Everything Derozan

[jimmie]

@slaw: The question to me isn't ever DeMar's impact on the offensive end this season. He's good to great there.

It's whether or not he gives back just as much on the other end on a regular basis, which can be argued. He's had stretches this year of being a painfully bad defender. Yes, he's had his moments of stellar defense, but it feels, to me at least, like the bad defense is more common than the good this year.

Well, the bad defense was every game last year, so moments of stellar defense maybe shows remaining potential there, too, right?

You weren't happy with his offense -- at all -- about 60 games ago, and you've turned the corner on that to where he's now "good to great". Maybe he can get better on D next year.

[Barolt]

Well, the bad defense was every game last year, so moments of stellar defense maybe shows remaining potential there, too, right?

You weren't happy with his offense -- at all -- about 60 games ago, and you've turned the corner on that to where he's now "good to great". Maybe he can get better on D next year.

It's possible. But I'm still less than completely comfortable maxing a guy on the hope that he'll decide to play defense every night next year.

I'm not saying he's a bad player, which some people seem to think that I think, but my opinion is that max players should be game changers. And while DeMar does that on offense, if he frequently gives it back on defense, he's not necessarily changing the game for the better.

[OldSkoolCool]

Good points overall Dan, stats have their limitations, that's why I tried to keep the correlation of stats within the team, to eliminate as many variables as possible.

JV is able to carry Scola a lot more than DD is able too...was the point I was trying to make

And none of these players have Dwane Casey seemingly intentionally sabotaging their lineups' ability to play well.

Role is a huge factor in these things. Should you try stuff that lineup data points towards? Yes, absolutely, to see if it holds up with roles changing.

Well I would argue that DD's individual stats are largely due to Casey giving him every opportunity he ever wanted...

So if we compare him to his other teammates, we should expect that DD has a largely positive contribution to the team, but alas the stats are generally fuzzy, some say yes he impacts, others say no.

For example, yes he massively affect our ability to get the FT line

No, he does not distribute the ball well, nor help our ability to generate threes/contain threes.

So offensively he is about a wash (imo I will take team involvement and "flow" over FT efficiency), and defensively he is a negative. Max player?

We already saw what happens to Lowry if you try to go without DD for a couple months - the second half of last season and that abomination of a playoffs series happens. And you can say that others could pick up the slack instead of Lowry but there's no PROOF of that - maybe they can't. I have every confidence in JV - but in his teammates' ability to get the ball to him? Lowry might be the one that takes up the load of running all the action to set up JV post ups and PnR's, which means a large workload once again.

This is on the coach, what we saw from Lowry last year was a result of DC saying, "Ross, you are now DD-lite. Dribble drive attack. Lowry, you must have at least %40 USG each game."

So to justify paying DD, to compensate for our coaches insanity, to protect the true max player on the roster...is not good asset management. The financial flexibility from letting DD walk, will let you go after a 15 mil high usage -chucker- to take some of the scoring load off.

That argument is for simplicity sake, the real situation is more like: Put JV into DD's offensive role, and have Ross start in a complimentary role to Lowry/JV, similar to JV's role. Ross is also a better defender than DD, and would allow us the option to match up Ross on the tough cover's at PG to further protect Lowry. And he is cheaper. Win-win-win.

DeMar is NOT a big impact superstar. Don't get me wrong. But he's a very good player who can handle an extraordinary offensive load - high usage with solid efficiency, while playmaking fairly well and rarely turning the ball over. He's the player that Lowry needs beside him to BE the big impact superstar we have for a full 82 games. And in the meantime he's not hurting the team at all on the court, unlike in previous years.

Well as covered in my post, wrt playmaking fairly well and TOV's, is that CoJo is better at that right now anyways. At 8 mil. And stellar defensively.

If MU renounces DD and has the $15 million or so to spend on "actual productive players", aren't there about 20 (or more) other teams with at least as much cap space this off season? How many "actual productive players" that fit our needs are going to be available and by how much will they end up being overpaid?

That depends. 15 mil this year and a full max the following year. Don't think we can attract a max player in 2017?

2. To suggest Derozan is not a productive player is beyond ridiculous. He's putting up 24/4/4 on solid shooting numbers and he's getting to the line at a ridiculous rate. He's also a workhorse in terms of games and minutes played. He's extremely productive. You may not like how he plays or think he isn't worth $20M+ per year or think he can be replaced, etc. but those are very different arguments than suggesting he isn't productive.

His individual accolades are not my problem. My problem is that you can visibly see this team slow down and become worse defensively when he is on the court. The stats mostly back that narrative up.

Max players to me need to change the game when they step on the court. DD doesn't seem to do this outside of his brief Kobe moments where he makes stupid shots.

3. Derozan is worth whatever someone will pay him. In this market, he is a max player, or close thereto. He may give a small discount to Toronto but no one else is getting him for less than max money. Is he a franchise changing superstar a la Lebron? No, but he is a max player in today's NBA.

If someone wants to pay $38.14 for a coffee from Tim Hortons, will you say, "someone else payed that kind of money for the coffee so I got to too"?

Market value is a fair argument but how much of a discrepancy do we start to allow for production vs cost?

CoJo is doing roughly what DD is doing at 8 mil

I'm not saying he's a bad player, which some people seem to think that I think, but my opinion is that max players should be game changers. And while DeMar does that on offense, if he frequently gives it back on defense, he's not necessarily changing the game for the better.

This is exactly where I am at as well. Even for less than max (say 20 mil - %18 of the 2017 cap), I don't see it. Not for a player, who by what I see on the floor, doesn't make us better (or worse). And it is somewhat supported statistically.

If we chose someone from a different team that has a similar impact on the game as DD, would we all be clamoring to sign them no matter what? I don't think so...

[3inthekeon]

That depends. 15 mil this year and a full max the following year. Don't think we can attract a max player in 2017?.

Since the full max in 2017 is dependent on letting Kyle walk as well, probably not the type of max player that will make us any better than we are now.

[OldSkoolCool]

Since the full max in 2017 is dependent on letting Kyle walk as well, probably not the type of max player that will make us any better than we are now.

That depends...what are Patterson's and Lowry's cap holds?

[DanH]

That depends...what are Patterson's and Lowry's cap holds?

About 10 and 18 M.

[Chr1s1anL]

Kyle Lowry:*DeMar’s role is to be a leader, be a scorer, be a guy we can count on every single day, every single game, to get his 20 to 30 to 40 points a night, plus give us some good rebounding. And also to go out there and take the challenge of knowing he’s gonna be double-teamed and knowing he’s going to be in tough situations, but still be able to come through for us. At the end of the day, we need him as a team to be that guy who we can go to and say, “Here, go get us a bucket.”
Read more at http://www.slamonline.com/them-boys-...TjlgAYxQoST.99


Kyle Lowry seems to think DD contributes to winning

[Barolt]

Kyle Lowry:*DeMar’s role is to be a leader, be a scorer, be a guy we can count on every single day, every single game, to get his 20 to 30 to 40 points a night, plus give us some good rebounding. And also to go out there and take the challenge of knowing he’s gonna be double-teamed and knowing he’s going to be in tough situations, but still be able to come through for us. At the end of the day, we need him as a team to be that guy who we can go to and say, “Here, go get us a bucket.”
Read more at http://www.slamonline.com/them-boys-...TjlgAYxQoST.99


Kyle Lowry seems to think DD contributes to winning

Even if he didn't, this is exactly what he would say because he's not an asshole trying to destroy his own team.

"Player says all the right things" is indicative of exactly nothing.

[Chr1s1anL]

Even if he didn't, this is exactly what he would say because he's not an asshole trying to destroy his own team.

"Player says all the right things" is indicative of exactly nothing.

So you don't think Lowry meant that?

[OldSkoolCool]

Kyle Lowry:*DeMar’s role is to be a leader, be a scorer, be a guy we can count on every single day, every single game, to get his 20 to 30 to 40 points a night, plus give us some good rebounding. And also to go out there and take the challenge of knowing he’s gonna be double-teamed and knowing he’s going to be in tough situations, but still be able to come through for us. At the end of the day, we need him as a team to be that guy who we can go to and say, “Here, go get us a bucket.”
Read more at http://www.slamonline.com/them-boys-...TjlgAYxQoST.99


Kyle Lowry seems to think DD contributes to winning

This attitude is shitty team basketball and will eventually lead no-where

[ogi]

This attitude is shitty team basketball and will eventually lead no-where

Just about every team in the league has a go to guy or maybe two guys for scoring... Spurs included

[OldSkoolCool]

Just about every team in the league has a go to guy or maybe two guys for scoring... Spurs included

Every team has a go-to guy for sure

They only use them when they need a bucket, not for 20 possessions a game

Rediculous

[ogi]

Every team has a go-to guy for sure

They only use them when they need a bucket, not for 20 possessions a game

Rediculous

Except that has nothing to do with the quote. Also there more than one viable way to run an offense. Just cuz you don't like how it looks doesn't mean a player has a shitty attitude that's gonna inevitably lead to failure. Ridiculous.

[Chr1s1anL]

Every team has a go-to guy for sure

They only use them when they need a bucket, not for 20 possessions a game

Rediculous

You really need to watch other teams closely.

[OldSkoolCool]

Except that has nothing to do with the quote. Also there more than one viable way to run an offense. Just cuz you don't like how it looks doesn't mean a player has a shitty attitude that's gonna inevitably lead to failure. Ridiculous.

I don't like how it looks. Which isn't the reason why it will lead to failure.

I don't think it is very effective, which is why it will lead to failure.

You really need to watch other teams closely.

I do, and lots of them have some of the same problems of the Raptors.

Because other people do it is not a good justification for me. Give me evidence that leaning on guys like this is the best way to run an offense. Until then, the team game will always win, at every level, over the long term.