Everything Derozan

[The Great One]

I never compared DeMar to AI btw. I just mentioned AI because he's a volume scorer just like DeMar. And in today's game, for whatever reason, if you're a volume scorer, you're poison.

AI in his prime, when he was in Philly takes 30-35 shots a game specially the year where he won the MVP. I'm not exaggerating.

[KeonClark]

I never compared DeMar to AI btw. I just mentioned AI because he's a volume scorer just like DeMar. And in today's game, for whatever reason, if you're a volume scorer, you're poison.

AI in his prime, when he was in Philly takes 30-35 shots a game specially the year where he won the MVP. I'm not exaggerating.

AI was incredible. Dragged the 2nd worst supporting cast of this millennium to the finals. First was Lebron's crew in his first cavs stint. Fuck advanced stats.

[DanH]

I never compared DeMar to AI btw. I just mentioned AI because he's a volume scorer just like DeMar. And in today's game, for whatever reason, if you're a volume scorer, you're poison.

AI in his prime, when he was in Philly takes 30-35 shots a game specially the year where he won the MVP. I'm not exaggerating.

AI peaked at 28 shots per game. And played 44 minutes a game that year.

That said, your point suggests that AI would be valued less now because DeRozan is not valued as highly as you think he should be. But Iverson, for all his inefficiency, still posted dramatically better advanced impact numbers than DeMar ever has, in spite of grading out about the same or worse in terms of production due to his low efficiency, and as such I expect he'd still be considered an MVP candidate (depending on his team's success) based on that.

Volume scorers who contribute little else are certainly valued less now than they were. Game bending scorers who post awesome impact numbers are pretty universally valued though, so the Iverson point isn't really true, and doesn't really apply to DeMar.

[tDotted]

AI peaked at 28 shots per game. And played 44 minutes a game that year.

That said, your point suggests that AI would be valued less now because DeRozan is not valued as highly as you think he should be. But Iverson, for all his inefficiency, still posted dramatically better advanced impact numbers than DeMar ever has, in spite of grading out about the same or worse in terms of production due to his low efficiency, and as such I expect he'd still be considered an MVP candidate (depending on his team's success) based on that.

Volume scorers who contribute little else are certainly valued less now than they were. Game bending scorers who post awesome impact numbers are pretty universally valued though, so the Iverson point isn't really true, and doesn't really apply to DeMar.

Iverson never played with someone like Lowry who carries the bulk of the offensive impact for the team though. DeMar's offensive impact was pretty good-great when Lowry was out with injury.

[MixxAOR]

Demar is kinda similar to Stackhouse no?

[golden]

Demar is kinda similar to Stackhouse no?

Early on, DeMar's stats were eerily similar right across the board, but he has blown by Stackhouse in terms of efficiency (i.e. ORTG 113) the last few regular seasons. Stackhouse had similar high usage, but he never got above 106 ORTG his whole career. That's a pretty big difference. But that's regular season.

The real problem is that DeMar's ORTG falls off a cliff in the playoffs (ORTG = 96, 96, 104), the last 3 post-seasons. That's horrific to just meh. And he doesn't make up for it with defense (DRTG = 114, 110, 111). He's still got a lot of #ProveEm'ing to do in the playoffs.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Early on, DeMar's stats were eerily similar right across the board, but he has blown by Stackhouse in terms of efficiency (i.e. ORTG 113) the last few regular seasons. Stackhouse had similar high usage, but he never got above 106 ORTG his whole career. That's a pretty big difference. But that's regular season.

The real problem is that DeMar's ORTG falls off a cliff in the playoffs (ORTG = 96, 96, 104), the last 3 post-seasons. That's horrific to just meh. And he doesn't make up for it with defense (DRTG = 114, 110, 111). He's still got a lot of #ProveEm'ing to do in the playoffs.

He did have a 113 oRTG in his first trip to the playoffs. It's really weird to me how the only year DeMar and Lowry both played well in the playoffs was the first time they went there (other than Game 1, DeMar was excellent against the Nets). Every other time, they've played way worse than they did in the regular season.

The only explanation I can think of is that it was a combination of the Nets being a poor defensive team (20th) and also the Raptors being expected to lose. The underdog status might have taken some pressure off of them. In our other first round series we've been the favourite, and in 2015 and 2016 we played against elite defenses (Washington was 5th and Indiana was 3rd).

Not really an excuse though, they need to figure out how to step the fuck up in the playoffs and maintain or preferably raise their level of play. If they don't do that, we have no chance of ever even threatening the Cavs, and teams like Boston and Washington will beat us if they no-show series against them.

[Axel]

I really don't buy this argument that this is purely media bias and that guys like AI would be subject to the same treatment.

If you look at the stats, Demar's best season in WinShares is 9.9, the 2015-2016 season where he had 23.5 PPG and 4.5 RPG in 78 games. If you look at all the players who had 20+ PPG and 4+ RPG since 1979-1980 (the 3 point era), then his 9.9 WS still ranks outside the top 300. His WS ranks him with guys like 24 yr old Peja Stojakovic and 25 yr old Kemba Walker. The older guys who would be comparable "non-3 point scorers" - Dominique at 31, WS of 11.4, Amare at 24, WS of 11.2, Dr J at 31, WS of 13.3, Clyde Drexler at 29, WS of 12.8 - all had much higher WS, so in addition to an eye test which some may call media bias, there is obviously some statistical evidence as well.

I think the fact is simply that Demar isn't as good as some want him to be and his lack of 3 point shot AND defence is a very real limitation on his value to a basketball team. Sure, the rankings are BS to some degree but they are also based on reality.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

I really don't buy this argument that this is purely media bias and that guys like AI would be subject to the same treatment.

If you look at the stats, Demar's best season in WinShares is 9.9, the 2015-2016 season where he had 23.5 PPG and 4.5 RPG in 78 games. If you look at all the players who had 20+ PPG and 4+ RPG since 1979-1980 (the 3 point era), then his 9.9 WS still ranks outside the top 300. His WS ranks him with guys like 24 yr old Peja Stojakovic and 25 yr old Kemba Walker. The older guys who would be comparable "non-3 point scorers" - Dominique at 31, WS of 11.4, Amare at 24, WS of 11.2, Dr J at 31, WS of 13.3, Clyde Drexler at 29, WS of 12.8 - all had much higher WS, so in addition to an eye test which some may call media bias, there is obviously some statistical evidence as well.

I think the fact is simply that Demar isn't as good as some want him to be and his lack of 3 point shot AND defence is a very real limitation on his value to a basketball team. Sure, the rankings are BS to some degree but they are also based on reality.

I don't think anyone's made that argument. Comparing him to Peja at 24 or Kemba isn't exactly a negative for him either. Peja was definitely a top 30 player in 2001-02, and he was one of the main weapons for a team that should've been in the NBA Finals if not for some very questionable officiating. Kemba is one of the best guards in the east right now.

Those other guys you've compared him to were top 10-15 players when they were in the league, so him being somewhat worse than them is obvious. The issue people have is him being ranked in the 40s when he should clearly be around 25-30 or so.

[Axel]

I don't think anyone's made that argument. Comparing him to Peja at 24 or Kemba isn't exactly a negative for him either. Peja was definitely a top 30 player in 2001-02, and he was one of the main weapons for a team that should've been in the NBA Finals if not for some very questionable officiating. Kemba is one of the best guards in the east right now.

Those other guys you've compared him to were top 10-15 players when they were in the league, so him being somewhat worse than them is obvious. The issue people have is him being ranked in the 40s when he should clearly be around 25-30 or so.

The argument of media bias has absolutely been made and, as the stats show, a player can score without a three point shot and still grade out better. Demar simply doesn't do enough of those other things to overcome his shot limitations. If he did, then he wouldn't likely be ranked below those other players for the upcoming season. Three point shooting and defence matters.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

The argument of media bias has absolutely been made and, as the stats show, a player can score without a three point shot and still grade out better. Demar simply doesn't do enough of those other things to overcome his shot limitations. If he did, then he wouldn't likely be ranked below those other players for the upcoming season. Three point shooting and defence matters.

I'm not sure what you're trying to get across. What you just said is why I have someone like Hayward or Klay Thompson ranked ahead of DeMar. Because they carry large roles as well but also are more efficient and play better D.

But someone like Middleton shouldn't be ranked ahead of DeRozan. Simply just not a better player.

It's getting to a point now where the ability to score has actually become undervalued in terms of rating an individual player. You might argue that a 3+D player could fit in on more teams than DeRozan because of their skillset, but that doesn't make them a better player lol.

[golden]

He did have a 113 oRTG in his first trip to the playoffs. It's really weird to me how the only year DeMar and Lowry both played well in the playoffs was the first time they went there (other than Game 1, DeMar was excellent against the Nets). Every other time, they've played way worse than they did in the regular season.

The only explanation I can think of is that it was a combination of the Nets being a poor defensive team (20th) and also the Raptors being expected to lose. The underdog status might have taken some pressure off of them. In our other first round series we've been the favourite, and in 2015 and 2016 we played against elite defenses (Washington was 5th and Indiana was 3rd).

Not really an excuse though, they need to figure out how to step the fuck up in the playoffs and maintain or preferably raise their level of play. If they don't do that, we have no chance of ever even threatening the Cavs, and teams like Boston and Washington will beat us if they no-show series against them.

It's just the result of opposition game-planning and adjustments. Raps caught everybody by surprise that first season and right on into the playoffs against the Nets. The book has been out on our offense since the Wizards series and Casey/Lowry/DD have simply doubled down on the style of play.... modern NBA be damned. The last 2 playoffs, the defense has carried us through.

[tDotted]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get across. What you just said is why I have someone like Hayward or Klay Thompson ranked ahead of DeMar. Because they carry large roles as well but also are more efficient and play better D.

But someone like Middleton shouldn't be ranked ahead of DeRozan. Simply just not a better player.

It's getting to a point now where the ability to score has actually become undervalued in terms of rating an individual player. You might argue that a 3+D player could fit in on more teams than DeRozan because of their skillset, but that doesn't make them a better player lol.

So many "analysts" can't grasp this.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

So many "analysts" can't grasp this.

Yeah it's the problem I have. Are we talking about who can fit better and make marginal contributions on more teams? Well yeah, DeRozan's not going to win that battle. DeRozan's in the high usage group of star players who are expected to produce big on a nightly basis for their teams. Obviously if you have multiple players in that group who are better than DeRozan on your team, it makes more sense to have a role player next to them than him. However in terms of who is more capable and skilled as a basketball player, that would be DeRozan.

People have gotten so obsessed with certain advanced stats that they can't think or rationalize clearly (I say this as someone who is a huge proponent of using advanced stats to analyze the game). At the end of the day, what are we really ranking? Are we ranking the best players in the league, or the guys who fit best on more teams?

[MixxAOR]

It's meta in NBA right now.