Valanciunas needs to come off the bench.

[tDotted]

Also, the days of blaming casey for Valanciunas struggles should be over.

There's a difference between "Casey is at fault for JV's play" and "JV would never live up to the contract MU gave him under Casey".

[S.R.]

How long as he been trying for? Casey's been here since JV's rookie year and made it pretty obvious he wasn't going to feature him. Masai has had enough time from 2014-2016 to trade him but only shopped him in 2017 (after a clear down year) because of the tax situation. MU has done a lot of good, but that's a clear fuck up

That's some serious revisionist history based on the current dynamics.

Since the beginning? JV was nearly a 30 mpg player in his second year, a 21 year old top 5 pick and things were looking good. His minutes, role, and usage all held steady for the next 3 years. This is the first year he's more clearly fallen out of favour, dropping down to 20 mpg.

And Casey wasn't featuring anybody other than Lowry/DeMar prior to this year, JV was the hot topic because he looked to be the third best player on the roster and the most obvious guy to argue for more shots for, but as any fan or Carroll or Patterson will tell you, Casey's usage issues weren't just about JV, it was about the two starting guards vs. everyone else.

And the league has changed year over year, moving further and further away from JV's game in general. It's not the same league today that it was in 2014, at all.

[Shaolin Fantastic]

Aside from your star players (if they're not good defenders) you want your best defenders starting at each position. The reason for this is that their defense loses its value when they're coming off the bench. Off the bench they play against lesser competition, where good defense is less necessary and thus has a smaller impact. The opposite is also true. A player who's a liability defensively but strong offensively can be very effective off the bench because their defense is less of an issue against worse players, and they get to go at those weaker players on the other end as well and score productively.

It's not really a novel concept, but doing it with centers is fairly new, and something we --- a team that has multiple centers who ARE actually good defenders at that position --- should think about doing.

[hotfuzz]

I don't see why it has to be either Casey's fault or JV's fault. I think both are guilty for the current situation. Casey fucked up his development from repeated benchings even when JV played well. On the other hand, JV has had many seasons to notice that the league is changing and doesn't have need for lumbering Cs with no range. He should have used this time to develop something....anything that would make him valuable in today's game. A 3pt shot, better passing...anything, but he hasn't. He's essentially the same player as he was 2-3 years ago, whereas the league has changed dramatically, leaving him in the dust.

[JamesNaismith]

He tried. It's not stupid to not trade a guy if the return isn't there, that's how you bleed assets and end up with nothing in the cupboard. That's a bigger problem than what they're trying to figure out on the court right now.

To not trade him when the return isn't there?! What the heck were/are we expecting to get for him?!

How does anyone figure it was a better idea to hold on to him when every possible sign pointed to his value only further declining in a league that was/is so clearly becoming one of speed and shooting?! lol oook....sounds like a great plan. Better hold on to your car too and drive the thing into the ground until you get a higher selling price lol it makes that kinda sense, as in none.

[S.R.]

To not trade him when the return isn't there?! What the heck were/are we expecting to get for him?!

I think you missed the point, that's a reference to the net loss of a JV trade that we can pretty well infer from the lack of a JV trade when the GM wanted to trade him. It took a first round pick to move Carroll. How many sweeteners did you want thrown in for a JV trade? Poeltl? OG? Siakam? All 3? The return from that trade would be worse than the outgoing cost for the Raptors, again presumably, because it didn't happen.

[Scraptor]

That's some serious revisionist history based on the current dynamics.

Since the beginning? JV was nearly a 30 mpg player in his second year, a 21 year old top 5 pick and things were looking good. His minutes, role, and usage all held steady for the next 3 years. This is the first year he's more clearly fallen out of favour, dropping down to 20 mpg.

And Casey wasn't featuring anybody other than Lowry/DeMar prior to this year, JV was the hot topic because he looked to be the third best player on the roster and the most obvious guy to argue for more shots for, but as any fan or Carroll or Patterson will tell you, Casey's usage issues weren't just about JV, it was about the two starting guards vs. everyone else.

And the league has changed year over year, moving further and further away from JV's game in general. It's not the same league today that it was in 2014, at all.

It's not revisionist history at all. In fact, I'd say yours is the more revisionist version of history. Jonas was a 28mpg player in his second year, but that dropped to 26mpg the next three years, with him frequently benched in fourth quarters. He only averaged 8.3 FGA/g that second year, which was tied with Greivis Vasquez for 5th/6th on the team. Despite expectations that a high-value sophomore would have an increased workload, he never cleared 9 FGA/g over the next three seasons.

In fact, it was already obvious by December 2014 (his third season) that things weren't going to change under Casey. Which is why someone made this post:
http://forums.raptorsrepublic.com/sh...ht=#post395811

Fan Opinion: Just trade Jonas already

18/15 yesterday. 6/7 from the field and 6/6 from the line. And he still gets no plays call for him, and sits with the game on the line. It is obvious Jonas is an afterthought on this team, and in my opinion, he is being horribly mismanaged. Yet his stock is going to be pretty high around the league because of that potential. So why not just trade him for a piece that fits in better with the play style of the team (wing-centric).

There have been so many articles about Jonas's usage and fourth quarter benchings over the past few years, I'm not sure how anyone could honestly say that this is the first year he's clearly fallen out of favour. Here's an example from that same season, Feb 2015. https://www.thestar.com/sports/rapto...ors-coach.html

And part of the role of the front office and coaching staff is to figure out where the league is going, not chasing where it's been. That same year (2014-15) was the one where they were trying to get him to play like Hibbert.
http://nationalpost.com/sports/baske...that-as-a-goal

That year the Warriors won the Finals (2015). It's also the year we were swept by the Wizards. Masai had an opportunity to either fire Casey, or to accept that JV wasn't going to be used to his full potential by Casey (or fit in this new NBA). But he neither fired Casey, nor did he trade JV.

In fact, Masai had a full year from that point forward to trade JV for good value. JV showed plenty of flashes to retain his "potential" tag, most notably against the Cavs in the 2016 playoffs. And he was signed to what was perceived to be a team-friendly extension, one which he had not yet started (it kicked in in 2016-17).

And still Masai chose to do nothing. Instead he waited, and waited, and over the course of 2016-17, the media began to really hammer home that maybe JV was in the same group as Greg Monroe and Enes Kanter (Zach Lowe brought it up in a podcast last year). It became leaguewide consensus that there is a glut of old-school centres, which is why we tried too late to move JV, and things have gotten even worse this year, as JV is now showing his frustration in the locker room in front of reporters.

Masai has made some great moves, but he has also let opportunity pass him by. You could do the same timeline for the Knicks pick, which was considered absolute gold on this forum for a long time. But we waited, and waited, and waited, and it turned into Jakob Poeltl. Who is decent enough, but it's a far cry from what that pick was valued at over the course of our possessing it.

It's the flip side of being patient. There is such a thing as being too patient. Daryl Morey's twitter quotes Into the Woods, but it's relevant: "Opportunity is not a lengthy visitor."

[Chr1s1anL]

I mean, sure, if MEM isn't too concerned with a good return for Gasol.

Or if the Raps are willing to give up Poeltl, at the very least.

I don't think Gasol has that much value. Lets not for get he is 32. Only contender teams would be interested and that's a small group of teams. I don't think Boston would be interested. I can only think of the Cavs who would be very interested. Also if he starts forcing his way out it lowers it more.

[3inthekeon]

I don't see why it has to be either Casey's fault or JV's fault. I think both are guilty for the current situation. Casey fucked up his development from repeated benchings even when JV played well. On the other hand, JV has had many seasons to notice that the league is changing and doesn't have need for lumbering Cs with no range. He should have used this time to develop something....anything that would make him valuable in today's game. A 3pt shot, better passing...anything, but he hasn't. He's essentially the same player as he was 2-3 years ago, whereas the league has changed dramatically, leaving him in the dust.

Casey fucked up by not incorporating him properly in the offence when he was on the floor. But that had little to do with stunting his development.As for "playing well", many fans only see points and rebounds, where JV excelled. Being a half step late on defensive rotations or not making proper reads is not something average fans can see. But coaching staffs definitely see that.

[JimiCliff]

But that had little to do with stunting his development.

We have no idea if this is true. It might have. And if it did - this might indicate a mental weakness on JV's part that would disqualify him from ever being a really significant NBA contributor. Or - it might not, and Casey's treatment of JV might have been poor coaching that permanently hurt his growth as a player. Any of this is possible.

[S.R.]

It's not revisionist history at all. In fact, I'd say yours is the more revisionist version of history. Jonas was a 28mpg player in his second year, but that dropped to 26mpg the next three years, with him frequently benched in fourth quarters. He only averaged 8.3 FGA/g that second year, which was tied with Greivis Vasquez for 5th/6th on the team. Despite expectations that a high-value sophomore would have an increased workload, he never cleared 9 FGA/g over the next three seasons.

In fact, it was already obvious by December 2014 (his third season) that things weren't going to change under Casey. Which is why someone made this post:
http://forums.raptorsrepublic.com/sh...ht=#post395811




There have been so many articles about Jonas's usage and fourth quarter benchings over the past few years, I'm not sure how anyone could honestly say that this is the first year he's clearly fallen out of favour. Here's an example from that same season, Feb 2015. https://www.thestar.com/sports/rapto...ors-coach.html

And part of the role of the front office and coaching staff is to figure out where the league is going, not chasing where it's been. That same year (2014-15) was the one where they were trying to get him to play like Hibbert.
http://nationalpost.com/sports/baske...that-as-a-goal

That year the Warriors won the Finals (2015). It's also the year we were swept by the Wizards. Masai had an opportunity to either fire Casey, or to accept that JV wasn't going to be used to his full potential by Casey (or fit in this new NBA). But he neither fired Casey, nor did he trade JV.

In fact, Masai had a full year from that point forward to trade JV for good value. JV showed plenty of flashes to retain his "potential" tag, most notably against the Cavs in the 2016 playoffs. And he was signed to what was perceived to be a team-friendly extension, one which he had not yet started (it kicked in in 2016-17).

And still Masai chose to do nothing. Instead he waited, and waited, and over the course of 2016-17, the media began to really hammer home that maybe JV was in the same group as Greg Monroe and Enes Kanter (Zach Lowe brought it up in a podcast last year). It became leaguewide consensus that there is a glut of old-school centres, which is why we tried too late to move JV, and things have gotten even worse this year, as JV is now showing his frustration in the locker room in front of reporters.

Masai has made some great moves, but he has also let opportunity pass him by. You could do the same timeline for the Knicks pick, which was considered absolute gold on this forum for a long time. But we waited, and waited, and waited, and it turned into Jakob Poeltl. Who is decent enough, but it's a far cry from what that pick was valued at over the course of our possessing it.

It's the flip side of being patient. There is such a thing as being too patient. Daryl Morey's twitter quotes Into the Woods, but it's relevant: "Opportunity is not a lengthy visitor."

Agreed on the last sentence, but did you look at JV's per 36 FGA and USG%? In spite of losing about 2 mpg over that 4 year period, his shots and usage either held steady or increased per 36. There wasn't a year-over-year progression of working this guy out of the offence, that's a myth.

Yes there have been other points of debate about JV and about every other player on the team, about the coach, about everything. Now that JV is playing 20 mpg it's easy to look back and say "This should have been obvious!", but very few people around here were arguing for trading JV in 2014 or 2015. The Raptors generally believed in the same signs of promise that you're saying would have given him trade value a few years ago, e.g. he was a critical player in their deepest playoff run to date.

[DanH]

As promised, here's the bulk of that article I wrote, with most of the wordy bits cut out. If you want explanations of why this stuff is being presented beyond what I keep here, clicky the link.

https://www.raptorshq.com/2017/11/28...as-serge-ibaka

Let’s keep things in context here. How badly have the starters performed this year?

Well, there have actually been a bunch of starting lineups due to injuries, but the two that have played by far the most minutes are Kyle Lowry, DeMar DeRozan, Serge Ibaka and Jonas Valanciunas joined by one of Norman Powell or OG Anunoby.

Lineup | Minutes Played | Offensive Rating | Defensive Rating | Net Rating
KL-DD-NP-SI-JV: 122 MP, 107.2 ORTG, 112.0 DRTG, -4.8 RTG
KL-DD-OG-SI-JV: 91 MP, 113.8 ORTG, 112.7 DRTG, +1.1 RTG

Rather than dealing with two lineups separately, let’s look at the 4-man unit of Lowry, DeRozan, Ibaka and Valanciunas, as that’s really what we are questioning here. The small forward position seems likely to take care of itself, at least in the short term.

Lineup | Minutes Played | Offensive Rating | Defensive Rating | Net Rating
KL-DD-SI-JV: 228 MP, 111.6 ORTG, 111.4 DRTG, +0.2 RTG

So, that’s not great. Certainly, you want better than .500 ball from your starting unit. But let’s also put it in the context of the issues from the past, again using 4-man units, ignoring the revolving door at starting SF.

Lineup | Minutes Played | Offensive Rating | Defensive Rating | Net Rating
2016-17 Siakam Starters: 458 MP, 106.2 ORTG, 113.3 DRTG, -7.0 RTG
2015-16 Scola Starters: 779 MP, 103.2 ORTG, 108.1 DRTG, -4.9 RTG

And it really does seem to be an issue for the starters specifically at the start of each half. Consider the following breakdown for the starting 4-some we talked about above.

Quarter | Minutes Played | Net Rating
1st Q: 98 MP, -8.5 RTG
2nd Q: 44 MP, +29.3 RTG
3rd Q: 68 MP, -13.0 RTG
4th Q: 17 MP, +19.9 RTG

What the heck, right? These guys suck to start each half, and are awesome to close each half. They’ve played a lot more in 1st and 3rd Q’s, as you’d expect, so their awesome play later in halves is just managing to balance out their overall numbers. But why? Why would they play so poorly to start if they are capable of playing so well, and do so, later in each half?

What if Siakam Starts?
How has that lineup done this year, overall? We’ll again isolate from the SF position and use the 4-man lineup of Lowry, DeRozan, Ibaka and Siakam to maximize the sample size. Also, somehow those four have played with all three of Valanciunas, Poeltl and Nogueira for short spurts, so we’ll remove those minutes, since we’re not really talking about 3-big lineups.

Lineup | Minutes Played | Offensive Rating | Defensive Rating | Net Rating
KL-DD-PS-SI: 73 MP, 106.0 ORTG, 102.3 DRTG, +3.7 RTG

Well then, the defense looks much better. The offense dips considerably, but not enough to wash out the defensive improvement, and they post a slight positive rating. Not exactly the killer lineup you’d hope for, but at least a small improvement, and if it could hold up over a full season, it would be a significant positive contribution to carry a small positive margin over heavy minutes.

But there’s more context here — remember when we looked at the starting lineup by quarter, and how they somehow started slowly but played well later in halves? Let’s run the same test with this group, although we know the samples will be small.

Quarter | Minutes Played | Net Rating
1st Q: 17 MP, -20.9 RTG
2nd Q: 13 MP, +5.9 RTG
3rd Q: 23 MP, +11.7 RTG
4th Q: 20 MP, +12.7 RTG

Well, the third quarter is better at least, though the Pacers game showed that’s no guarantee. (The lineup had a +28 net rating in the third prior to the Pacers game, but that didn’t stop the collapse.) But sadly the first quarter numbers are actually even worse than the starters have posted. Of course, the above is all small sample theatre, and overall as we showed they’ve washed out to a slight positive, but the trend continues with this lineup — they are struggling to get started. When you consider that the vast majority of those 1st and 3rd quarter minutes would have come after about six minutes, that muddies the waters as well.

The good news is, Poeltl has actually gotten a nice chunk of minutes beside the other starters, often when Valanciunas has gotten an early hook or in his place in the 4th when the team is closing and needs defense on the floor. The bad news... well, I’ll show you. Here are Poeltl’s on-court ratings when playing with, a) all three of Lowry, DeRozan and Serge, and, b) both Lowry and DeRozan, with or without Serge, to give a larger sample than the first one. Again I’ve removed the weird 3-big lineup minutes.

Lineup | Minutes Played | Offensive Rating | Defensive Rating | Net Rating
KL-DD-SI-JP: 27 MP, 89.8 ORTG, 115.9 DRTG, -26.1 RTG
KL-DD-JP: 73 MP, 102.8 ORTG, 118.1 DRTG, -15.3 RTG

So... yeah, that’s not great. And 73 minutes is a pretty sizeable sample there. Personally I think that although Poeltl has shown great promise and has really helped that bench unit, he’s just not physically ready for the starting bigs this league can throw at you. For whatever reason, this idea looks less than promising. The defense has somehow been worse than the starting lineup’s has been, and the offense falls off a cliff.

And at the same time, even if you think the results would come around, Poeltl hasn’t exactly shown an ability to stay on the court in those matchups. He racks up seven personal fouls per 36 minutes when playing with both Lowry and DeRozan. That’s a very high rate — the highest rate on the team right now is Valanciunas with 5.0 PF/36, Poeltl right behind him with an overall rate of 4.9 PF/36.

For the record, Nogueira has the same issue. When he’s played with all three of Lowry, DeRozan and Ibaka (he has a decent sample with all three at 39 minutes) he’s fouling at a rate of 9.1 personal fouls per 36 minutes. That’s insane.

My personal theory? The Raptors lead guards think they have to run the offense through Valanciunas and Ibaka when they are out there, especially to start halves. In the first quarter, Ibaka and Valanciunas carry usage rates of 24% and 23% respectively. In the third quarter, 19% and 25%. But remember from above, those starting lineups have excelled in the second and fourth quarters. In the second quarter, the two bigs have carried usage rates of 15% and 17%, and in the 4th: 16% and 17%.

Although the offense clicks well enough for that group, it clicks better later (it’s roughly league average in the first and third quarters), and asking more of the bigs just takes energy they could be using defensively. (The other big concern for me, the inconsistent energy, from all five guys, defensively). I think a more aggressive approach from the guards early in games could lead more naturally to the appropriate usage for the bigs, where their opportunities feed off of a defense broken trying to contain the guards, rather than force-feeding them looks. The lack of attacking mentality also makes it seem like the team is going through the motions early, which may translate to that missing defensive energy.

[Cross]

And it really does seem to be an issue for the starters specifically at the start of each half. Consider the following breakdown for the starting 4-some we talked about above.

Quarter | Minutes Played | Net Rating
1st Q: 98 MP, -8.5 RTG
2nd Q: 44 MP, +29.3 RTG
3rd Q: 68 MP, -13.0 RTG
4th Q: 17 MP, +19.9 RTG

What the heck, right? These guys suck to start each half, and are awesome to close each half. They’ve played a lot more in 1st and 3rd Q’s, as you’d expect, so their awesome play later in halves is just managing to balance out their overall numbers. But why? Why would they play so poorly to start if they are capable of playing so well, and do so, later in each half?

Dan, you might consider this:
1st and 3rd Q's are strictly against opposing starters.
Is there a way to check, if 2nd and 4th are partly against lesser competition?

Also, might be the case, while playing against "rested" (1st and 3rd Q's) players, the speed of our starting unit (not only JV's, but of all main 4) bites the team in the ass and this laziness or(and) lack of speed is of less importance, as opponents naturally drop their tempo moving towards the end of the half?

Is there any data, that can prove/dismiss these ideas?

[DanH]

Dan, you might consider this:
1st and 3rd Q's are strictly against opposing starters.
Is there a way to check, if 2nd and 4th are partly against lesser competition?

Also, might be the case, while playing against "rested" (1st and 3rd Q's) players, the speed of our starting unit (not only JV's, but of all main 4) bites the team in the ass and this laziness or(and) lack of speed is of less importance, as opponents naturally drop their tempo moving towards the end of the half?

Is there any data, that can prove/dismiss these ideas?

If there’s data, I can’t access it easily. Sorry.

As for the competition, if anything they probably face lesser competition in the 1st and 3rd, as often they’ll get run late into the Q (later than I’d like) when some teams sub bench players in, while in the 2nd and 4th they tend to only come in right at the end of the half when most teams are running out their best lineups.

[3inthekeon]

Seems everyone's been barking up the wrong tree.

Lowry/DeRozan with:

JV 289.7 MP +0.3 Net

Poeltl 80.2 MP -15.2 Net

Bebe 98.0 MP +11.0 Net