No one said he isn't replaceble (although his defense is not since he grades out as pretty much the best SG defensive player in the league & his 3PT shooting is not replaceable easily at all either).
His 7.2 ppg and 33.3% 3 point shooting is very replaceable.
and you can quote defensive metrics all you want. It doesn't tell a truthful story. If he was so good, or as good as his metrics, why isn't he a first team all NBA defensive player? , why isn't he even 2nd team?
Exactly my feeling too! But...but...his defense!
33% shooting
That's what he shot last year. But I'm sure you didn't want to remember that!33% shooting
I'm going to stop here. I don't like coming off as mean or poking fun too much even when I disagree in such a major way.
Nothing mean here at all. Just discussion
Covered that.
I watched him a lot in the playoffs. There were a lot of times when he took shots because he didn't have any choice. He was literally the only guy on the floor who could put the ball in the net. And his guys kept dumping the ball back on him with the clock running out. I know he's a volume shooter, but you can't look at a guy in a vacuum either.
Yeah, a lot of people over-value points, and under-value defense. I'm not one of those people. Danny needs to be on the team, and his $10M contract is going to look like chump change, especially if he keeps hitting his 3's like he did in the playoffs. BUT... that doesn't have anything to do with whether DeRozan would be a worthwhile roster addition, at the right price.
A lot of people also under-value shooting fouls drawn. It's one of the biggest holes in the Spurs' offense. And the value of being able to get to the line goes up an order of magnitude in the playoffs, when more of the games are close and hard-fought. The instinct is to try and use the 3 to close the gap in the last minutes of a close game. But there's no subs ute for scoring with the clock stopped. If the Spurs had DeRozan on the roster, they would have met the Warriors in the Conference Finals.
If he was surrounded by guys like Kawhi and LMA, would he keep being a volume chucker, or would he pass up some of those low-percentage shots? I honestly don't know. But his game has the potential to help those other guys be even more effective. I wouldn't over-pay for him, but I sure as wouldn't cliff-jump if the Spurs signed him.
Well, I think just logically, people know what you said is mutually exclusive. You can't on one hand get DeRozan and on the other hand not over pay him. He's going to get maxed and that is a major reason (beyond some flaws in his game) that people (at least me) react to him.
I never said anything about money. I just responded to Chinook's comments that he's worse than having Kevin Martin back on the roster. I know what you're saying, but you're blaming me for something I never said or hinted at.
TBH, I don't know what "over-paid" means, the way this offseason is shaping up. This cap explosion has everything upside-down. Mid-tier players are apparently going to be signing for almost as much as franchise players who signed a year or two ago. But the max contract is still based on a percentage of the cap. If DeRozan gets maxed, that's ing ridiculous. But... even though I hear a lot of numbers getting thrown around, the one thing I know is that every decent FA can't get maxed. A lot of these guys are trying to get paid based on next year's projected cap, which is supposed to be around $108M. Contracts signed this year may look like bargains next year - but there just isn't room for that many players to get the max percentage of their team's total cap.
I guess we'll see how it shakes out. But, no, DeRozan isn't a max player.
The comment I was responding to was your last comment where you said "I wouldn't over pay for him". Sorry for the confusion.
I agree with you - the market hasn't been set and it's going to be such a culture shock. I mean, to me, it's not just about a guy getting max it's relative comparison. For example even if it's not max no way should DeRozan make more than Kawhi. But the new changes make that a certainty. But it's a shift in how we look at things (% of the cap vs dollar amount).
$139 million
some absolute gold in hereenjoy
He should have held out for that “no trade” clause. Oops
laughing at the contract and now we paying it... chinook with his talent evaluation goods... rob actually liking the idea... greys getting persecuted while have better arguments than bolds.. hilarious
omegalul
My worst take was still wanting Splitter over Aldridge in 2014. DeRozan has gotten better, but I also didn't understand how much Pop would be able to alter what he did to get the most out of him. I'm glad that I was wrong.
Still, it's in bad taste for someone to dig up old threads to laugh at takes when they weren't here to make their own.
lol and now these posters are nowhere to be found hahahaha
oh boyle.. I found this on accident while trying to look up what gnsf meant of all things
to be honest, Derozan (raptors version) would already be a huge upgrade over what we had last season
That's true. There were definitely versions of the Spurs that didn't need DeRozan as much as this one, but really once Parker started to fall off, DeMar made sense. Seeing him as a Parker replacement rather than a Green or especially Leonard replacement definitely recasts his view. It's not like Tony was a great defender or shooter either. Would have much rather have had DeRozan back then and avoided that Mills contract the next summer.
damn I was hoping I hadn't posted in this thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
