth and play harder & smarter the next time. Playoffs could really expose that strategy, so you still need super-talented guys who can get buckets (i.e. eFG%) in the half-court.

[MixxAOR]

Well if Raptors are able to control defensive rebounds and keep their own turnovers in check then with their defense they will have a chance in every game. FG% and FTA depends on our talent level but they can affect opposing team's FG% and FTA. Can they shut down opposing teams consistenly? That's the question.

[LJ2]

Our own FG% and turnovers has been a big key as well.. We had 16 more shots opening night against the Wiz and somehow lost that one. Crappy FG% and 19 turnovers that game.

[slaw]

The question is if it's a sustainable strategy.... because there is an potential flaw on largely relying on turnovers and OREBs as a way for your team to win in the margins: the success of that approach can be largely out of your control. If the opposition coach decides to make taking care of the ball, boxing out, gang rebounding and getting back in transition a top priority, then those are all coachable problems that can be corrected.

You can already see this approach catching teams off guard in the regular season, but if you have to play the same team back-to-back, they'll remember how they got punched in the mouth and play harder & smarter the next time. Playoffs could really expose that strategy, so you still need super-talented guys who can get buckets (i.e. eFG%) in the half-court.

Raps turned teams over a lot the last 2 seasons (1 and 2 and TOV%). Even in the championship year they were 9th, so it's definitely a key defensive value for Nurse.

Really tough to say with the OREB%. It hasn't necessarily been a point of emphasis the last couple seasons. Whether that's changed is hard to say based on 8 games. It could also be it's just a function of wanting these kinds of players for 75 other reasons and one of the unintended consequences or ancillary benefits being more offensive rebounds.

I just don't agree with the position being posited here (as I understand it) that there's any major philosophical change to rely on those facets of the game over others or that they are creating a team with that being the end game.

[DanH]

I don't know that it's a new philosophy. It might be the first time a team has been able to accomplish it to this degree though.

[LJ2]

I don't know that it's a new philosophy. It might be the first time a team has been able to accomplish it to this degree though.

Maybe not new, but I don't think it's received the attention or discussion it deserves on the forums. You can draw a lot of ideas from the teams game strategy, to how/why minutes are delegated to certain players to potential draft or free agent targets. It's only been 8 games so a small sample but the numbers, as basic as the ones I've looked at are, seem to support it. It's something I'll be keeping an eye on.

[MixxAOR]

Speaking of what's sustainable or not. Is elite half-court offense historically an indicator of winning in playoffs?

[Primer]

Speaking of what's sustainable or not. Is elite half-court offense historically an indicator of winning in playoffs?

I think with the new defensive rules half-court offense isn't as potent. So if refs call the playoff games like they are now you won't need elite half-court offense.

[MixxAOR]

Just realized once our FG% increases our OREB will naturally drop lol

[KeonClark]

Just realized once our FG% increases our OREB will naturally drop lol

Yeah, that's what people fail to realize is there is a strong correlation between the teams at the top of O reb and at the bottom of fg%

[LJ2]

Just realized once our FG% increases our OREB will naturally drop lol

Yes, and that's a really good thing. OREB is just one way to create additional shot attempts so not worried it will take away from their strategy (if that is their strategy)