Just a quick follow up to yesterday. Last night was a unique Raptors game. If you compare their box score to the Pacers it looks pretty good (which makes sense, it was a close game). They had almost the same FG%, 4 more shot attempts, made a better percentage AND a higher number of three's, had a couple more O-rebounds, tied on the boards overall, assisted more baskets, same # of fouls, same turnovers (which were low) and a couple extra blocks. Looks like a competitive game vs a good team.
Problem #1: Did Ed Davis get hurt? If not then how does he only see 17 minutes? 5 of 7 (efficient offense = wins) 3 offensive boards, team high 10 total, just one foul (good, especially with Hibbert-David West in the paint all night) and a block.
Problem #2: Demar continuing to play ELITE level minutes. 33 minutes, 8 missed shots, one trip to the line, ZERO O-rebounds, ZERO assists. He is either a selfish chucker that tries to carry the offense, or he is incapable of doing anything other than shooting. In his defence, there really is no alternative to him playing this many minutes. The only other SG is Gary Forbes, and he is just about as bad. If Demar is getting minutes to "develop" then someone should advise him to develop his passing, rebounding and defence because his low-quality play combined with the absurdly high minutes he gets absolutely cost the raptors that game. If you know anyone at the Raptors front office please tell them that I will personally compile some video of Tony Allen (Memphis) and Deshawn Stevensen (Dallas - but only during the playoffs last year) to be thoroughly reviewed by Derozen. The video will be called "How To Contribute In The NBA As a Shooting Guard Without Shooting Your Way Out Of The League."
Ideally, he gets some of that offense together and gets his PPG way up. Some GM will always take on a guy that shows flashes of offensive ability. Sort of like what the Raptors did in taking on Gary Forbes (although to their credit I don't think they paid him very much).
(follow-up to a comment that DD should rebound better because he is 6-8 and can jump out of the gym and that he has great potential since he passes the eye-test known as dunking on occasion. Or as my favourite "experts" put it - "he has tremendous athletic ability", as if looking like an athlete and not producing has more potential than the guys who do not pass the eye-test - as in they don't make highlight reel plays. Think Kevin Love; extremely elite level player with historic versatility but not much to show on Court Cuts vs Blake Griffin; good player and basically 50% of every highlight reel)
A study was recently published at the MIT sports analytic conference that tracked a sample of 11,000 rebounds. 99.5% of rebounds (excluding team rebounds) are recovered at 8 feet from the floor or lower, with 15% actually hitting the floor before being secured. There goes the idea that the highest jumpers / "best athletes" are the ones that get rebounds. You do not get rebounds if you do not box out. If you do not box out you do not help your team. (Minor exception would be Dallas last year or San Antonio/Boston this year - they don't really rebound but try beating them in transition, it's not going to happen. Besides, they move the ball until they get good, high-percentage/value shots like open jumpshots not off the dribble, or corner threes). When you give players a lot of minutes and they do very little to help the team, your team loses. Andrea and Derozen get a lot of minutes while the teams gets lots of losses. This can't be that hard to figure out!