Everything Valanciunas

[GLF]

Worst case scenario, it is better for a good player to be buried here than playing against us.

Best case scenario, they do actually eventually learn to use him in the PnR properly, while he develops his defensive IQ like most bigs do as they age, and earns more trust from Casey on that end.

My only question is do you think JV not being used correctly on our team makes our team worse? Because as good of a player as he is he's still a role player and if he's strengths aren't being showcased and his negatives are coming out more and more his presence can actually end up hurting out team more than help it in my opinion.

[Fully]

The market for JV league wide has made Masai's decision about him very easy. If no one is willing to part with 'value' for him then you keep him in Toronto for the time being and try to find ways for him to be productive here; whether that's in a new role off the bench or whatever else. He's not the type of sunken cost like DMC where you need to actively strap assets to him just to get him out of town.

[GLF]

The market for JV league wide has made Masai's decision about him very easy. If no one is willing to part with 'value' for him then you keep him in Toronto for the time being and try to find ways for him to be productive here; whether that's in a new role off the bench or whatever else. He's not the type of sunken cost like DMC where you need to actively strap assets to him just to get him out of town.

That I completely agree with. JV is still a good player. You don't let a good player go for nothing, especially since he has a good contract as well. DC was just terrible

[JamesNaismith]

I'm not even in love with the idea but given the likelihood that we can't afford to extend Norm, I would look to see if we could package him + JV to the Pelicans for Cousins when the Pelicans are inevitably underperforming and hopefully this is another Ross + pick for Ibaka type situation at the deadline where the fit just wasn't there but works out in our favour.

[3inthekeon]

JV is a terrific rebounder. Poeltl might become one, but there is no one else on our team that can be called good.

He does not have a good contract. It was good at the time of the extension, but the league has changed.

[GLF]

JV is a terrific rebounder. Poeltl might become one, but there is no one else on our team that can be called good.

He does not have a good contract. It was good at the time of the extension, but the league has changed.

Oh I thought it was still considered good. My bad. But yea rebounding wise he's almost elite and we have no one on this team we can consider that so that I agree with, but that is literally the only strength he has that we actually use. Is that enough that his presence on this makes us better? Because defensively he's unreliable and we don't use him correctly if at all on offence. This is why I'm not sure if his presence on our team hurts us more than it helps us at this point. I'm sure Dan H will be able to post some stats that proves me wrong.

[Demographic Shift]

JV is a terrific rebounder. Poeltl might become one, but there is no one else on our team that can be called good.

He does not have a good contract. It was good at the time of the extension, but the league has changed.

He is indeed a great rebounder on both ends of the floor.
After him we are light on glass cleaners.
I think he stays this year for better or worse..and there is worse out there..a lot worse.

I think JV will come in really handy if we draw the Chowderheads in the post season.
Right now the Celts biggest guys up front, who at have at least one year of NBA experience are

Al Horford who is not a particularly good rebounder and is listed at a generous fisherman like 6 -10
Aaron Baynes is the backup at 6-10 ( who JV kills as much as Drummond)
Mucus Morris in at 6 -9
Jae Crowder at another generous 6 -6
They have Zizic ..but he is a first year guy.

JV will be a difference maker if that's a series that comes about.

[DanH]

Oh I thought it was still considered good. My bad. But yea rebounding wise he's almost elite and we have no one on this team we can consider that so that I agree with, but that is literally the only strength he has that we actually use. Is that enough that his presence on this makes us better? Because defensively he's unreliable and we don't use him correctly if at all on offence. This is why I'm not sure if his presence on our team hurts us more than it helps us at this point. I'm sure Dan H will be able to post some stats that proves me wrong.

There are no definitive stats that can emphatically prove whether a player helps or hurts his team. In theory, impact stats would do so, but they are notoriously unreliable in samples smaller than several years. Then there's the production angle - the idea that 5 glue guys playing together would actually be really bad - the idea that you can't build a team around a bunch of Patterson's, no matter how useful a single one can be to the building of a team. Heck, there are some players that serve both purposes, but those are superstars (like Lowry, for example, though he is limited in ways the top guys are not).

So, stats. Well, for impact stats there's RPM, where JV graded out as league average (almost exactly), and contributed 4 wins in his minutes this year (for reference, Lowry contributed 12+, most on the team by far, with guys like Ibaka pro-rating to about 6 wins, and DeRozan to about 5). For production stats there is PER (good for high volume scorers) and win shares (measure of efficiency and all-around contribution) - JV was 3rd on the team in PER and WS. Of course, all of those are measures of the player's performance in the role they were in - not a measure of the inherent value of the player. For example, using any of those measures to compare a bench player to a starter would be foolhardy as there is no guarantee a player can maintain that performance against superior competition or in larger minutes. That approach obviously sets aside the more contextual evaluators, for example his rebounding being a rare skill set on this team, and his elite rebounding numbers hard to replace from within.

Part of the reason I've supported JV in spite of his apparent flaws on the court, is that the stats have always said he is at worst a roughly average player, and at best an elite production player.

That said, as I started out with... There is no stat that can answer that question beyond doubt. If you think he just doesn't fit anymore, so be it. I don't see it - his skill set seems well suited to playing with our star players, as a solid screen setter, good rebounder, developing shooter and elite threat on the roll, and his defensive issues should lessen as he gains experience and the game slows down for him. All that IMO though. No stats to prove it one way or the other.

[GLF]

There are no definitive stats that can emphatically prove whether a player helps or hurts his team. In theory, impact stats would do so, but they are notoriously unreliable in samples smaller than several years. Then there's the production angle - the idea that 5 glue guys playing together would actually be really bad - the idea that you can't build a team around a bunch of Patterson's, no matter how useful a single one can be to the building of a team. Heck, there are some players that serve both purposes, but those are superstars (like Lowry, for example, though he is limited in ways the top guys are not).

So, stats. Well, for impact stats there's RPM, where JV graded out as league average (almost exactly), and contributed 4 wins in his minutes this year (for reference, Lowry contributed 12+, most on the team by far, with guys like Ibaka pro-rating to about 6 wins, and DeRozan to about 5). For production stats there is PER (good for high volume scorers) and win shares (measure of efficiency and all-around contribution) - JV was 3rd on the team in PER and WS. Of course, all of those are measures of the player's performance in the role they were in - not a measure of the inherent value of the player. For example, using any of those measures to compare a bench player to a starter would be foolhardy as there is no guarantee a player can maintain that performance against superior competition or in larger minutes. That approach obviously sets aside the more contextual evaluators, for example his rebounding being a rare skill set on this team, and his elite rebounding numbers hard to replace from within.

Part of the reason I've supported JV in spite of his apparent flaws on the court, is that the stats have always said he is at worst a roughly average player, and at best an elite production player.

That said, as I started out with... There is no stat that can answer that question beyond doubt. If you think he just doesn't fit anymore, so be it. I don't see it - his skill set seems well suited to playing with our star players, as a solid screen setter, good rebounder, developing shooter and elite threat on the roll, and his defensive issues should lessen as he gains experience and the game slows down for him. All that IMO though. No stats to prove it one way or the other.

I didn't think about the screen setting as well. He is very good at that which helps our team a lot. Also him being a threat on the roll even if we don't pass it to him helps as well. It's just like how Patterson was a 3 point threat even though he didn't hit the shot so guys would stay glued to him. He has improved his jump shot as well which is good. I really just wish we would use him more offensively to really increase his effectiveness as I'm sure we all do. Hopefully he takes another step in the right direction defensively this year. But if setting good screens, rebounding, and being a threat on the roll is all we are going to ask him to do and he does it well I guess that's enough to help the team. Him improving as a shooter and as a defensive player is only the icing on top.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

I didn't think about the screen setting as well. He is very good at that which helps our team a lot. Also him being a threat on the roll even if we don't pass it to him helps as well. It's just like how Patterson was a 3 point threat even though he didn't hit the shot so guys would stay glued to him. He has improved his jump shot as well which is good. I really just wish we would use him more offensively to really increase his effectiveness as I'm sure we all do. Hopefully he takes another step in the right direction defensively this year. But if setting good screens, rebounding, and being a threat on the roll is all we are going to ask him to do and he does it well I guess that's enough to help the team. Him improving as a shooter and as a defensive player is only the icing on top.

The way to do this would be to bring him off the bench, perhaps with a different coach who would emphasize him as the 2nd option in the DeMar+Bench or Kyle+Bench lineups when Ibaka is off the floor. You can get him close to 20 minutes per game in those lineups and then find 5-6 minutes with Ibaka as well (so still get the 25mpg he's been used to under Casey).

This is what OKC does with Kanter, which allowed him to have a 27% usage rate off the bench last year (this is higher than Lowry's) and shoot 59.9 TS%. I think that type of role could work great for Val (but with a bit more minutes than what Kanter plays). But everyone here is so against it for some reason. Teams do this all the time with offensive guards even if they are one of the top 5 players on the team (hell we did it with Lou Will), but as soon as I suggest doing it with a center (or maybe specifically because it's Valanciunas) nobody is interested.

It's not about saying Val is worse or not good enough to start. It's about maximizing his abilities. He is not going to get post touches playing with Lowry (~25% usage), DeMar (30%+ usage) and Ibaka (~20% usage). He's even going to be the roll man in the pick and roll less frequently. Let him shine with the bench units and also help those young guys like Powell and Wright out, relieving them of pressure to score a lot when one of Lowry or DeMar is off the floor.

[DanH]

Like, that theory is wonderful and all, but we've seen it play out already with a pretty solid sample (last year, about 350 and 700 minutes playing without DD and KL respectively). When JV is on the court with DD (regardless of Lowry) he has a lower usage rate. He has a higher one (still capped at 23%) when DD is off the court.

The opposite is true for Lowry. JV actually has a higher usage rate with him than without him. He also has a higher usage when playing with both Lowry and DD than he does when just playing with DD.

So, running JV out with the DD bench unit does not help with this. At all.

Which is why I've been saying he should start each Q, so he gets time in the starting lineup to absorb some early tough minutes away from Ibaka-at-C, or Poeltl, and also gets to play away from DD in those KL-centric bench units.

But of course, the biggest issue is the strategic goal of PnR's right now. They are intended to get the guards free and passing is an afterthought. Changing that thinking would help. Of course, they won't do that, hence the lineup suggestion.

[KHD]

Like, that theory is wonderful and all, but we've seen it play out already with a pretty solid sample (last year, about 350 and 700 minutes playing without DD and KL respectively). When JV is on the court with DD (regardless of Lowry) he has a lower usage rate. He has a higher one (still capped at 23%) when DD is off the court.

The opposite is true for Lowry. JV actually has a higher usage rate with him than without him. He also has a higher usage when playing with both Lowry and DD than he does when just playing with DD.

So, running JV out with the DD bench unit does not help with this. At all.

Which is why I've been saying he should start each Q, so he gets time in the starting lineup to absorb some early tough minutes away from Ibaka-at-C, or Poeltl, and also gets to play away from DD in those KL-centric bench units.

But of course, the biggest issue is the strategic goal of PnR's right now. They are intended to get the guards free and passing is an afterthought. Changing that thinking would help. Of course, they won't do that, hence the lineup suggestion.

trading away cory joseph should help. i don't think i've ever seen him throw a pass to any of our bigs.

[DanH]

trading away cory joseph should help. i don't think i've ever seen him throw a pass to any of our bigs.

Definitely one aspect of Wright's game I look forward to, the intent to pass, even if he posted a similar assist rate to Joseph in limited time last year (he did spend a lot of time as a third guard or in garbage time lineups, to be fair).

[Mess]

Definitely one aspect of Wright's game I look forward to, the intent to pass, even if he posted a similar assist rate to Joseph in limited time last year (he did spend a lot of time as a third guard or in garbage time lineups, to be fair).

Is it that Joseph didn't pass or that no teamed feared him taking a 3 off the dribble (like Kyle), or dependably blowing by the defender on the switch (like Kyle)? That led to everyone's favourite part of a Raptors game - more CoJo dribbling! With the possibility of a missed layup! (his finishing at the rim was his worst since his rookie season).

[golden]

Like, that theory is wonderful and all, but we've seen it play out already with a pretty solid sample (last year, about 350 and 700 minutes playing without DD and KL respectively). When JV is on the court with DD (regardless of Lowry) he has a lower usage rate. He has a higher one (still capped at 23%) when DD is off the court.

The opposite is true for Lowry. JV actually has a higher usage rate with him than without him. He also has a higher usage when playing with both Lowry and DD than he does when just playing with DD.

So, running JV out with the DD bench unit does not help with this. At all.

Which is why I've been saying he should start each Q, so he gets time in the starting lineup to absorb some early tough minutes away from Ibaka-at-C, or Poeltl, and also gets to play away from DD in those KL-centric bench units.

But of course, the biggest issue is the strategic goal of PnR's right now. They are intended to get the guards free and passing is an afterthought. Changing that thinking would help. Of course, they won't do that, hence the lineup suggestion.

Yep. That's really more because of DeMar needing a lot of floor spacers, which was even worse when we had JV, DD & CoJo. I love DeMar, but building around his lack of 3-pt shooting really is a challenge and makes everybody else look exponentially worse. DeMar's worked hard, but he really has lived a charmed life here in Toronto, right from Day 1 being able to play big minutes as rookie and then the tam building our offensive sets in large part to work around his flaws.