OT: The "Euro" Raptors?

[Masbee]

Well as others mentioned, it would kind of be like a broke-man's SSOL Sun's team, which I found very entertaining (and they won games). The Suns didn't have any good defenders outside of Marion either really. I think it would be fun to watch, at the very least. I wasn't saying their a contender by any means.

Raja Bell was a key defender for the Suns, after the Joe Johnson era.

The Suns were pretty unique.

Nash was a ridiculously good shooter. From all spots on the floor. Set. Moving. Falling away.

Calderon is not as good as a shooter.

Nash is a phenom with his dribble and passing.

Calderon is good. Just not as good.

Bosh is a good player, and more well rounded. But, he isn't Amare on the offensive end.

Amare (at his peak, which coincided with Sun's peak), attacked the paint like no other.

That combination of Nash and Amare, surrounded by some decent role players that couldn't be completely ignored, made the Nash/Amare pick and roll the deadliest offensive weapon in the NBA. There wasn't anything like it.

So, you start with an MVP point guard, a near MVP caliber (offensively) big, and build on that with a couple of nice complementary players who don't need to have the ball to help the team: Marion and Raja Bell. That makes for a very good team.

The Raptors don't have a duo anything near as good as Nash/Amare. Nor do they guys who contribute without the ball that were as good as Raja (defense, making wide open threes) or Marion (defense, rebounding, running the floor).

At least they got their Boris Diaw replacement in Turk.

Again, the Raptors have no hope to come close to the Dantoni Suns.

The motor is driven by Nash. They don't have a Nash. So it starts to breakdown as soon as you start the engine. Then, Bosh isn't the same kind of inside force offensively that Amare was. This means the defenses can stay home a little more. This reduces the impact of the role players and shooters. And so on.

Now we get to the defense. It is mythology that the Suns had a BAD defensive team. They did not. They were not a top defensive team. There is a big difference. Overall they were middle of the pack defensively. Their PPS allowed ranking averaged 15th. It was their ppg against that fooled some people.

They played team defense to make up for their weak defenders. They had two good defenders in Marion and Bell. They suckered many teams into taking bad shots - which is defense of a sort. Who on the Raptors is as good defensively as Marion and Bell? I think the Raptors will be a bad defensive team. Not as good offensively as the Suns were. Worse defensively. How can this work well?

 

[Boob-No-More]

back to the new jersey series- i know u might think i suffer from a bout of homerism but i guarantee u that the raps should of won that series. the raps all but won the decisive game sixth but caledron through an errant (really bad) pass which should have connected with chris bosh for a wide open layup. that would have meant game seven at home for toronto and as u know- home teams have historically dominated games sevens.

I remember that game and agree that Toronto should have won that game and won the series. However, my point is it shouldn't have come down to that one play. If Toronto would have rebounded better, the game would not have been that close and would not have come down to one errant pass to determine the outcome of the the series.

notwithstanding all the optimism from raptor nation- i agree, the raps are at best a second round team.

As an outsider, I see them as, at best, a first round team.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

They played team defense to make up for their weak defenders. They had two good defenders in Marion and Bell. They suckered many teams into taking bad shots - which is defense of a sort. Who on the Raptors is as good defensively as Marion and Bell? I think the Raptors will be a bad defensive team. Not as good offensively as the Suns were. Worse defensively. How can this work well?

All good points. I think the Raptors will play a similar style, but will be inferior in all ways to that Suns team. They will be inferior offensively. They have similar weapons, but lesser talent. And, I agree their defense will be much worse - especially on the permitter where the Sunds had Marion and Bell. I remember watching the Suns dismantle the Blazers back then. Nash totally picked apart the Blazers defense and it seemed like every Phoenix possession ended in a wide open shot. On the other end, Marion (who even guarded the Blazers PGs at times) and Bell did a great job closing out on teh Blazers shooters. So, while the Suns were getting wide open shots, the Blazers were often forcing shots with a hand in their face. Marion's length, in particular, made things difficult for the Blazers perimeter shooters.

Ironic that the Raptors had Marion and let him slip away. I know his stats have been down since he left the Suns, but he would esily be the Raptors best perimeter defender and was their best rebounder (for his position) for them last season.

So, where the Suns were winning 60 games and making it to the Conference Finals. I see these Raptors winning 40 - 45 games and getting bounced in the 1st round. And, if Bosh leaves next summer, this might be their best chance at advancing past the 1st round for the next several years. They've made a lot of moves, and I think they have definitely improved their team. However, they have committed a ton of salary to a roster that is ill suited to post season success.

BNM

 

[rocketeer]

The Raps will have to score 106 points a game to get 50 wins because they're going to be giving up 105.

that's why i said 50 wins was possible only if everything goes right.

 

[Shapecity]

pg - calderon/jack
sg - belinelli/jack
sf - hedo/derozan
pf - bosh/reggie evans
c - bargnani/patrick obryant

that's basically what the raptors are looking at. it really is a very poor man's suns team from when they had joe johnson. you've got bosh as amare, calderon as a lesser version of nash, and hedo as young joe johnson. the biggest diffence is the downgrade from marion/qrich/barbosa/jim jackson to bargnani/belinelli/jack/derozan.

i see 50 wins as possible for this raptors team if everything goes right(though my prediction would be a record just over .500), but it's hard for me to see them knocking off anyone in the playoffs.

Don't forget Rasho Nesterovic.

 

[rocketeer]

Don't forget Rasho Nesterovic.

i missed them signing him. he's definitely a better option than obryant.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

clearly the league is being stratified between the haves and the have-nots. cleveland, orlando and boston are the class of the east and atl, washington, miami and toronto are a few notches behind. in that second tier- i think tor has a legit chance to get the fourth seed. why? cause they have more depth than the other three and in a 82 game season- depth matters. plus, the superstar in miami and agent zero both have well chronicled injury histories.

What depth?

 

[Ed O]

Teams that run high paced "gimick" offenses tend to overachieve during the regular season, but underachieve in the play-offs. During the regular season, with so many games, rarely playing the same team twice in a row, and few days to prepare between games, teams that play an unconventional style tend to steal several games against "better" teams. In the post season, when you play the same team 4 - 7 games in a row and have multiple days off between games to prepare it's easy to exploit your opponent's weaknesses. The only SSOL team that has had any success in the post season was the Suns - and even they underperformed in the post season relative to their regular season results.

I know this is the conventional wisdom, but I'm not sure that it's accurate. The Warriors in 2006-07 were first in pace, for example, and upset the Mavs (28th in pace) in the first round in spite of winning 25 fewer games in the regular season. Last year Denver was fifth in pace and made it to the Conference Finals.

It would be interesting to see teams how teams with high pace do in the playoffs.

Ed O.

 

[deception]

What depth?

look above. they have a quality backup at every position

 

[Ed O]

look above. they have a quality backup at every position

Hmm... Jack is but one man, DeRozan is 20 years old and O'Bryant has appeared in 79 games in three seasons.

Evans is a good rotation guy, but I don't think it's accurate to say they have a quality backup at every position.

Ed O.

 

[deception]

Hmm... Jack is but one man, DeRozan is 20 years old and O'Bryant has appeared in 79 games in three seasons.

Evans is a good rotation guy, but I don't think it's accurate to say they have a quality backup at every position.

Ed O.

rasho is quality, evans and jack we agree on, belinelli is quality in my opinion and wright is a defensive pest at the very least

 

[deception]

oh forgot- i cosign on obryant, hes a scrub.

 

[Ed O]

oh forgot- i cosign on obryant, hes a scrub.

Yeah, I had a brain cramp on Rasho, otherwise I would've given you credit for him as a quality backup big.

Sorry if you addressed this above, but do you see DeRozan as the starting 2?

Ed O.

 

[Natebishop3]

Hmm... Jack is but one man, DeRozan is 20 years old and O'Bryant has appeared in 79 games in three seasons.

Evans is a good rotation guy, but I don't think it's accurate to say they have a quality backup at every position.

Ed O.

And I really wasn't very impressed with DeRozan when I saw him in the SL.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

look above. they have a quality backup at every position

Rasho and Jack are the only quality backups.

 

[Master Shake]

The Raps will have to score 106 points a game to get 50 wins because they're going to be giving up 105.

I don't care if we give up 200 a night, if we win, I'll be happy.

 

[Minstrel]

if we win

No.

I'll be happy.

No.

Sorry.

 

[Boob-No-More]

look above. they have a quality backup at every position

I suppose it all depends on how you define "quality". By my definition, they don't even have quality starters (as in above average players) at all the starting positions. If we just look at PER from last season (which I know is flawed, but it favors offense over defense, just like Bryan Colangelo, so it's probably good enough for this purpose), the Raptors only have quality starters at 2 of the 5 positions, and quality back-ups at none. The average NBA player has a PER of 15.0.

PG: Quality starter, below average back-up
Starter: Calderon, PER = 18.7, quality starter, well above average offensively, poor defender.
Back-up: Jack, PER = 13.1, good guy, below average player.

SG: Your weakest position, far below average starter, below average/unproven back-ups
Starter: Belinelli, PER = 11.8, significantly below average player. not a quality starter.
Back-up: Jack (see above) or DeRozan, unproven rookie, highly unlikely to have a PER => 15.0.

SF:Average starter, unproven back-up.
Starter: Hedo, PER = 14.8, suprisingly low PER for an offensive minded player.
Back-up: Derozan (see above)

PF: All-star starter, well below average back-up.
Starter: Bosh, PER = 22.7, far above average, your best player and definitely a quality starter.
Back-up: Evans, PER = 10.4, excellent rebounder, but a horrible offensive player.

Center: Below average starter (due to poor rebounding and weak defense), decent back-up.
Starter: Bargnani, PER = 14.6, above average offensively, but far, far below average on defense and the boards, not a quality starting center IMHO.
Back-up: Rasho, PER = 14.1. used to be an above average player, but has slipped a bit with age, still a decent back-up.

Just looking at your top 10, I see only two players who had above average PERs last season. Given that PER favors players who excel at offense over those who excel at defense, I find this very surprising for a team loaded with players who are much better offenseively than they are on defense.

Perhaps it's not fair to only consider players with a PER above 15.0 (by definition, the league average) as quality players. And, admittedly, you have a couple more starters (Hedo and Bargnani) that are only slightly below average and could both post PERs above 15.0 this coming season. It's also not very realistic to think your top 10 players will all be above average. Ideally, your starters would all be average or above and your back-ups slightly below average to average (13.5 - 15.0 PER). It's also nice to have a player coming off the bench that can ignite your offense. Such an offensive sparkplug would likely have a PER above 15.0. If we go by that criteria, Toronto has two above average starters (including one all-star), two slightly below average starters, one horrible starter, and one decent back-up.

Just for grins, let's see how our Blazers stack up.

PG: Solid rotation with one well above average starter and one slightly below average back-up
Starter: Miller, PER = 18.6, well above average starter.
Back-up: Blake, PER = 14.5, slightly below average player, will make a good back-up.

SG: Our strongest position, all-star starter, above average back-up
Starter: Roy, PER = 24.0, all-star, statistically, one of the top 10 players in the league last season.
Back-up: Rudy, PER = 15.4, above average player as a rookie, offensive spark off the bench.

SF: Below average starter (as a rookie, should improve this year), below average back-up coming off an injury.
Starter: Batum, PER = 12.9, last year's surprise starter, undeveloped offensive game lead to low PER as a rookie.
Back-up: Webster, PER = 12.0 (2007-08 - injured last season), a bit of a wild card, former starter coming off a serious foot injury. Outlaw will also see minutes at the 3, so this position isn't as weak as it appears.

PF: Well above average starter, above average back-up.
Starter: Aldridge, PER = 19.1, far above average, not quite an all-star yet, but getting closer every year.
Back-up: Outlaw, PER = 15.1, above average back-up who provides offensive spark off the bench.

Center: One of the best center rotations in the league, outstanding rebounding and defense, low, but efficient scoring
Starter: Przybilla, PER = 15.4, above average center who led the league in TRB%, is a great defender and shot 0.625 from the field.
Back-up: Oden, PER = 18.1, foul and injury plagued rookie season, but was still extremely productive when on the court, likely starter this season.

So, 7 of the Blazers top 10 had PERs above 15.0 last season, including three (one all-star and one near all-star) that were well above average (18.6 - 24.0). They also had two players coming off the bench (Outlaw and Fernandez) that provide potent offense with PERs above 15.0. This year, with Przybilla and Blake likely moving to back-up roles, they should have 4 very solid (PER = 14.5 - 15.4) back-ups. 3 of their top 10 players (Oden, Rudy and Batum) were rookies last season and will likely see significant improvement in their second seasons. So, Portland has four quality starters (including one all-star) and four quality back-ups. A much deeper roster than Toronto.

BNM

 

[LittleAlex]

pg - calderon/jack
sg - belinelli/jack
sf - hedo/derozan
pf - bosh/reggie evans
c - bargnani/patrick obryant

that's basically what the raptors are looking at. it really is a very poor man's suns team from when they had joe johnson. you've got bosh as amare, calderon as a lesser version of nash, and hedo as young joe johnson. the biggest diffence is the downgrade from marion/qrich/barbosa/jim jackson to bargnani/belinelli/jack/derozan.

i see 50 wins as possible for this raptors team if everything goes right(though my prediction would be a record just over .500), but it's hard for me to see them knocking off anyone in the playoffs.

I think they are a Homeless Man's Suns team.

Since I don't watch them much, is Bosh really all that comparable to Amare? For all his faults, Amare was absolutely dominate in the open floor. I have no idea if Bosh has the same skill set.

I read a couple of Raptor blogs that claimed Calderon was risk adverse, implying he didn't really want to push the ball much. Once again, perhaps someone who watches the team can comment.

The biggest difference between JJ on the Suns and Hedo on the Raptors is athleticism. Namely, JJ was a superior athlete and Hedo isn't. That and Hedo is old.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I suppose it all depends on how you define "quality". By my definition, they don't even have quality starters (as in above average players) at all the starting positions. If we just look at PER from last season (which I know is flawed, but it favors offense over defense, just like Bryan Colangelo, so it's probably good enough for this purpose), the Raptors only have quality starters at 2 of the 5 positions, and quality back-ups at none. The average NBA player has a PER of 15.0.

PG: Quality starter, below average back-up
Starter: Calderon, PER = 18.7, quality starter, well above average offensively, poor defender.
Back-up: Jack, PER = 13.1, good guy, below average player.

SG: Your weakest position, far below average starter, below average/unproven back-ups
Starter: Belinelli, PER = 11.8, significantly below average player. not a quality starter.
Back-up: Jack (see above) or DeRozan, unproven rookie, highly unlikely to have a PER => 15.0.

SF:Average starter, unproven back-up.
Starter: Hedo, PER = 14.8, suprisingly low PER for an offensive minded player.
Back-up: Derozan (see above)

PF: All-star starter, well below average back-up.
Starter: Bosh, PER = 22.7, far above average, your best player and definitely a quality starter.
Back-up: Evans, PER = 10.4, excellent rebounder, but a horrible offensive player.

Center: Below average starter (due to poor rebounding and weak defense), decent back-up.
Starter: Bargnani, PER = 14.6, above average offensively, but far, far below average on defense and the boards, not a quality starting center IMHO.
Back-up: Rasho, PER = 14.1. used to be an above average player, but has slipped a bit with age, still a decent back-up.

Just looking at your top 10, I see only two players who had above average PERs last season. Given that PER favors players who excel at offense over those who excel at defense, I find this very surprising for a team loaded with players who are much better offenseively than they are on defense.

Perhaps it's not fair to only consider players with a PER above 15.0 (by definition, the league average) as quality players. And, admittedly, you have a couple more starters (Hedo and Bargnani) that are only slightly below average and could both post PERs above 15.0 this coming season. It's also not very realistic to think your top 10 players will all be above average. Ideally, your starters would all be average or above and your back-ups slightly below average to average (13.5 - 15.0 PER). It's also nice to have a player coming off the bench that can ignite your offense. Such an offensive sparkplug would likely have a PER above 15.0. If we go by that criteria, Toronto has two above average starters (including one all-star), two slightly below average starters, one horrible starter, and one decent back-up.

Just for grins, let's see how our Blazers stack up.

PG: Solid rotation with one well above average starter and one slightly below average back-up
Starter: Miller, PER = 18.6, well above average starter.
Back-up: Blake, PER = 14.5, slightly below average player, will make a good back-up.

SG: Our strongest position, all-star starter, above average back-up
Starter: Roy, PER = 24.0, all-star, statistically, one of the top 10 players in the league last season.
Back-up: Rudy, PER = 15.4, above average player as a rookie, offensive spark off the bench.

SF: Below average starter (as a rookie, should improve this year), below average back-up coming off an injury.
Starter: Batum, PER = 12.9, last year's surprise starter, undeveloped offensive game lead to low PER as a rookie.
Back-up: Webster, PER = 12.0 (2007-08 - injured last season), a bit of a wild card, former starter coming off a serious foot injury. Outlaw will also see minutes at the 3, so this position isn't as weak as it appears.

PF: Well above average starter, above average back-up.
Starter: Aldridge, PER = 19.1, far above average, not quite an all-star yet, but getting closer every year.
Back-up: Outlaw, PER = 15.1, above average back-up who provides offensive spark off the bench.

Center: One of the best center rotations in the league, outstanding rebounding and defense, low, but efficient scoring
Starter: Przybilla, PER = 15.4, above average center who led the league in TRB%, is a great defender and shot 0.625 from the field.
Back-up: Oden, PER = 18.1, foul and injury plagued rookie season, but was still extremely productive when on the court, likely starter this season.

So, 7 of the Blazers top 10 had PERs above 15.0 last season, including three (one all-star and one near all-star) that were well above average (18.6 - 24.0). They also had two players coming off the bench (Outlaw and Fernandez) that provide potent offense with PERs above 15.0. This year, with Przybilla and Blake likely moving to back-up roles, they should have 4 very solid (PER = 14.5 - 15.4) back-ups. 3 of their top 10 players (Oden, Rudy and Batum) were rookies last season and will likely see significant improvement in their second seasons. So, Portland has four quality starters (including one all-star) and four quality back-ups. A much deeper roster than Toronto.

BNM

amazing post

 

[deception]

I suppose it all depends on how you define "quality". By my definition, they don't even have quality starters (as in above average players) at all the starting positions. If we just look at PER from last season (which I know is flawed, but it favors offense over defense, just like Bryan Colangelo, so it's probably good enough for this purpose), the Raptors only have quality starters at 2 of the 5 positions, and quality back-ups at none. The average NBA player has a PER of 15.0.

PG: Quality starter, below average back-up
Starter: Calderon, PER = 18.7, quality starter, well above average offensively, poor defender.
Back-up: Jack, PER = 13.1, good guy, below average player.

SG: Your weakest position, far below average starter, below average/unproven back-ups
Starter: Belinelli, PER = 11.8, significantly below average player. not a quality starter.
Back-up: Jack (see above) or DeRozan, unproven rookie, highly unlikely to have a PER => 15.0.

SF:Average starter, unproven back-up.
Starter: Hedo, PER = 14.8, suprisingly low PER for an offensive minded player.
Back-up: Derozan (see above)

PF: All-star starter, well below average back-up.
Starter: Bosh, PER = 22.7, far above average, your best player and definitely a quality starter.
Back-up: Evans, PER = 10.4, excellent rebounder, but a horrible offensive player.

Center: Below average starter (due to poor rebounding and weak defense), decent back-up.
Starter: Bargnani, PER = 14.6, above average offensively, but far, far below average on defense and the boards, not a quality starting center IMHO.
Back-up: Rasho, PER = 14.1. used to be an above average player, but has slipped a bit with age, still a decent back-up.

Just looking at your top 10, I see only two players who had above average PERs last season. Given that PER favors players who excel at offense over those who excel at defense, I find this very surprising for a team loaded with players who are much better offenseively than they are on defense.

Perhaps it's not fair to only consider players with a PER above 15.0 (by definition, the league average) as quality players. And, admittedly, you have a couple more starters (Hedo and Bargnani) that are only slightly below average and could both post PERs above 15.0 this coming season. It's also not very realistic to think your top 10 players will all be above average. Ideally, your starters would all be average or above and your back-ups slightly below average to average (13.5 - 15.0 PER). It's also nice to have a player coming off the bench that can ignite your offense. Such an offensive sparkplug would likely have a PER above 15.0. If we go by that criteria, Toronto has two above average starters (including one all-star), two slightly below average starters, one horrible starter, and one decent back-up.

Just for grins, let's see how our Blazers stack up.

PG: Solid rotation with one well above average starter and one slightly below average back-up
Starter: Miller, PER = 18.6, well above average starter.
Back-up: Blake, PER = 14.5, slightly below average player, will make a good back-up.

SG: Our strongest position, all-star starter, above average back-up
Starter: Roy, PER = 24.0, all-star, statistically, one of the top 10 players in the league last season.
Back-up: Rudy, PER = 15.4, above average player as a rookie, offensive spark off the bench.

SF: Below average starter (as a rookie, should improve this year), below average back-up coming off an injury.
Starter: Batum, PER = 12.9, last year's surprise starter, undeveloped offensive game lead to low PER as a rookie.
Back-up: Webster, PER = 12.0 (2007-08 - injured last season), a bit of a wild card, former starter coming off a serious foot injury. Outlaw will also see minutes at the 3, so this position isn't as weak as it appears.

PF: Well above average starter, above average back-up.
Starter: Aldridge, PER = 19.1, far above average, not quite an all-star yet, but getting closer every year.
Back-up: Outlaw, PER = 15.1, above average back-up who provides offensive spark off the bench.

Center: One of the best center rotations in the league, outstanding rebounding and defense, low, but efficient scoring
Starter: Przybilla, PER = 15.4, above average center who led the league in TRB%, is a great defender and shot 0.625 from the field.
Back-up: Oden, PER = 18.1, foul and injury plagued rookie season, but was still extremely productive when on the court, likely starter this season.

So, 7 of the Blazers top 10 had PERs above 15.0 last season, including three (one all-star and one near all-star) that were well above average (18.6 - 24.0). They also had two players coming off the bench (Outlaw and Fernandez) that provide potent offense with PERs above 15.0. This year, with Przybilla and Blake likely moving to back-up roles, they should have 4 very solid (PER = 14.5 - 15.4) back-ups. 3 of their top 10 players (Oden, Rudy and Batum) were rookies last season and will likely see significant improvement in their second seasons. So, Portland has four quality starters (including one all-star) and four quality back-ups. A much deeper roster than Toronto.

BNM

is it me or are we too preoccupied with stats? does per measure willingness to sacrifice your body, willingness to play through pain or ones contribution to locker room chemistry? NO. as an example- oden grades well in PER but every time i see him- he looks disinterested and utterly confused. i guess PER doesnt measure intellect either

 

[Minstrel]

is it me or are we too preoccupied with stats? does per measure willingness to sacrifice your body, willingness to play through pain or ones contribution to locker room chemistry? NO.

No, because intangibles are in the eye of the beholder. PER also doesn't measure how attractive you find the player. It measure their actual effect on the court.

as an example- oden grades well in PER but every time i see him- he looks disinterested and utterly confused. i guess PER doesnt measure intellect either

If it made him worse at scoring, rebounding, passing or not turning the ball over, it would be measured. It doesn't measure "how he looks to you whenever you see him."

I love the argument that goes: "Fuck stats. Do they measure <stream of random things>? No? Well, then clearly all the players I like or that are on my team are underrated. Case closed."

Bosh ranks well by PER. All-Star level. But every time I see him, he seems passionless, disinterested and like he'd rather be wind-surfing. Clearly a scrub. CLEARLY. Guess PER doesn't measure "rather be wind-surfing."

 

[oldmangrouch]

Simple marketing tactic - if you can't win, at least be exciting!

As BNM points out, their best case scenario is that they over-achieve in the regular season and keep the fans coming to the games.

 

[deception]

No, because intangibles are in the eye of the beholder. PER also doesn't measure how attractive you find the player. It measure their actual effect on the court.



If it made him worse at scoring, rebounding, passing or not turning the ball over, it would be measured. It doesn't measure "how he looks to you whenever you see him."

I love the argument that goes: "Fuck stats. Do they measure <stream of random things>? No? Well, then clearly all the players I like or that are on my team are underrated. Case closed."

Bosh ranks well by PER. All-Star level. But every time I see him, he seems passionless, disinterested and like he'd rather be wind-surfing. Clearly a scrub. CLEARLY. Guess PER doesn't measure "rather be wind-surfing."

my point is that stats dont tell the entire tale. and u cant compare a 5 time all star to a dude who just completed an unimpressive rookie season.

 

[Minstrel]

my point is that stats dont tell the entire tale.

No, but it tells a lot of it. Trying to factor in things that no one really has any idea how to factor in simply adds randomness, not information. We can say that such appraisals are not 100% certain, but they do tell us that most of Toronto's players aren't likely to be significantly better than average.

and u cant compare a 5 time all star to a dude who just completed an unimpressive rookie season.

True that you can't compare someone who's only had an abbreviated rookie season (if you mean Oden) to someone has been successful for a while, due to differences in minutes and sample sizes.

Whether that rookie season was "unimpressive" sort of begs the question. If you throw out PER as misleading because it says that someone you thought was unimpressive was actually quite good, then all you're really saying is, "PER doesn't validate my opinion so it must be wrong."

 

[Idog1976]

im withholding judgment on colangelo's frenetic summer but keep in mind that im unequivocally the most ardent critic of colangelo in raptorland. although, i will say that he's acquiring assets which means that if we get close within the next couple of years, he might be able to swing a deal that would make us serious contenders. of course that hinges on derozan blossoming and hedo making a significant contribution. big IF's? but without hope- we would have nothing but our socialized healthcare.

LMAO awesome closer. LOL!

 

[deception]

. If you throw out PER as misleading because it says that someone you thought was unimpressive was actually quite good, then all you're really saying is, "PER doesn't validate my opinion so it must be wrong."

exactly. im not proposing we throw out per but i think it only has value when u view it in context of what we know about a player.

 

[Chutney]

Simple marketing tactic - if you can't win, at least be exciting!

As BNM points out, their best case scenario is that they over-achieve in the regular season and keep the fans coming to the games.

Oh they'll keep coming regardless. Chris Bosh's potential departure has created a sense of urgency in the organization that us fans never could.

 

[Boob-No-More]

is it me or are we too preoccupied with stats? does per measure willingness to sacrifice your body, willingness to play through pain or ones contribution to locker room chemistry? NO. as an example- oden grades well in PER but every time i see him- he looks disinterested and utterly confused. i guess PER doesnt measure intellect either

Says the guy whose team has a roster full of players with unimpressive stats... Go figure.

There's really only one stat that matters - wins. The Blazers, with their disinterested players and high PERs won 54 games. The Raptors, with a roster full of players with low PERs won 33. Gee, maybe there is something to all these stats after all. The superior production of the Blazers players shows up directly in the scores of their games where they had a +5.3 per game point differential. The Raptors, with a roster full of below average producers had a point differential of -2.9. The roster full of players who consistently produced at a better than average rate won significantly more games than they lost. The roster full of below average producers lost significantly more game than they won. No surprises there. You can choose to ignore the stats if you want, but it won't change the results.

As I stated in my original post, PER is not a perfect stat and it doesn't tell the whole story. It is one of many stats that attempts to summarize a player's production in a single number. It tends to favor offense (more easily measured) over defense, and you also have to consider sample size - all of the players I posted PERs for played significant minutes in 2008-09, other than Webster (so I used his 2007-08 PER). Although it's not a perfect stat, PER is useful for these types of discussions as long as you understand its limitations.

How you think Oden looks has ZERO impact on his production. Oden, as a rookie, fighting injuries and constant foul trouble, was among the league leaders in TRB%. To be an outstanding rebounder requires hustle and desire. There are no disinterested and confused elite rebounders. Oden's TRB% was exactly twice Bargnani's (20.0 vs. 10.0). I'll take Oden's disinterested and confused appearance over Bargnani's poor production any day.

As far as intellect goes, who would you rather have on your team, LeBron James or Albert Einstein? If it's a basketball team, I think I'd go with LeBron over Albert's superior intellect. Yes, some players are smarter than others, but that also shows up in the stats. Dumb players make dumb decisions and that shows up as turn overs and missed shots.

BNM