Acie Show full post »
LX
Northern Neighbour wrote:


As Dan has mentioned, when FVV initiates the offence, the offence becomes stagnant. Honestly, he shouldn't be running the offence down the stretch because a) he cannot get into the lane with better defenders on him; b) he has difficulty finishing at the rim; and c) he too often does his best CuJo imitation and pound the rock into the floor until there are 6 to 8 seconds left. He's very good against bench guys for a reason.

He's a smart player, but again his overall impact is marginal due to his many limitations.

I do understand the "progress" thing because it's an argument that I used early in the season. We're midway through the year, and it's time to start using the most effective lineups in crunch time. If FVV is going well, like he was against Milwaukee, then run with him. However, too often this year Casey has stubbornly kept him on the floor despite his and the overall unit's struggles.


Yeah, you seem pretty stuck on the limitations. I think he is moving past some of those. I could be wrong, but i am not seeing anything like cujo in him for quite some time now. I did the same thing with Jonas, in seeing limitations above all else. That was based on a lot more of a span of play. But i was still reacting too soon to a guy that was in better shape and asked to do some different things within this system.

And as for the most effective lineups in crunch time - how about not falling back on relying on Kyle and DeMar too heavily in crunch time? They still need to fully cement the new style of play above all else. We're talking about something that can easily take more than a season or personnel change to accomplish. Let's rely on what is entirely known as being the most effective lineups come playoff time, and at that point let's also have confidence in different guys being able to provide a big impact in a game or two. This would seem to me to still be very much the stage for noting and building upon progressions.
Quote 2 0
Northern Neighbour
LX wrote:
Yeah, you seem pretty stuck on the limitations. I think he is moving past some of those. I could be wrong, but i am not seeing anything like cujo in him for quite some time now. I did the same thing with Jonas, in seeing limitations above all else. That was based on a lot more of a span of play. But i was still reacting too soon to a guy that was in better shape and asked to do some different things within this system. And as for the most effective lineups in crunch time - how about not falling back on relying on Kyle and DeMar too heavily in crunch time? They still need to fully cement the new style of play above all else. We're talking about something that can easily take more than a season or personnel change to accomplish. Let's rely on what is entirely known as being the most effective lineups come playoff time, and at that point let's also have confidence in different guys being able to provide a big impact in a game or two. This would seem to me to still be very much the stage for noting and building upon progressions.


Of course I'm going to focus on a player's strengths and weaknesses. Why wouldn't I? When a player like FVV has significant weaknesses, it affects the entire unit on the court. It's been mentioned many times but you refuse to comprehend what has been written – from creating poor matchups defensively to the opposition sagging off him on the offensive end to his inability to create and finish close to the rim. For example, when DD plays his natural SG role, the team's chances of winning is 70%. When he moves to SF spot, the percentages decrease to 58%. And for FVV himself, playing the PG spot means a 65% win probability, and this declines to 50% when he's at the SG spot (when he's on the court with Lowry). That's not an effective use of personnel.

And if you go to 82games.com, it's interesting to see the win probability of certain 5-man units. The two lineups Casey has frequently used to close games - KL, FVV, DD, OG, and Ibaka or KL, FVV, DD, Siakim, and Ibaka - have, respectively, a 42% and 50% win probability.

The Raptors' best lineup according to 82games is the starting 5 with a 71% win probability. Actually, KL, DD, Miles, OG, and JV have a 100% win probability but that's in only 34 minutes.

Not sure what your point is about not relying too heavily on KL and DD because they've clearly changed their games. Plus, how is having FVV on the court alleviating their responsibilities when he does very little to create for others, is also gun shy when it comes to shooting, and has difficulties finishing at the rim if he gets there? As mentioned, defences sag off FVV and cheat into the lane. One can say FVV is there for floor spacing, but when he's gun shy how is offering floor spacing? If that's the goal, then put in Miles (but he's a defensive liability so he's not on the court at that time).

And again, I was with the "progression" viewpoint from the start of the season when you were MIA. Now, though, Casey has pretty much stuck with the same final five guys at the end of games barring a complete blow out. He's used Wright on occasion, but it's been mostly FVV. Now if he was rotating Wright, FVV, Miles, Siakim, and Powell into these roles then you might have a point. However, he no longer is doing this.
Quote 0 0
LX
The last couple of weeks DeMar's passing had been down, Kyle had been in a funk and there wasn't the kind of cohesion we saw at times this month. The progress is there overall, but they've coasted a bit. I'm not sure stats that pronounce 100% win probabilities mean that everything has been cemented. If that's the case then count me as happily wrong. Should coaches make decisions based on predictions of win probabilities at the expense of following principals? Playoffs playoffs playoffs. That's what it's about, and even though there has been progress and change, it's hardly complete. Assists have dipped through much of the past few weeks. Play on the road in particular has faltered. I think there was a real need to keep the ball moving throughout games. That doesn't equate to immediate success. Certainly no 100% probabilities. But it is what they need to get to the success that is going to matter.
Quote 2 0
DanH
I’m not saying VanVleet shouldn’t have been given a shot there - he was having an incredible impact early in the season with the bench (seemingly, turned out a lot of that was OG), so no harm trying it. But right now he’s getting a dramatically bigger shot than any of the other options on the roster, which I don’t understand. Especially considering how poorly it has generally gone. You can always come back to this look if you decide other looks don’t work. But we should really be giving extended looks to other closing lineups so we know what we are comparing to.
Quote 0 0
LX
DanH wrote:
I’m not saying VanVleet shouldn’t have been given a shot there - he was having an incredible impact early in the season with the bench (seemingly, turned out a lot of that was OG), so no harm trying it. But right now he’s getting a dramatically bigger shot than any of the other options on the roster, which I don’t understand. Especially considering how poorly it has generally gone. You can always come back to this look if you decide other looks don’t work. But we should really be giving extended looks to other closing lineups so we know what we are comparing to.


Yeah - I don't discount any of that so much. I am saying nothing is or should be cemented. I guess the fear is that this arrangement appears cemented? There hasn't been a lot that hasn't gone poorly in some sense down the stretches of tight games. And i think style of play and just staying confident within the system under pressure had as much to do with that as who was on and off the floor. That's why i say this could get the snowball rolling for everyone, build that confidence from this and move forward. That's something worth looking at when approaching change. Making it comprehensive sometimes takes pulling on chains that are immediately within their grasp to begin with. From there it could get really good.
Quote 1 0
Northern Neighbour
LX wrote:
The last couple of weeks DeMar's passing had been down, Kyle had been in a funk and there wasn't the kind of cohesion we saw at times this month. The progress is there overall, but they've coasted a bit. I'm not sure stats that pronounce 100% win probabilities mean that everything has been cemented. If that's the case then count me as happily wrong. Should coaches make decisions based on predictions of win probabilities at the expense of following principals? Playoffs playoffs playoffs. That's what it's about, and even though there has been progress and change, it's hardly complete. Assists have dipped through much of the past few weeks. Play on the road in particular has faltered. I think there was a real need to keep the ball moving throughout games. That doesn't equate to immediate success. Certainly no 100% probabilities. But it is what they need to get to the success that is going to matter.


You don't just take one statistic - in this case win probability - but all stats plus traditional observation to make a judgment because the naked eye doesn't tell everything. Humans tend to see the extremes – either the huge positives or the really low negatives. Stats help offer a more objective analysis, but they shouldn't be used to make definitive conclusions because context matter. For instance, Bruno has the best +/- on the team.

And as all the stats suggest that the team is weaker with FVV on the floor at crunch time - and even traditional evaluation suggests this - why not try something new? Casey has been using FVV a lot more in the 4th Quarter over the past four, maybe six weeks with mixed success. Given his struggles to create offensive against opponents' top units, why keep him out there? If DD and KL are struggling, he doesn't offer a solution offensively, which goes against your point of keeping him out there.
Quote 0 0
LX
Northern Neighbour wrote:


You don't just take one statistic - in this case win probability - but all stats plus traditional observation to make a judgment because the naked eye doesn't tell everything. Humans tend to see the extremes – either the huge positives or the really low negatives. Stats help offer a more objective analysis, but they shouldn't be used to make definitive conclusions because context matter. For instance, Bruno has the best +/- on the team.

And as all the stats suggest that the team is weaker with FVV on the floor at crunch time - and even traditional evaluation suggests this - why not try something new? Casey has been using FVV a lot more in the 4th Quarter over the past four, maybe six weeks with mixed success. Given his struggles to create offensive against opponents' top units, why keep him out there? If DD and KL are struggling, he doesn't offer a solution offensively, which goes against your point of keeping him out there.


I think I've shown an understanding of, as well as tried to provide all kinds of different context.

Not all stats help provide objectivity. Stats like win probability are algorithms and algorithms can easily exaggerate and compound human bias. But whatever. I realize there are other stats you are referencing. Let me frame what I am saying in a similar vein in terms of needing objectivity. There are other means towards objectivity, and an essential means in the case of managing complex systems is having clear objectives and sticking to those objectives through ups and downs. All I'm saying is that playing Fred probably helps in meeting some important objectives in spite of statistical limitations that you insist on pointing to. The team objectives count the most, especially when dealing with change and developing players. And again, that doesn't mean that anything gets cemented. It means the team hopefully moves towards cementing some important objectives.

Delon looked like a kid that had gotten a nice competitive push and responded wonderfully. If he can trust that shot and play aggressively without gambling defensively then he becomes so much more than a support player. I can't begin to tell you how much that excites me. I've been waiting on this. And even tonight there was a few latent instances where he had the defense on their heels and paused. There is no place for pausing and collecting yourself in this offense in those situations. There is no letting the defense get set while you ponder whether you should drive or shoot or pass. It has to be gogogo. Now that he trusts his shot the thought process should get greased nicely. You could see that in play tonight and it was fantastic. This is big. Bigger than Fred developing and progressing by far, but the more the merrier when it comes to pushing each other to get better and better.
Quote 2 0
Northern Neighbour
LX wrote:


I think I've shown an understanding of, as well as tried to provide all kinds of different context.

Not all stats help provide objectivity. Stats like win probability are algorithms and algorithms can easily exaggerate and compound human bias. But whatever. I realize there are other stats you are referencing. Let me frame what I am saying in a similar vein in terms of needing objectivity. There are other means towards objectivity, and an essential means in the case of managing complex systems is having clear objectives and sticking to those objectives through ups and downs. All I'm saying is that playing Fred probably helps in meeting some important objectives in spite of statistical limitations that you insist on pointing to. The team objectives count the most, especially when dealing with change and developing players. And again, that doesn't mean that anything gets cemented. It means the team hopefully moves towards cementing some important objectives.

Delon looked like a kid that had gotten a nice competitive push and responded wonderfully. If he can trust that shot and play aggressively without gambling defensively then he becomes so much more than a support player. I can't begin to tell you how much that excites me. I've been waiting on this. And even tonight there was a few latent instances where he had the defense on their heels and paused. There is no place for pausing and collecting yourself in this offense in those situations. There is no letting the defense get set while you ponder whether you should drive or shoot or pass. It has to be gogogo. Now that he trusts his shot the thought process should get greased nicely. You could see that in play tonight and it was fantastic. This is big. Bigger than Fred developing and progressing by far, but the more the merrier when it comes to pushing each other to get better and better.


You clearly haven’t fully comprehended my argument because I have used stats to support my argument about FVV’s physical and in-game limitations and how his presence on the court actually has been detrimental to the end goal of winning (Dan, too, has provided evidence). You have only provided your opinion, with some of which I do agree.

Now if FVV is going, play him. In the past 4-6 weeks, Casey has played him down the stretch even though he was making zero impact on both ends (which makes him a negative support player). It’s the culmination of Casey’s stubbornness and FVV’s general ineffectiveness in crunch time that has me questioning why he’s on the court during these situations. Multiple stats support the argument Dan and I have posited.
Quote 0 0
LX
Yeah, well i simply don't buy that stubbornness is what your evidence proves is in play. That doesn't mean I lack understanding of your evidence.
Quote 0 0