JeffB Show full post »
Northern Neighbour
moremilk wrote:
Nah, I think you're just trying to justify a piss poor performance by our guards. Poeltl essentially took JV's minutes and had 12 boards in 26 minutes. Which is more or less JV territory. Whatever JV was doing, there is no way their PG grabs 15 boards unless Lowry is not doing his job. Lowry is usually the guy grabbing 7+ boards. Also, a lot of the rebounds were long, where the center has no impact. It's not like Murray was parked under the basket outmuscling everybody.


No. See what eIT said. JV takes up so much space in the paint and boxes out that he eats up loose balls and rebounds. There is no opportunity for the opposition to get offensive rebounds.

But with Bebe in the lineup, the team's rebounding suffers a great deal. His problem is that he's so skinny and weak that bigger guys like Aldridge and Gasol can push him under the basket. Consequently, Bebe cannot get rebounds. This then allows smaller guys to grab loose balls.

Ibaka's problem is that he overhelps at times and gets caught watching the ball instead of heading to the paint. As such, he's often in poor rebounding position.

Yes, the guards were crap tonight, and they, too, need to box out and help on the glass. Still, the big men need to do a better job at cleaning up. With a healthy JV, no way the Spurs outrebound the Raptors by 25 (or whatever the number was) and grab 18 offensive rebounds that lead to something like 26 or 27 second-chance points.

Another big reason for the loss was how awful Lowry played. He's playing like he did last season when he started the year really slowly. He has to find his groove quickly, and it better be against Golden State otherwise that game will be a blowout by halftime.
Quote 1 0
Northern Neighbour
We need a general Raptors thread where we can post random thoughts.

Anyway, nothing against FVV, but I would like to see Casey dump the 2-PG second unit. Wright has shown he can run the offence well, and the team could use more length and athleticism. As such, I would like to see McKinnie get some burn or Siakim. Both will help out on the glass and defensively. The 2nd unit would also be really long and even more difficult to play against. I like FVV, but there are too many mismatches when he's on the court. He also hasn't been very productive while on the court.
Quote 0 0
3forthewin
4 point loss in Sa and a bad shooting night, not so bad.
Quote 1 0
Toby
No point in reorganizing your team after losing to Spurs. It's San Antonio's mantra in the NBA, make the other teams feel like crumpled newspaper, and Coach Popovich has a lighter.
Quote 1 0
LKeet6
JeffB_STR82DVD wrote:
This team doesn't have enough shooting for this style. I said that b4 the season and expecting internal growth on 3pt shooting is silly imo.


it's definitely a weakness, we basically NEED miles to perform to be good from 3, on a game by game basis.

don't think making such calls based on the worst, one game, example is a good idea tho.

Firstly, we've been in games despite not shooting well from outside, due to just playing great, in pretty much every other area, and i DO think that is sustainable; second, i think there could be plenty of games where we're really good from 3, and those could be marked as wins, pretty much. It's not inconceivable we could have plenty of games where all 3 PGs, powell and miles shoot well from 3. We'll blow out teams if that happens...
Quote 0 0
LKeet6
moremilk wrote:
He only played 19 minutes anyway, and it's not like his man grabbed all those rebounds or they were tapping the ball outside. What was bebe supposed to do, box Murray? What was Lowry doing, cause he was definitely not scoring the ball ... [smile]


yeah, i'm gonna have to contradict that one too. Guards fight for boards sometimes, sure, but bigs are the ones who secure rebounds, on a consistent basis, in the paint. Doesn't matter which opposition player is going for them, bigs are the ones, certainly on the defensive end, who clean up the paint.

I think you're confusing def and off rebs for a start, and forgetting all our bricked jump shots which gave them easy rebs, the missed rebs on our end were short rebs in the paint...big territory...
Quote 0 0
moremilk
LKeet6 wrote:


yeah, i'm gonna have to contradict that one too. Guards fight for boards sometimes, sure, but bigs are the ones who secure rebounds, on a consistent basis, in the paint. Doesn't matter which opposition player is going for them, bigs are the ones, certainly on the defensive end, who clean up the paint.

I think you're confusing def and off rebs for a start, and forgetting all our bricked jump shots which gave them easy rebs, the missed rebs on our end were short rebs in the paint...big territory...


Again, our bigs played their bigs to a draw on the boards. A lot of the rebounds were long too, where JV would have no impact.

The reality is that their starters played with way more energy than ours. Yes, JV would have helped with the boards, since he's our best rebounder. But poeltl and bebe were great defensively with their mobility, and perhaps some of those rebounds would have turned into straight buckets. Poeltl in particular was outstanding.

At the end of the day, they crushed us on the boards, no single player would have made a difference imo.

And despite that, because our defense was great, we should have won in double digits if we could only make a few of those open shots.

It really was an excellent game, except for those two areas.
Quote 0 0
LKeet6
Can't disagree on the big defence, esp poeltl! But then I feel JV has showed a noticeable improvement there also...

It was indeed an excellent game; I'm loving watching us! I think EVERYONE agrees on that one... [smile]
Quote 0 0
Northern Neighbour
moremilk wrote:


Again, our bigs played their bigs to a draw on the boards. A lot of the rebounds were long too, where JV would have no impact.

The reality is that their starters played with way more energy than ours. Yes, JV would have helped with the boards, since he's our best rebounder. But poeltl and bebe were great defensively with their mobility, and perhaps some of those rebounds would have turned into straight buckets. Poeltl in particular was outstanding.

At the end of the day, they crushed us on the boards, no single player would have made a difference imo.

And despite that, because our defense was great, we should have won in double digits if we could only make a few of those open shots.

It really was an excellent game, except for those two areas.


Have you ever played organised basketball? Coached it?

Again, using rebound numbers of the bigs is idiotic, especially since Bebe and not Poeltl never were on the court at the same time. Even then, using raw numbers is idiotic. Plus, it’s the number of offensive boards that killed Toronto - 18 allowed. That falls on the bigs. SA will naturally have more rebounds since the Raps missed more shots but the rebounding discrepancy was due to their work on the offensive end and Toronto’s bigs’ inability to clean up the glass.

Bebe, as mentioned, gets pushed out of position too easily and he doesn’t box out. As a result, he’s often in poor rebounding position (often under the hoop), which creates space for other players to grab loose balls (just watch every game he plays and he’s often under the rim). It isn’t always necessary for the opposition big to grab the offensive rebound if he’s creating opportunities for his teammates through space or back taps. It’s like setting a screen - the stats won’t show anything but he plays a critical role in the outcome.

Finally, Bebe has always been a poor rebounder. Ditto Ibaka (he only had 4 rebounds). The two combined for 10 rebounds, which is atrocious from your starting frontcourt.
Quote 1 0