Everything Derozan

[JWash]

Yes I remember, I also remember after the first 5 games when DD played great and all the "told ya so" posts from DD supporters until his game started to revert form for another stretch. DD has put good stretches together many times, but has equal number of bad stretches.

Until DD maintains the improvements, hard to say he has changed when there is years of evidence to the contrary.

There is also the strange correlation of DD and Wins. When DD is at his 'best', the team hasn't been winning much. Recent games are an example, when Lowry went into God mode, we almost beat GSW. When DD did, we lost to Denver.

Further to the wins point, DD actually drives less when we win.

In wins, DD drives 10.6 times per game. In losses, 14.7. Now I'm sure many will think "well obviously if he isn't hitting his shots then we will lose" but DD shoots significantly better in losses than wins. 52.3% in wins and 61.9% in losses.

I don't think it's surprising to see that Demar shoots 19 FGA in our losses and just 14 FGA in our wins. So there is still that too.

FWIW I think most top players have better numbers in wins than losses.

For example Lowry averages approximately 22-5-6 in both wins and losses. However in wins his TS% is 64% and he has a netRTG of +27. In losses his TS% is 55% and he has a netRTG of 0. Lowry like DeRozan also takes more shots in losses (17.4), than wins (14.4).

[Barolt]

FWIW I think most top players have better numbers in wins than losses.

For example Lowry averages approximately 22-5-6 in both wins and losses. However in wins his TS% is 64% and he has a netRTG of +27. In losses his TS% is 55% and he has a netRTG of 0. Lowry like DeRozan also takes more shots in losses (17.4), than wins (14.4).

You misread Axel's post. Axel was saying DeMar is better in our losses than in our wins, you're saying Lowry is the reverse. So when Lowry plays better, we win, and when DeMar plays better we lose.

[Snooch]

That's a lot of energy expended saying things like:

"If he shot a little less well, he'd be third" (as if third is bad, anyway) and

"He might not do as well next month" ... (and so on).

My point is that we've really only got two guys. And yet, even with the injuries, we're tied for second in a very tough conference. Those two guys are obviously shouldering heavy load - heavy usage - and quite well. The argument that he'd not a be a "number 1" on option a "true" contending team (with an elite "three" or "four", of course) blithely finesses the fact that we don't have an elite three or four!

If we were to get one, then we'd see. Maybe fairly soon. But for now ...

There are only two guys at the plant, doing twelve-hour shifts ... and they're [I]churning out product[/I. Keeping the company in the "black". No complaints. I think, sure, you put in your call to human resources ... but you thank both guys at the end of every day ...

that is a load of nothing.

And in no way added to anything I attempted to have a discussion with you about.

Was entirely dismissive to anything I posted in a very poorly generalized assumption and relegated to, "we have won games, you have to give demar some credit cause he played" as if by reducing any debate to its most simplest form is a way to get someone to agree with you.

Yes.

Demar deserves some credit for our wins....as does ross, powell, bebe, biyombo, scola, lowry, joseph, carroll, bruno, jv, etc.

JV deserves some credit for Bebes good game against Atlanta...dont you agree? because if he hadnt been injured Bebe would never have played...so the guys at the plant were able to chug chug along with Bebe at center punching his clock because JV was sent home sick....cannot disagree with that right?

[JWash]

This part I disagree with. The simple fact is DeRozan lineups without Lowry in them are bad offensively, which dictates more minutes for Lowry. Our #2 guy should keep the team rolling when Lowry goes out.(although I think DeMar should be #3 behind Jonas and Kyle, Jonas has just shown that his efficiency doesn't drop as his usage rate has risen the last few seasons)

I'm just going to quote DanH in regards to those on-off stats:

Yeah, I'm not too concerned about those DD splits - D plays with the bench a lot and has logged a lot of minutes with Biyombo, even before JV went down, who clogs the lane like crazy, which impacts DD's game more than anyone else's.

As for players on the team who play better without Lowry? Luis Scola. How can he still be starting?

Lowry is also just insanely better without Scola on the court. You know how amazing Lowry has been overall? With Scola out there he has a net negative rating - even with Lowry being a superstar this year, the team is being outscored when he shares the court with Scola (by a very small number, but still). Take Scola off and Lowry's on-court net rating is +18.

Guess how many players on the team have a negative net rating with Lowry?

Two.

Scola shares that honour with Anthony Bennett, who has played 15 minutes total with Lowry.

Literally no other player on the team, not Powell, not Biyombo, has a negative net rating with Lowry. How this starting lineup is allowed to continue I have no idea.

[JWash]

You misread Axel's post. Axel was saying DeMar is better in our losses than in our wins, you're saying Lowry is the reverse. So when Lowry plays better, we win, and when DeMar plays better we lose.

No he wasn't.

He was saying in losses DeMar shoots MORE but shoots less efficiently. All I'm saying is that Lowry does the same thing (albeit even in losses he's still decently efficient at 55 TS%, but way better in wins at 63 TS%)

EDIT: Kinda funny stat but DeRozan is shooting 0% from 3 in losses on 1.6 attempts per game, and 39% in wins at 1.3 attempts per game. Just thought that was interesting.

[Barolt]

I'm just going to quote DanH in regards to those on-off stats:

And the problem with that argument is that Lowry lineups without DeRozan are really, really good on both ends. So basically how I read that is that DeRozan might be a really good player for some teams, but it might not be ours.

[Barolt]

No he wasn't.

He was saying in losses DeMar shoots MORE but shoots less efficiently. All I'm saying is that Lowry does the same thing.

Nope. He said DeMar shoots more and more efficiently in losses than wins. Read it again.

[Wild-ling#1]

Jimmy Butler is les than 1 point per game behind demar and FAR more efficient logging a higher offensive rating, TS$, FG%, 3pt%, better defenisve rating more rebounds, more steals on less usage.

I think most would give Butler an edge over DeMar, right now, though their key numbers are very close (and DeMar leads slightly in points and, less slightly, in assists).

So I'm trying to get DeMar credit for what her does do - which is a lot. Not drag Butler down. You?

[Axel]

No he wasn't.

He was saying in losses DeMar shoots MORE but shoots less efficiently. All I'm saying is that Lowry does the same thing (albeit even in losses he's still decently efficient at 55 TS%, but way better in wins at 63 TS%)

Shoots more and shoot WAY BETTER in losses.

When we win, DD drives less and shoots worse.

When we lose, DD drives more and shoots at 61.9% (really freakin' good).

[Barolt]

I think most would give Butler an edge over DeMar, right now, though their key numbers are very close (and DeMar leads slightly in points and (less slightly) in assists).

So I'm trying to get DeMar credit for what her does do - which is a lot. Not drag Butler down.

You?

The difference for me is I think we'd be a lot better with Butler, and I think the Bulls would be worse with DeMar.

[consmap]

Shoots more and shoot WAY BETTER in losses.

When we win, DD drives less and shoots worse.

When we lose, DD drives more and shoots at 61.9% (really freakin' good).

I think the team is more likely to win when a number of players contribute, and not just one guy that has it going while everybody else is cold.

[JWash]

Shoots more and shoot WAY BETTER in losses.

When we win, DD drives less and shoots worse.

When we lose, DD drives more and shoots at 61.9% (really freakin' good).

Except he doesn't shoot better in losses. Maybe on drives only, but he shoots only 51 TS% overall in losses and 55 TS% in wins.

[Axel]

I think the team is more likely to win when a number of players contribute, and not just one guy that has it going while everybody else is cold.

Perhaps...will run the numbers and see what I can find out.

But it is interesting that DD at his 'best' doesn't lead to wins. I mean, shooting 62% on drives should open things up for everyone around him and mean we win. But it doesn't for some reason.

[JWash]

Perhaps...will run the numbers and see what I can find out.

But it is interesting that DD at his 'best' doesn't lead to wins. I mean, shooting 62% on drives should open things up for everyone around him and mean we win. But it doesn't for some reason.

How on earth is DD at his best when we lose?

Wins: 55 TS%, +8 netRTG
Losses: 51 TS%, -10 netRTG

[Barolt]

Perhaps...will run the numbers and see what I can find out.

But it is interesting that DD at his 'best' doesn't lead to wins. I mean, shooting 62% on drives should open things up for everyone around him and mean we win. But it doesn't for some reason.

My best guess would be something like: DeMar is driving well, decides to drive more often, other guys don't get into an offensive rhythm because of the number of possessions DeMar starts to eat up. That's just spitballing though.