Everything Derozan

[blackjitsu]

Analyzing Drew League footage is a fools game, but it looks like Demar is moving a lot better than he was in earlier footage from this summer. Whatever that means. Not sure what dunking on a guy allergic to defense means, but it looked nice.

[Quirk]

Because you say so??

Because I would like to have at least 4 significantly above average players on the team, and DeRozon is a league average player, this unavoidably means that he should not be higher than 5th on the depth chart, no doubt Team USA feels the same way.

[Quirk]

I disagree with your argument here, but I do want to point out a small area where I do agree with you.

DeMar wouldn't need to have a reduced usage, minutes AND salary. In my mind, his ideal use is as a sixth man, running the offence off the bench - would have a strength and skill advantage there, perhaps enough to have him take better shots, and would not have to carry any sort of real defensive load. And his improved playmaking skills could blossom picking apart bench defences.

But that does mean a decrease in minutes to a bit under 30, and certainly a much smaller salary than he currently projects to. His usage though, could stay very high.

Why would you pay your sixth man anything more than your 5th highest salary? And certainly if your 6th man is demanding that salary, one that is above his relative productivity on the team, he can not also claim to be signing for loyalty, love of the city, etc.

[DanH]

6th man making more than the 5th highest salary is not that uncommon.

But in any case, my argument was not that he had to be paid more or less than the 5th highest salary. It was that your assertion that DD needs to be 5th or lower in pay, minutes AND usage doesn't line up. 6th men often carry very high usages, and decent minutes (high 20's to 30), while being reasonably paid (3rd to 5th highest on team), and he fits that mold to a tee (better threes would help but aren't necessary if he's going to have the ball in his hands a lot off the bench).

[Quirk]

6th man making more than the 5th highest salary is not that uncommon.

But in any case, my argument was not that he had to be paid more or less than the 5th highest salary. It was that your assertion that DD needs to be 5th or lower in pay, minutes AND usage doesn't line up. 6th men often carry very high usages, and decent minutes (high 20's to 30), while being reasonably paid (3rd to 5th highest on team), and he fits that mold to a tee (better threes would help but aren't necessary if he's going to have the ball in his hands a lot off the bench).

Not sure what "doesn't add up."

While certainly what "can be" and "what is best" are not the same thing, I'm not at all clear on how you can argue that it wouldn't be best for the team if 4 players who are actually above average, hopefully significantly above average, aare playing more minutes and getting more usage than DD does, and that therefore it would be also be best if DeRozan's salary didn't impede paying these other players.

Is it possible for the team to be competitive and still pay DeRozan more than his productivity warrants? Yes, but it makes it more difficult to acquire and pay the players who are actually making the team competitive, since average players can only help tow the line, not lead the pack.

Is it possible for the team to be competitive with DeRozan playing more that 5th most minutes or having more than 5th highest usage? Yes, but it means that the team will produce worse that it could if those minutes and shots where given to above average players, of which there are currently at least four currently on the team.

You can find a million ways in which to rationalize overpaying or overplaying DeRozan on a competitive team, sure, but you will not find a single reason why doing this would be a good idea.

[DanH]

If you value DeRozan such that he has to be 5th least used, played AND paid to be worth keeping, you are undervaluing him.

And that comes from one of his most vocal critics.

[JWash]

If you value DeRozan such that he has to be 5th least used, played AND paid to be worth keeping, you are undervaluing him.

And that comes from one of his most vocal critics.

Lol clearly there's a spectrum here

Looney Tunes Land ---> DeRozan Detractors ---> Neutrals ---> DeRozan Supporters ---> Looney Tunes Land

[Wild-ling#1]

Lol clearly there's a spectrum here

Looney Tunes Land ---> DeRozan Detractors ---> Neutrals ---> DeRozan Supporters ---> Looney Tunes Land

There are "neutrals"?? (No diss here, tho' ... We oughtta almost expect people here to have an opinion on this)

[Superjudge]

I think Derozan is a good player.

I dont know why all the noise about him, you guys are silly

[Quirk]

If you value DeRozan such that he has to be 5th least used, played AND paid to be worth keeping, you are undervaluing him.

And that comes from one of his most vocal critics.

Since you're one of the more statistically capable members here, care to quantify that? Where do you think he fits, w/o being influenced by expected demands of DeRozan or his agent, #4? #3? What is justified with his actual productivity, IYO?

[Quirk]

If there are approximately 100 or so players in the league better than DeRozan, for instance, which doesn't strike me as unfair in the slightest, then on average every team should have about 4 of them.

I would really be interested in any statistical justification of there not being 100 players or so (112 to be exact) that are better than DD.

[JWash]

If there are approximately 100 or so players in the league better than DeRozan, for instance, which doesn't strike me as unfair in the slightest, then on average every team should have about 4 of them.

I would really be interested in any statistical justification of there not being 100 players or so (112 to be exact) that are better than DD.

There aren't even close to 100 players better than DeRozan.

[Quirk]

There aren't even close to 100 players better than DeRozan.

I was asking for a statistical justification, not an unsubstantiated assertion. Hopefully DanH can shed some light.

[Axel]

There aren't even close to 100 players better than DeRozan.

It might not be as far off as you think.

The depth at PG alone in the NBA is impressive.

I would think DD falls in the 70s range. Maybe 80s. Would be interested to see if anyone can actually populate a list.

Of course, if you are listing for contract purposes, the list is really more like 2 years into the future than today's production.

Which of course would lead to additional arguments about which prospects will be better.

Which of course would lead to the "better player" vs "better player for their role" arguments.

Which of course would then lead back to square one.

[special1]

I was asking for a statistical justification, not an unsubstantiated assertion. Hopefully DanH can shed some light.

I'd like to see your list of 100 players better than Demar. Explain your reasoning if possible. Let us discuss your list.

PG
SG or wing
SF or wing
PF or big
C or big

Also, you said that there were 4 current players on the Raptors that are "better" than Demar and deserves higher usage, minutes and salary. Can you explain who these 4 players are and why you think they deserve higher usage, salary and minutes?








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk