Everything 2023 Draft

[G____Deane]

It's going to be interesting to see how much of Toronto's drafting philosophy changes with a new coach. Will they stick to their guns of drafting strong defenders whom they hope to teach shooting to or would they lean towards guys like Keyonte George and Nick Smith Jr. that are known more as scorers?

This team needs scorers, period. Even with our emphasis on D, we were pretty much shat there too; no identity in Raptor land.

"Toronto made 737 more field-goal attempts than its opponents, more than double the next closest team, at plus-344, but this overwhelming advantage didn't matter because it was also third-worst in effective field-goal percentage on offense and second-worst on defense."

How can a Coaching system generate THAT many more offensive chances than ANY OTHER TEAM with so little results. Sooooo many of those were wide open. When we say this team needs shooting, we mean anyone that can hit the ocean with a beach ball. OG was the only player on the team that even exceeded the league average on 3's.

This is a horrible shooting team and the D doesn't just not make up for it, it's not even very good. And a new Coach isn't going to magically turn around poor shooters and make everyone shoot 40% from 3.

This roster is soooooo flawed.

[DanH]

This team needs scorers, period. Even with our emphasis on D, we were pretty much shat there too; no identity in Raptor land.

"Toronto made 737 more field-goal attempts than its opponents, more than double the next closest team, at plus-344, but this overwhelming advantage didn't matter because it was also third-worst in effective field-goal percentage on offense and second-worst on defense."

How can a Coaching system generate THAT many more offensive chances than ANY OTHER TEAM with so little results. Sooooo many of those were wide open. When we say this team needs shooting, we mean anyone that can hit the ocean with a beach ball. OG was the only player on the team that even exceeded the league average on 3's.

This is a horrible shooting team and the D doesn't just not make up for it, it's not even very good. And a new Coach isn't going to magically turn around poor shooters and make everyone shoot 40% from 3.

This roster is soooooo flawed.

I mean, we've covered this multiple times though. The offensive system was low risk, to minimize turnovers and maximize offensive rebounding while generating lower quality shots that would naturally lead to lower efficiency from basically everyone (the exception late in the season being Jak in his Fred PnR actions, which Fred saw a bit of an uptick in efficiency on as well though mostly just a big boost to his assist numbers). The defensive system was designed to generate turnovers to be able to get out and run and force other teams to take the ball away from their primary guys and have their secondary and teritary creators carry the load, and the tradeoff is the high quality looks they did give up when the offence did break through the swarming defence.

Reality is we were above average in both offence and defence.

[planetmars]

Not really a fan. He's a senior (I think) and still putting up pretty mediocre stats.

Any number of rookie or sophomore guards could do the same if you gave them a couple of extra years in their college programs.

Yeah he's a 4 year senior. It's why he's likely getting drafted in the mid/low 20's. But he's exactly what we need in terms of skillset. And if we're looking for help immediately, then why not?

I think we could trade down and get 2 picks. Use the other pick for more of a project.

I find this draft to be flatter than most though. I don't really think there are that many special players from the 10-15 range that we can't miss on. But of course I can be wrong.

[golden]

This team needs scorers, period. Even with our emphasis on D, we were pretty much shat there too; no identity in Raptor land.

"Toronto made 737 more field-goal attempts than its opponents, more than double the next closest team, at plus-344, but this overwhelming advantage didn't matter because it was also third-worst in effective field-goal percentage on offense and second-worst on defense."

How can a Coaching system generate THAT many more offensive chances than ANY OTHER TEAM with so little results. Sooooo many of those were wide open. When we say this team needs shooting, we mean anyone that can hit the ocean with a beach ball. OG was the only player on the team that even exceeded the league average on 3's.

This is a horrible shooting team and the D doesn't just not make up for it, it's not even very good. And a new Coach isn't going to magically turn around poor shooters and make everyone shoot 40% from 3.

This roster is soooooo flawed.

Our offense didn’t generate rhythm 3s, from motion and timing. It’s not a shooter friendly system. You have to read and react when Fred gets trapped like a cornered rat and be ready for the bailout pass. I don’t care if it’s wide open… the timing is bad for shooter’s rhythm.

Having said that… a truly “wide open” shot is rare in the NBA. The ability of physically gifted NBA uber athletes to close distance and contest shots is insane. Something we cannot fully appreciate from the TV vantage point. Synergy data doesn’t capture it either.

[DanH]

Our offense didn’t generate rhythm 3s, from motion and timing. It’s not a shooter friendly system. You have to read and react when Fred gets trapped like a cornered rat and be ready for the bailout pass. I don’t care if it’s wide open… the timing is bad for shooter’s rhythm.

Having said that… a truly “wide open” shot is rare in the NBA. The ability of physically gifted NBA uber athletes to close distance and contest shots is insane. Something we cannot fully appreciate from the TV vantage point. Synergy data doesn’t capture it either.

Synergy sure captures something.

The league as a whole shot 29% on over 8000 "contested" threes.

The league shot 35% on 30000 "open" threes.

The league shot 39% on 40000 "wide open" threes.

Are there some wide open threes tougher than the open ones or contested ones? Sure. But on average there are clear differences in the quality of shot based on those measures.

[blackjitsu]

Pretty in depth pod about the Raps and OKC draft picks. Most of it is about OKC since they have 3 picks. All the Raps stuff is at the start.

Nothing new, but they go into depth about the Raps needs: Shooting, half court offense initiators, and point of attack defenders.

The numbers are bleak (as has been mentioned on this thread). A lot is needed, but the Raps only have 1 draft pick. These guys don't think that the draft will help in the short term.

The only "shooter," they seem to value is OG. From my perspective, not sure they value Freddie.

Names they mentioned:

Cason Wallace (doesn't solve offense issues)
Bryce Sensabaugh
Keyonte George
Jett Howard
Gradey Dick
Max Lewis
Jordan Hawkins
Kobe Bufkin

Lots of guys mentioned, a lot of them have been mentioned here.

[The Great One]

Pretty in depth pod about the Raps and OKC draft picks. Most of it is about OKC since they have 3 picks. All the Raps stuff is at the start.

Nothing new, but they go into depth about the Raps needs: Shooting, half court offense initiators, and point of attack defenders.

The numbers are bleak (as has been mentioned on this thread). A lot is needed, but the Raps only have 1 draft pick. These guys don't think that the draft will help in the short term.

The only "shooter," they seem to value is OG. From my perspective, not sure they value Freddie.

Names they mentioned:

Cason Wallace (doesn't solve offense issues)
Bryce Sensabaugh
Keyonte George
Jett Howard
Gradey Dick
Max Lewis
Jordan Hawkins
Kobe Bufkin

Lots of guys mentioned, a lot of them have been mentioned here.

Well four of the guys that I like are on that list. Bufkin, Howard, Hawkins and George.

[golden]

Synergy sure captures something.

The league as a whole shot 29% on over 8000 "contested" threes.

The league shot 35% on 30000 "open" threes.

The league shot 39% on 40000 "wide open" threes.

Are there some wide open threes tougher than the open ones or contested ones? Sure. But on average there are clear differences in the quality of shot based on those measures.

Sure, but does the definition of "wide open" account for the forward momentum of a long, athletic defender, with an arm outstretched? Or is it just an overhead snapshot at the exact moment in time when the ball was released, and simply the X-Y linear distance between the ball and closest body part of the defender, as measured by a camera? I could be wrong, but I suspect the latter. In that case, a defender could be falling away from the shooter or moving towards the shooter, but both of those shots would be recorded exactly the same.... and we know that's obviously completely wrong context. And how do you even begin to capture rhythm? And on-target passes into the shooting pocket, in motion?

[Yuri Gagarin]

I mean, we've covered this multiple times though. The offensive system was low risk, to minimize turnovers and maximize offensive rebounding while generating lower quality shots that would naturally lead to lower efficiency from basically everyone (the exception late in the season being Jak in his Fred PnR actions, which Fred saw a bit of an uptick in efficiency on as well though mostly just a big boost to his assist numbers). The defensive system was designed to generate turnovers to be able to get out and run and force other teams to take the ball away from their primary guys and have their secondary and teritary creators carry the load, and the tradeoff is the high quality looks they did give up when the offence did break through the swarming defence.

Reality is we were above average in both offence and defence.

Sorry Dan this is a bunch of gobbleygook. The starting 5 had questions about their offence/shooting when they were drafted and still do. Team can’t shoot its clear as day

[DanH]

Sure, but does the definition of "wide open" account for the forward momentum of a long, athletic defender, with an arm outstretched? Or is it just an overhead snapshot at the exact moment in time when the ball was released, and simply the X-Y linear distance between the ball and closest body part of the defender, as measured by a camera? I could be wrong, but I suspect the latter. In that case, a defender could be falling away from the shooter or moving towards the shooter, but both of those shots would be recorded exactly the same.... and we know that's obviously completely wrong context. And how do you even begin to capture rhythm? And on-target passes into the shooting pocket, in motion?

Uhh, all good questions and largely irrelevant. Whatever it is measuring, most of the time that measure correlates strongly to whatever they define as wide open being drained a heck of a lot more than whatever they call open which is drained a heck of a lot more than whatever they call contested.

You can critique what you call it all you like - the shots that fall into those categories have a clear correlation with the success rates of those shots (in massive league wide samples), which means they are measuring something real about the differences in those shots.

[DanH]

Sorry Dan this is a bunch of gobbleygook. The starting 5 had questions about their offence/shooting when they were drafted and still do. Team can’t shoot its clear as day

OK? Doesn't change the system they ran that everybody and their mother has commented on over the past few years with the Raptors sacrificing shot quality to game the possession count system, with the thought being that the extra possessions are worth more than whatever they lose in efficiency. A big part of that math is likely the belief that the shooting talent on the team puts a ceiling on that efficiency, which is fair, but it still means that ceiling is a good ways above their near-worst efficiencies on the year.

[The Great One]

Yep. Bufkin is #1 on my list now.

https://twitter.com/hoopgoose/status...RQm9Eo4Kw&s=19

[Yuri Gagarin]

OK? Doesn't change the system they ran that everybody and their mother has commented on over the past few years with the Raptors sacrificing shot quality to game the possession count system, with the thought being that the extra possessions are worth more than whatever they lose in efficiency. A big part of that math is likely the belief that the shooting talent on the team puts a ceiling on that efficiency, which is fair, but it still means that ceiling is a good ways above their near-worst efficiencies on the year.

There will be a new system with a new coach but regardless Masai said the first order of business is get shooting. Hes not looking for a system to possibly improve the teams shooting. As mentioned just OG shooting above league avg (at low volume) is a recipe for mediocrity at best. I mentioned to you last summer teams that shoot poorly rarely make it into the playoffs and you said it worked last time so it should work again. Masai sees it not sure why you keep denying it

[LJ2]

This team needs scorers, period. Even with our emphasis on D, we were pretty much shat there too; no identity in Raptor land.

"Toronto made 737 more field-goal attempts than its opponents, more than double the next closest team, at plus-344, but this overwhelming advantage didn't matter because it was also third-worst in effective field-goal percentage on offense and second-worst on defense."

How can a Coaching system generate THAT many more offensive chances than ANY OTHER TEAM with so little results. Sooooo many of those were wide open. When we say this team needs shooting, we mean anyone that can hit the ocean with a beach ball. OG was the only player on the team that even exceeded the league average on 3's.

This is a horrible shooting team and the D doesn't just not make up for it, it's not even very good. And a new Coach isn't going to magically turn around poor shooters and make everyone shoot 40% from 3.

This roster is soooooo flawed.

It becomes a bit of the chicken or the egg question. If we don't have the right players then do we generate the extra possessions? I mean we could get players that score and give up way more on the other end in which case shooting a better % is irrelevant.

[G____Deane]

I mean, we've covered this multiple times though. The offensive system was low risk, to minimize turnovers and maximize offensive rebounding while generating lower quality shots that would naturally lead to lower efficiency from basically everyone (the exception late in the season being Jak in his Fred PnR actions, which Fred saw a bit of an uptick in efficiency on as well though mostly just a big boost to his assist numbers). The defensive system was designed to generate turnovers to be able to get out and run and force other teams to take the ball away from their primary guys and have their secondary and teritary creators carry the load, and the tradeoff is the high quality looks they did give up when the offence did break through the swarming defence.

Reality is we were above average in both offence and defence.

This just doesn't make sense to me. When you maximize offensive rebounds, that automatically results in a certain percentage of higher quality shots, by virtue of where offensive rebounds are controlled, not lower. Offensive rebounds generate considerably higher efficiency. They didn't just run up the floor and jack up quick low percentage shots to boost their sheer numbers!

When you have more than double the next closest team in field goal attempts (not just more than any other team which would be notable in itself) but more than double the next team, the only way not to outscore the majority of teams is to be massively inefficient. . Hey, we were; third-worst in effective field-goal percentage.

Add to that, the team shot for shat from 3, OG being the single and only player that was ever league average.

It's bizarre to even attempt to defend those stats. The team, especially Fred due to the sheer number of shots he jacks up, have to up their efficiency. We need shooters....