Axel wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Valanciunas
Collapse
X
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostWell that's a different issue entirely, but I agree with the sentiment. Been annoyed about that all summer. Really not much firepower coming off the bench at all and a lot of inexperience. The roster definitely looks worse than it did at the end of last year.Heir, Prince of Cambridge
If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.
Comment
-
Axel wrote: View PostBut it's not a different issue. Figuring out how to best allocate the resources we have is the exact same issue. Heavy minutes for starters to off-set the poor depth is a big part of the solution. Good year for a Thib's like approach.
I just don't think that's a good strategy to just bank everything on your starting lineup. We also don't have the advantage Thibs did where his starting 5 was an elite defensive unit while also being able to score effectively. Especially since we have struggled to "win" against other starters in the past. Our starting units have typically been net zero lineups. It's with the bench units where we've been able to gain an advantage on other teams by staggering Lowry/DeRozan and killing teams with worse depth.
I actually think that's why we've struggled in the playoffs. Because in the playoffs teams don't play bad players very much and only go like 7 or 8 deep. So we don't have the opportunity to dismantle those bad benches with our Lowry+Bench unit.Last edited by Shaolin Fantastic; Fri Sep 8, 2017, 11:43 AM.
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostThe data has showed that the Raptors starting units the past several years have been barely positive units. Even with Ibaka last year, the starting 5 minus Lowry was just +2.1 in 233 minutes post ASB (after the trade). With Lowry included (only 3 games of data) the lineup was -25.2, and it was abysmal in the playoffs also -24.7. We didn't start looking good in the playoffs until we moved JV to the bench (the new starting lineup with Powell inserted instead of JV was +17.4) and he himself also played better off the bench and helped those units offensively while getting more usage. In fact his best playoff game came off the bench in game 2 against the Cavs where he had a 33% usage rate and 23 points in 20 minutes.
In all likelihood we aren't going to try it to start the season, but I want to see it implemented. JV is not going to get the touches required to outweigh his defensive failings with the starters. He already wasn't getting enough starting next to Siakam last year, and now it's Ibaka who commands a lot of shots himself. He can have a better impact on the game and as a result improve the team overall from the bench, still playing about the same minutes but being a lot more productive offensively in that time.
Powell starting in the playoffs was absolutely key - but JV going to the bench was not the important part. The new starting lineup was much better on both ends because the offence wasn't completely useless (leading to fast breaks for a MIL team that desperately needed them), which was because of the extra ball handler. Just look at how the starting lineup, but with Powell replacing Carroll instead of JV, performed in the playoffs - it was just as good as the one where Ibaka was at C. Powell was the difference maker, not JV being benched.
How many times are we going to re-hash the same evidence that you willfully ignore each time it comes up again?
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostAre we going over this again? We did this already. The JV-Ibaka pairing had to play without Lowry - all year the team struggled without Lowry. Lowry coming back and playing three games after a month plus of time missed due to injury is exactly the sort of flawed sample that arguments like this tend to be built on. And even the JV-Ibaka starting unit got way more effective as they learned to play together. They were far better towards the end of that sample than the beginning. Funny how a few games to get used to playing together can impact how a lineup performs.
Powell starting in the playoffs was absolutely key - but JV going to the bench was not the important part. The new starting lineup was much better on both ends because the offence wasn't completely useless (leading to fast breaks for a MIL team that desperately needed them), which was because of the extra ball handler. Just look at how the starting lineup, but with Powell replacing Carroll instead of JV, performed in the playoffs - it was just as good as the one where Ibaka was at C. Powell was the difference maker, not JV being benched.
How many times are we going to re-hash the same evidence that you willfully ignore each time it comes up again?
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostSo what about starting Powell and Miles and bringing JV off the bench?
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostSo what about starting Powell and Miles and bringing JV off the bench?Heir, Prince of Cambridge
If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostAnd who comes off the bench as a wing player? Bruno? Poeltl gets cut out of the rotation entirely? We run Miles out against starting PF's every night? Weren't you the one worried about being undersized at the 3, and now you want to be undersized at the 3, 4 and 5? Come on.
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostI'm just asking the question. If the benefit of the lineup was starting Powell and also having a speed advantage over other teams.
Comment
-
You're just picking the narrative you want to push. Yes it was partially about adding a third ball-handler, but it was moreso about matching up better with them defensively as JV was doing a much better job against his counterpart, Monroe in the bench unit than against the speed of their guys in the starting lineup.
If it was just about getting a 3rd ball handler we could've just subbed Carroll for Powell and been done with it.
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostYou're just picking the narrative you want to push. Yes it was partially about adding a third ball-handler, but it was moreso about matching up better with them defensively as JV was doing a much better job against his counterpart, Monroe in the bench unit than against the speed of their guys in the starting lineup.
If it was just about getting a 3rd ball handler we could've just subbed Carroll for Powell and been done with it.
And they could definitely have subbed Powell for Carroll (as they did for stretches, just not at tip-off, and had great success). The starting unit would have been just fine at that point, but Ibaka would still have struggled with Monroe. Two birds, one stone. But the second bird doesn't apply most nights (or applies in the opposite direction), so Powell in for Carroll is exactly what they should do.
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostPowell starting in the playoffs was absolutely key - but JV going to the bench was not the important part. The new starting lineup was much better on both ends because the offence wasn't completely useless (leading to fast breaks for a MIL team that desperately needed them), which was because of the extra ball handler. Just look at how the starting lineup, but with Powell replacing Carroll instead of JV, performed in the playoffs - it was just as good as the one where Ibaka was at C. Powell was the difference maker, not JV being benched."Stop eating your sushi."
"I do actually have a pair of Uggs."
"I've had three cups of green tea tonight. I'm wired. I'm absolutely wired."
- Jack Armstrong
Comment
-
JimiCliff wrote: View PostAnd when considering the starting lineup change in that MIL series, don't forget - the team refused to exploit the massive mismatch JV had over Maker in the post. If you aren't going to attack that, then yep, may as well bring him off the bench.
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostOh, the bench absolutely had more success defensively because JV neutralized Monroe. It's a big part of why JV should start, because most teams start their big/non-shooting C's, MIL is the exception.
And they could definitely have subbed Powell for Carroll (as they did for stretches, just not at tip-off, and had great success). The starting unit would have been just fine at that point, but Ibaka would still have struggled with Monroe. Two birds, one stone. But the second bird doesn't apply most nights (or applies in the opposite direction), so Powell in for Carroll is exactly what they should do.
Comment
-
Shaolin Fantastic wrote: View PostWhich is a big part of my whole argument for bringing him off the bench. Too many chefs in the kitchen and we don't let him cook anything. Lowry, DD, Ibaka are all ahead of him in the pecking order. And I wouldn't be surprised if Powell ended up being too if he starts.
Like, look at DeMar. Sure, he carried a 34% usage last year. But when he shared the court with Lowry and JV? 31%. 43% when the two of them were off the court (ie his bench unit usage). Sure, Lowry carried a 25% usage on the year, but with the other two it was only 22%. Ibaka's usage was only 20% beside DeMar and JV. Norm carried a 21% usage on the year - and only 17% with Lowry, DeMar and JV on the court. Guys like JV and Norm and Serge and even Lowry don't need heavy usage to be effective weapons in the offence. Heck, JV carried basically identical usages with versus without Lowry and/or DeMar - between 18% and 21% right across the board, with only his "without DeMar" usage coming in as high as 23%. Heck, his raw "without Lowry" usage goes down, from 21% with him to 18% without him.
The whole argument you make assumes the team would use JV as a primary option off the bench, which they obviously would not. He'll get a slightly inflated role with the Lowry unit if history is any indicator, but that's it.
Comment
Comment