Everything Derozan

[white men can't jump]

balls. so we are into hypothetical futures and realities now? you know if he had of played extremely well we could have swept all the way to the finals. lets at least keep the argument to things that are real

How about this for real.

PER: 14.2
TS%: .462%
eFG%: .399%
FG%/3%: .394%/.154%
AST%: 14.4 % (vs 20.8 reg season)
FT rate: .309 (vs .474 reg season)
USG: 30.9 %

The only stat there that looks like a max player stat is usage...but no one in their right mind would give that usage to a player putting up the numbers/performance DeMar did for most of the playoffs. Especially a player who is a bad defender. Assists and FTs are supposed to justify giving him that usage, but that fell apart in the playoffs.

DeMar's "market value" this summer has literally everything to do with him being one of the only high-profile free agents in a year where there will be far too much money, and nothing to do with his on court value.

[Barolt]

Ok since Barolt won't do it ... I will.

Last 10 games

23.2 ppg 3.8 reb 2.6 ast 2.2 to

51.7 TS% on 31.4% USG

45.2% fg
85.5 % ft
12.5 % 3s


First 10 games

Do we need to even look it up? I can't separate it on NBA.com.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And this is what bias looks like.

This is taking the numbers and saying that he faced particular types of defenders during the first 10 games that made him struggle, but removing those games because you don't like what that tells you, and just taking the subset of data that agrees with your narrative.

By only going with the last 10 games, you remove every game that Paul George or Hassan Whiteside played in. So you make it look like DeMar didn't struggle, by removing every type of defender he struggled against.

[Miekenstien]

What hypothetical? Demar played so poorly in the first 2 rounds that we very easily could have lost. A player who can't show up for 2 rounds of basketball is not worth that much money. That is what happened, he played badly. No alternate reality necessary to see that.

Demar was lucky that his teammates played well enough to win despite him.

yes we could of, but we didn't. and the fact that we could have lost doesn't mean that what happened after those possibilities didn't happen also didn't happen. demar still finished the playoffs about as well as he could. against the cavs and in the conference final.


we were lucky, the raptors were lucky. he was lucky he was given the time to figure out the playoffs and he did. he grew. he improved. that happened. shake and bake. and demar wasn't lucky, monetarily, he was getting paid anyway by someone.

[Miekenstien]

What, are you suggesting that a player doesn't need to deserve a contract, as long as someone else is willing to give it to them then they deserve it?

what does market value mean to you? when someone says it costs 100 dollars do you walk out of the store with it after paying 50?

[Miekenstien]

DeMar's "market value" this summer has literally everything to do with him being one of the only high-profile free agents in a year where there will be far too much money, and nothing to do with his on court value.

completely disagree

[special1]

never said it erases the first two but his improvement and consistency started during the miami series. and the first round doesn't erase that the other two rounds happened here. this argument is a half full glass with people saying whether it is full or not. truth is i find that the fact that he was able to string a bunch of good and really good games together in the 2nd and third rounds speaks higher than the inconsistency of the first round when he, personally, had a giant amount of pressure.

what stat marks the impact of every shot effecting your chance to earn 100 million dollars? if basketball and sports are about the mental game as much as the physical game, and we all like to point and paint people as mental midgets then that has to be taken into account.

i don't know what demar supporters think about the reasons to not max him. me, a raptors fan, knows you don't let something of value go when you can keep it at market value. that is all this argument is to me. sign him to do with him as you will in the future. the idea that signing him means we are married to demar is completely not true. this is the nba where every interview comes with an obligatory "this is a business". we have a gm who has repeatedly signed, lesser players i might add, to max contracts and traded them away. we have a gm who traded god damned andrea bargaini for a first round pick. any decision masai makes, i am giving him the benefit of the doubt.

team building wise, asset management wise, raptors future wise, signing demar is the right move.

Good post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Axel]

yes we could of, but we didn't. and the fact that we could have lost doesn't mean that what happened after those possibilities didn't happen also didn't happen. demar still finished the playoffs about as well as he could. against the cavs and in the conference final.


we were lucky, the raptors were lucky. he was lucky he was given the time to figure out the playoffs and he did. he grew. he improved. that happened. shake and bake. and demar wasn't lucky, monetarily, he was getting paid anyway by someone.

Guess Luis Scola is getting a big pay day too since we made the ECF and won 56 games with him starting.

Demar finished strong, but even at his best, he wouldn't be a clear cut max guy and the inconsistency of those performances should be a huge factor.

[Miekenstien]

And this is what bias looks like.

This is taking the numbers and saying that he faced particular types of defenders during the first 10 games that made him struggle, but removing those games because you don't like what that tells you, and just taking the subset of data that agrees with your narrative.

By only going with the last 10 games, you remove every game that Paul George or Hassan Whiteside played in. So you make it look like DeMar didn't struggle, by removing every type of defender he struggled against.

i asked to put them both up. pretty sure they break up 10 game stretches all the time in sports. he would have looked extra bad with the other numbers up also.

[Miekenstien]

Guess Luis Scola is getting a big pay day too since we made the ECF and won 56 games with him starting.

now you're being facetious. scola isn't getting paid because he has a low market value. teams won't be willing to spend money on him.

[Axel]

what does market value mean to you? when someone says it costs 100 dollars do you walk out of the store with it after paying 50?

I agree with WMCJ assessment of the market value.

Demar is lucky for the timing of his UFA is all. This summer is the most unusual FA in the history of the sport, an extremely inflated demand with minimal supply. In a couple of years, the market will normalize but Demar's contract will still be huge.

[Axel]

now you're being facetious. scola isn't getting paid because he has a low market value. teams won't be willing to spend money on him.

Of course it's facetious but so is the idea that Demar gets a free pass on 2 rounds of basketball because he played better against the Cavs.

[Barolt]

Hey guys!

Good news. By selective bias, I can prove that our 3pt shooters didn't struggle in the playoffs. Patterson shot 41% against Indiana, Carroll shot 47% against Miami, and Ross shot 35% against Miami.

Clearly, our struggles in the playoffs had nothing to do with our 3pt shooters, because for certain stretches of games they were each good!

[special1]

And this is what bias looks like.

This is taking the numbers and saying that he faced particular types of defenders during the first 10 games that made him struggle, but removing those games because you don't like what that tells you, and just taking the subset of data that agrees with your narrative.

By only going with the last 10 games, you remove every game that Paul George or Hassan Whiteside played in. So you make it look like DeMar didn't struggle, by removing every type of defender he struggled against.

Just like you always do....

I presented the numbers that were available. I doubt they change anyone's minds on which ever side you're on.

So relax. Someone asked for the numbers for the last 10 games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Barolt]

Just like you always do....

I presented the numbers that were available. I doubt they change anyone's minds on which ever side you're on.

So relax. Someone asked for the numbers for the last 10 games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I didn't mean your bias, I meant literally 'selective bias'. As in choosing the statistics that provide a bias to make something look better/worse than it actually is.

[Miekenstien]

Of course it's facetious but so is the idea that Demar gets a free pass on 2 rounds of basketball because he played better against the Cavs.

he played better against the heat. he played great against the cavs. he isn't getting a free pass. the first round happened. everyone saw that. but so did the regular season. he fell back into bad habits when the pressure mounted, then he figured it out and improved. how is the passage of time and the improvement therein so hard to see?

what is a fair penalty for 7 bad games? 1 million? 2 million? ran out of town with spit in his face? where is your line? any number but 25 million? slightly lower than anyone else is willing to pay, just so he knows and remembers paul george?