RealGM

Same idea as the other thread. Which 90's team would benefit the most from having Prime DeRozan added to their roster?

Probably the Jazz since they lacked a wing scorer and shot creator.

He would have also helped the Cavaliers quite a bit and looked great next to Reggie in Indiana.

Colbinii wrote:Probably the Jazz since they lacked a wing scorer and shot creator.

Until the playoffs, anyway.

I'm not sure how much better Derozan would be in the 90's.

I'm of the opinion he's just simply not that great, and era wouldn't change that massively.

BIGJ1ER wrote:I'm not sure how much better Derozan would be in the 90's.

I'm of the opinion he's just simply not that great, and era wouldn't change that massively.

I mean, aesthetically and stylistically, he'd suit the 90s well enough. He was a slow, slow learner in the actual NBA now, so that'd probably stay the same back then. Not a guy who picked things up quickly at all, despite years of opportunity, but a slow, baby-step time of incremental improvement year after a year. Took til his late 20s for him to really start showing positive offensive impact. If we borrow falco's interest in TSAdd, he looks even less impressive. Mid-range game, good FT shooter, big-time playoff dropper, but he would have been pretty good in the 90s RS, I think. Without someone like Lowry, team offense would be pretty limp, but he'd be your slightly-better Glenn Robinson type, you know?

Honestly probably a lot of the contending teams. There was kind of a dearth of strong perimeter scorers in the 90s and a surplus of rim protectors to cover his shoddy D. Knicks, Rockets, Spurs, Jazz, Sonics (less so) all could have used him.

pillwenney wrote:Honestly probably a lot of the contending teams. There was kind of a dearth of strong perimeter scorers in the 90s and a surplus of rim protectors to cover his shoddy D. Knicks, Rockets, Spurs, Jazz, Sonics (less so) all could have used him.

"Strong" is an aggressive word for Derozan's scoring. 4 of the past 9 seasons, he's been under league-average TS%. One year, he was spot-on league average. Another year, he was +0.9%. He was at 100 or less TS+ all but once from 2014-2019 (102 in the outlier year). He had a fantastic season with the Spurs in 2020, and has since been +1.9 and +2.4 (TS+ 103 and 104) since then. And of course, he's also a major playoff dropper.

This is not the picture of a "strong" scorer. He puts up 20+ PPG, for sure, and he's had a decent TS% in the RS a couple of times, but he's fairly weak in a number of areas compared to a very large proportion of volume scorers.

Knicks. I think they would have beaten the Rockets in 94 finals if they had him

Narigo wrote:Knicks. I think they would have beaten the Rockets in 94 finals if they had him

It's possible. But it's also likely that Hakeem would have warded him away from the rim (which has proven fairly simple to do now) and that his jumper would wither and die in the PS, as it has done rather consistently, and that they might have been even less competitive if he was bombing away.

tsherkin wrote:

pillwenney wrote:Honestly probably a lot of the contending teams. There was kind of a dearth of strong perimeter scorers in the 90s and a surplus of rim protectors to cover his shoddy D. Knicks, Rockets, Spurs, Jazz, Sonics (less so) all could have used him.

"Strong" is an aggressive word for Derozan's scoring. 4 of the past 9 seasons, he's been under league-average TS%. One year, he was spot-on league average. Another year, he was +0.9%. He was at 100 or less TS+ all but once from 2014-2019 (102 in the outlier year). He had a fantastic season with the Spurs in 2020, and has since been +1.9 and +2.4 (TS+ 103 and 104) since then. And of course, he's also a major playoff dropper.

This is not the picture of a "strong" scorer. He puts up 20+ PPG, for sure, and he's had a decent TS% in the RS a couple of times, but he's fairly weak in a number of areas compared to a very large proportion of volume scorers.

League average TS% is notably higher now than it was in the 90s. His efficiency would look much better then, and unlike many modern players, it would likely be pretty unaffected by the different game back then IMO. His game is much less reliant on spacing (though that of course helps everyone) than the vast majority of high volume scorers. You're also leaving out the value in him creating for himself and others.

Over all, I'd say he's a much better fit for that era and therefore would be a notably more valuable player. IMO, he'd certainly be a clear upgrade as a second option to a Ewing, Robinson, or (pre-Drexler, but maybe even then) Hakeem.

pillwenney wrote:League average TS% is notably higher now than it was in the 90s. His efficiency would look much better then, and unlike many modern players, it would likely be pretty unaffected by the different game back then IMO. His game is much less reliant on spacing (though that of course helps everyone) than the vast majority of high volume scorers. You're also leaving out the value in him creating for himself and others.

Mmm.

Derozan's raw TS% since becoming a 20+ ppg scorer:


2020-2022, he finally looks worth it, right? Of course, 2020 and 2021 were with San Antonio. This past season with Chicago, he had Lavine for 67 games, about 40% of a season from Lonzo Ball, 73 games from Vucevic. Lots of talent around him taking off pressure. He had an outlier season shooting from 10-16 feet. 29.7% of his shots at 51.1% FG, but had never previously shot over 49.3% (23.6% proportion, and he just had the second-best shooting season he's had from 16-23 feet, too. At age 32. So, we're seeing peak emergence, sure. But it has taken 12, 13 years to get there.

2017 and later, league-average TS% has been rising as 3PAr has been going up, for sure, so rTS% and TS+ have a slightly different meaning. But as I said, it took a very, very long time for Derozan to become a non-crap volume scorer, let alone reaching this recent phase where he's been very good in the RS and still dog-crap in the playoffs.

On the surface, I see what you're saying. His RS performance dramatically outstrips, say, John Starks or Sean Elliott. That would make a difference. But keep in mind that Derozan vanishes outside of 10 feet during the playoffs. He's a career 50.2% TS player in the playoffs. One of his 3 < 50% TS postseasons was just this past year in 2022, following one of his 3 best regular seasons. Career 46.5% FG player in the RS, 48.3% from 2. Past three seasons, 51.0% FG, 52.5% 2FG, right? Career 41.8% FG in the playoffs, 43.9% 2FG. Last three seasons? 44.6% FG, 47.3% 2FG. Career .404 FTr in the RS. Last three seasons, .424 (but dropped off to .386 this past season). Playoff career, .360, .308 the past 3 seasons (last 3 seasons in, anyway). Career 22.6% 10-16, 28.1% 16-23 feet, proportion-wise in the RS. 44.3% and 39.7% FG. 28.3 and 23.0 percent proportion in the past three years. 48.7% and 45.6% FG.

Playoffs? 19.3% and 32.0% proportion. 35.1% and 39.7% FG. Last three postseasons, 21.1% and 24.2% proportion. 35.6% and 42.0% FG. 2022 in particular, 23.2% and 44.2% proportion, 27.3% and 50.0% FG.

All of that matches what every Raptors fan remembers, and what probably Spurs and Bulls fans know now. It's trivial as a defense to get Derozan shooting long twos. He's okay to good at that depending on the season, but it gets him away from driving and gets him into a highly inefficient space. Limits his creation, limits his draw rate, limits his FG%. Limits everything.

So, RS warrior, PS dropper, even on good teams. I think that may not be quite as helpful as you think. And again, a dozen years or so to get himself into a space where he stands out as much more than a +1% rTS guy even back in the late 80s and 90s.

90s Derozan would benefit from smaller perimeter defenders. For a big chunk of his career, Derozan's scoring could be wiped out by putting a big wing on him. It was a consistent trend in his Raptors playoff meltdowns. He'd cook teams all regular season long with shooting guards on him, and then one little matchup adjustment in the playoffs and Derozan was a non-factor. Most of the great perimeter defenders of the 90s were small (Nate McMillan, Joe Dumars etc.) and teams routinely ran out a 6'4" or under wing stopper.

Rules about zone defense would have been to his benefit. In the end though, I still see his scoring game getting crushed by teams like the Knicks and Bulls. He'd still have these awful awful scoring playoff series ending his seasons. But I bet he has better success in the first round.

Colbinii wrote:Probably the Jazz since they lacked a wing scorer and shot creator.

He would have also helped the Cavaliers quite a bit and looked great next to Reggie in Indiana.

Shot creator we had Stockton. He was pretty capable of doing that for himself and others. Also Karl Malone.

Horny could also do it.

I can see we could use a better punch as a scorer in the wing but it's not like we were a liability in that regard either.

Joao Saraiva wrote:

Colbinii wrote:Probably the Jazz since they lacked a wing scorer and shot creator.

He would have also helped the Cavaliers quite a bit and looked great next to Reggie in Indiana.

Shot creator we had Stockton. He was pretty capable of doing that for himself and others. Also Karl Malone.

Horny could also do it.

I can see we could use a better punch as a scorer in the wing but it's not like we were a liability in that regard either.

Stockton and Malone are not Wing Creators.

Hornacek wasn't on the Jazz during the early 1990s, where they flamed out against the 1992 Blazers in the WCF, in part because Blue Edwards and David Benoitt were horrible wings and were outmatched.

Is DeMar enough to bridge the gap if Stockton is still destroyed by Porter? Maybe not but he definitely helps take some pressure off Stockton.

As for the Hornacek years, DeMar could replace Chris Morris and other wings of that level.

Colbinii wrote:

Joao Saraiva wrote:

Colbinii wrote:Probably the Jazz since they lacked a wing scorer and shot creator.

He would have also helped the Cavaliers quite a bit and looked great next to Reggie in Indiana.

Shot creator we had Stockton. He was pretty capable of doing that for himself and others. Also Karl Malone.

Horny could also do it.

I can see we could use a better punch as a scorer in the wing but it's not like we were a liability in that regard either.

Stockton and Malone are not Wing Creators.

Hornacek wasn't on the Jazz during the early 1990s, where they flamed out against the 1992 Blazers in the WCF, in part because Blue Edwards and David Benoitt were horrible wings and were outmatched.

Is DeMar enough to bridge the gap if Stockton is still destroyed by Porter? Maybe not but he definitely helps take some pressure off Stockton.

As for the Hornacek years, DeMar could replace Chris Morris and other wings of that level.

I wasn't reading wing creator. But we had 2 guys who could create offense.

Yes wings were very bad in the early 90s. I also don't know if DeRozan is a game changer for us that year, but given the upgrade I'd say yes at least to get to the finals. Also DeRozan's game suits the 90s better than nowadays.

Btw not in the 90s but do you feel we could have upset the Lakers with him in 88?

I'm not so sure it's a foregone conclusion that Derozan would benefit ANY contending team.

1994 Bulls

cupcakesnake wrote:90s Derozan would benefit from smaller perimeter defenders. For a big chunk of his career, Derozan's scoring could be wiped out by putting a big wing on him. It was a consistent trend in his Raptors playoff meltdowns. He'd cook teams all regular season long with shooting guards on him, and then one little matchup adjustment in the playoffs and Derozan was a non-factor. Most of the great perimeter defenders of the 90s were small (Nate McMillan, Joe Dumars etc.) and teams routinely ran out a 6'4" or under wing stopper.

That is a fair point. Having said that, if they had the mobility to get under him and dictate his spot, they'd end up having the same effect. But there were also still the Scottie Pippens and the Stacey Augmons and so forth in the 90s. Anthony Mason, if the Knicks really wanted to do it that way. Bryon Russell. Dan Majerle. Maybe even someone like Kendall Gill, but definitely Spree. There were definitely teams with the right options.

Rules about zone defense would have been to his benefit. In the end though, I still see his scoring game getting crushed by teams like the Knicks and Bulls. He'd still have these awful awful scoring playoff series ending his seasons. But I bet he has better success in the first round.

Yeah, I could see that. Except in a year with an unfavorable matchup, more first round success makes sense to me as well.

I like prime DDR on the Knicks, their defense should be able to absorb his shortcomings there and his potential value as a halfcourt scorer/playmaker happens to align with their greatest team need. His midrange iso game should translate to the era's spacing and defensive rules/schemes (he's never been too reliant on attacking the rim), and if he can maintain a strong FT rate then his relative efficiency figures to spike up in absence of modern 3pt shooting

DDR was miscast as a primary scorer in Toronto, and failed miserably in the playoffs, but did reasonably well as a co-main to LMA's post scoring in San Antonio (even in the PS vs a 10th ranked Denver defense) where he shot less and evolved as a playmaker. So I think if you take this Spurs version of DDR and port him to the 90s Knicks next to Ewing, then maybe we aren't talking about John Starks going 2-18

BenoUdrihFTL wrote: and if he can maintain a strong FT rate then his relative efficiency figures to spike up in absence of modern 3pt shooting

Not as much as you'd think. Surely, his numbers from 2020-2022, yes. 59-60% TS would look pretty good back then, no question.

But prior to those seasons? 90-97, league average was 53.6%, or about 0.4% lower than the average of 2014-2019 and almost identical to 2010-2016 (53.7). So those relative efficiency numbers really wouldn't be looking ALL that hot compared to his actual career until, again, very, very late in his career unless something changed.

Best argument for that would be that 95-97, the pulled-in line would give him a boost.

DDR was miscast as a primary scorer in Toronto, and failed miserably in the playoffs, but did reasonably well as a co-main to LMA's post scoring in San Antonio (even in the PS vs a 10th ranked Denver defense) where he shot less and evolved as a playmaker. So I think if you take this Spurs version of DDR and port him to the 90s Knicks next to Ewing, then maybe we aren't talking about John Starks going 2-18

That did depend on a more fluid offensive system, though, than he'd have found in New York. Still, the older Demar would definitely look better than younger Demar. He definitely improved in the RS as a playmaker and in a bunch of his scoring tools as well. He didn't look a lot better in San Antonio during the playoffs as a playmaker than he did in 2018 with Toronto, but as a player, he was better once he hit 30, yes.