Raptors sign DeMarre Carroll 4 years $60 Million!

[Snakebites]

My exact reaction lol

I was interested in Carroll towards the end of the season when I thought he might be an under the radar signing that we could get for like 7 or 8m per year. At that price he would have been a quality addition .Then he had a good playoffs and suddenly he is a top FA commanding max money. He is just not that good of a player to spend that much on even with the new cap. His numbers the last 2 years are too close to Morris to warrant paying 3x the price. Plus he is 3 years older.

Morris 2013 to 2015
10 ppg, 4 rpg, 1 apg, 37% three pointers

Carroll 2013 to 2015
12 ppg, 5 rpg, 2 apg, 38% three pointers

First of all- Carroll is an overpay. Yes.

Second of all, you picked the specific range that would help your case in comparison the most. How do they compare last year, the most important year in this comparison?

What about defensively? What about overall field goal percentage?



I don't like it when people cherry pick data.

Too bad those are there numbers. Since when is a 2 year sample less valid than 1?

That is the opposite of cherry picking.

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

You left out field goal percentage and free throw percentage, not to mention actual efficiency stats like true shooting percentage. You left those things out because they don't benefit the person you're promoting.

Cherry picking.

[mercury]

Carroll was open to all suitors... Toronto gave a better presentation than the Pistons.

"DeMarre Caroll said the team left a great impression. “I had 8 teams call me, and actually the Raptors were the very first team, and they gave me a great impression,” said Carroll. “They came to my house at 10 o’clock and I had four other teams: Detroit, Phoenix and New York. The Raptors were the first team to come in, and they blew me away with there presentation".

[whitehops]

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

Cherry picking.

adding in previous years factors in progression, which is important when comparing a younger player to a veteran.

when carroll was in his fourth season (the same as morris was last year), he averaged 17 minutes a game, scoring 6 points on 46% shooting from the field (28% from 3). he was 26 that year.

last year morris averaged 25 minutes a game, scoring 10 points on 43% from the field and 36% from 3. he was 25 last year. obviously morris has to improve defensively to make up the gap though.


there's a good chance morris never becomes as good a player as carroll was last year, but he can still improve, as carroll himself has shown. and even though morris likely won't ever be as good as carroll, he doesn't have to be. we are paying him literally a third of what carroll is getting paid.

[Snakebites]

Carroll was open to all suitors... Toronto gave a better presentation than the Pistons.

"DeMarre Caroll said the team left a great impression. “I had 8 teams call me, and actually the Raptors were the very first team, and they gave me a great impression,” said Carroll. “They came to my house at 10 o’clock and I had four other teams: Detroit, Phoenix and New York. The Raptors were the first team to come in, and they blew me away with there presentation".

We'd have had to outbid the Raptors for him.

I'm okay that we didn't.

[Snakebites]

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

Cherry picking.

adding in previous years factors in progression, which is important when comparing a younger player to a veteran.

when carroll was in his fourth season (the same as morris was last year), he averaged 17 minutes a game, scoring 6 points on 46% shooting from the field (28% from 3). he was 26 that year.

last year morris averaged 25 minutes a game, scoring 10 points on 43% from the field and 36% from 3. he was 25 last year. obviously morris has to improve defensively to make up the gap though.


there's a good chance morris never becomes as good a player as carroll was last year, but he can still improve, as carroll himself has shown. and even though morris likely won't ever be as good as carroll, he doesn't have to be. we are paying him literally a third of what carroll is getting paid.

Oh, I'm not even arguing we should have had Carroll for 15 mill over Morris for a fraction of that. I don't even take that position.

I just didn't like the selective brand of analysis he was using. It almost looked like he blatantly cherry picked the stats that would make the comparison look close. Carroll is clearly the better player.

[whitehops]

Oh, I'm not even arguing we should have had Carroll for 15 mill over Morris for a fraction of that. I don't even take that position.

I just didn't like the selective brand of analysis he was using. It almost looked like he blatantly cherry picked the stats that would make the comparison look close. Carroll is clearly the better player.

I was just trying to salvage his argument lol, carroll is worlds better right now.

[Todd3]

First of all- Carroll is an overpay. Yes.

Second of all, you picked the specific range that would help your case in comparison the most. How do they compare last year, the most important year in this comparison?

What about defensively? What about overall field goal percentage?



I don't like it when people cherry pick data.

Too bad those are there numbers. Since when is a 2 year sample less valid than 1?

That is the opposite of cherry picking.

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

You left out field goal percentage and free throw percentage, not to mention actual efficiency stats like true shooting percentage. You left those things out because they don't benefit the person you're promoting.

Cherry picking.

If you think Carroll is worth 10m more than Morris suit yourself but I dont see it.

[sc8581]

When you have cap space that nobody will take it doesn't matter if you overpay to get the much better player.

[Todd3]

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

Cherry picking.

adding in previous years factors in progression, which is important when comparing a younger player to a veteran.

when carroll was in his fourth season (the same as morris was last year), he averaged 17 minutes a game, scoring 6 points on 46% shooting from the field (28% from 3). he was 26 that year.

last year morris averaged 25 minutes a game, scoring 10 points on 43% from the field and 36% from 3. he was 25 last year. obviously morris has to improve defensively to make up the gap though.


there's a good chance morris never becomes as good a player as carroll was last year, but he can still improve, as carroll himself has shown. and even though morris likely won't ever be as good as carroll, he doesn't have to be. we are paying him literally a third of what carroll is getting paid.

Its really not that deep. We are talking two fourth, fifth option type 3&D role players. Their three point ability and defense is all that really matters here. They are about the same caliber three point shooters for their careers. Carroll is a better defender but he is not 10m per year better defender. Morris is only 26 and has pretty similar measurables physically, meaning there is a chance he could be developed into just as good of a defender. Always better to get a role player for cheap and develop them yourself than pay a premium for another team to develop them for you.

A few years ago Carroll was a nobody. Budenholzer got him for cheap and developed him into a solid role player. No reason Stan isnt capable of doing the same with Morris. Thus no reason for us to have to pay that much for these type of players. Teams with bad coaches have to pay other teams to develop their talent for them. Part of the value in Stan is his ability to do it himself.

[Snakebites]

Too bad those are there numbers. Since when is a 2 year sample less valid than 1?

That is the opposite of cherry picking.

The previous year isn't all important, but its certainly more important than the 2 years that came before that.

You left out field goal percentage and free throw percentage, not to mention actual efficiency stats like true shooting percentage. You left those things out because they don't benefit the person you're promoting.

Cherry picking.

If you think Carroll is worth 10m more than Morris suit yourself but I dont see it.

I specifically said I didn't....

I just don't like selective looking at data, it strikes me as dishonest. Of course I don't think Carroll is worth 3 times what Morris is.

Why engage people who don't even bother to read everything you say?

[Todd3]

I specifically said I didn't....

I just don't like selective looking at data, it strikes me as dishonest. Of course I don't think Carroll is worth 3 times what Morris is

So if I understand you correctly, you agree that Carroll is not worth that much more than Morris, but think how I posted the data to prove it is dishonest even though you agree with it? Huh?

Why engage people who don't even bother to read everything you say?

[/quote]

What the hell are you talking about?

[tmorgan]

Carroll isn't that good, people. You'll see.

(Mook Morris isn't good either)

[Snakebites]

I specifically said I didn't....

I just don't like selective looking at data, it strikes me as dishonest. Of course I don't think Carroll is worth 3 times what Morris is

So if I understand you correctly, you agree that Carroll is not worth that much more than Morris, but think how I posted the data to prove it is dishonest even though you agree with it? Huh?

Why engage people who don't even bother to read everything you say?

What the hell are you talking about?[/quote]

My problem wasn't with your conclusion, it was with your method of analysis.

You had an opinion and only showed the data that supported it.

[Todd3]

I specifically said I didn't....

I just don't like selective looking at data, it strikes me as dishonest. Of course I don't think Carroll is worth 3 times what Morris is

So if I understand you correctly, you agree that Carroll is not worth that much more than Morris, but think how I posted the data to prove it is dishonest even though you agree with it? Huh?

Why engage people who don't even bother to read everything you say?

What the hell are you talking about

My problem wasn't with your conclusion, it was with your method of analysis. You had an opinion and only showed the data that supported it.

i dont know what to tell you man. Good luck with that.