Lowe: Time To Start Investing Some Real 4Q Minutes In JV

[Raps in 4]

I hate it when Casey reacts to what the opponent is doing instead of letting the opponent adjust to what he's doing.

When the opponent goes small, Casey goes small. If the opponent is playing big, Casey goes big.

I'd like to see Casey one of these days say, f#@k it, I know you're playing small, but I'm going to put Val on the court and crush you inside on every offensive possession until you put a big out there that can match him. But it doesn't happen.

That's precisely why we almost lost the Phoenix game.

[dagger]

I hate it when Casey reacts to what the opponent is doing instead of letting the opponent adjust to what he's doing.

When the opponent goes small, Casey goes small. If the opponent is playing big, Casey goes big.

I'd like to see Casey one of these days say, f#@k it, I know you're playing small, but I'm going to put Val on the court and crush you inside on every offensive possession until you put a big out there that can match him. But it doesn't happen.

That's precisely why we almost lost the Phoenix game.

Phoenix was throwing a three point guard offence against us, and shooting threes. It's never a great idea analytically speaking to trade twos for threes, especially when the opponent is making a high percentage.

And 15 games in, there is lots of time for JV, and there is something to be said about enhancing the group dynamic by winning. When we hit a rough patch, where the collective shooting of our guards dips, that's a good time to force the game inside.

I could have said, a few days ago, that it was just as important to get Vasquez and Williams going, and Casey, by using them with starters more against Phoenix and now Atlanta, has succeeded in getting them into high gear. Some of that came at the expense of Ross and JV, but it's also in a good cause. We could also be Detroit, forcefeeding a post game to Drummond for which he is singularly unprepared or incapable - in the name of developing him. In the meantime, what Detroit is succeeding in doing is extending a losing culture, without necessarily making Drummond a better/more confident post player.

[OvertimeNO]

The keyword here is investment. That means it's not about instant payoff.

That's how the Spurs turned Splitter from a borderline scrub (he was a star in Europe, but didn't start well in the NBA) to a championship starting centre.

There were plenty of learning experiences to be had, when Pop could've easily just subbed him out for a vet.

My tentative argument against this is that Pop has the luxury of a stable of vets who've played under him for years and years, and are familiar with the multiple incarnations of his system.

Casey has a team that has only had one .500 season and playoff series to its credit. It's been one month. Let's see if what's working is actually working before calling to mess around with it - who knows, it's possible we might end up with far bigger problems than JV not getting 4th Q minutes.

[OakleyDokely]

Just want to add, I like Casey. He's a good coach. But if he wants to become a great coach, like Pop, he has to dictate the tempo, he has to dictate the style of game that's going to be played. He can't be reactionary all the time and he can't always be concerned with what the opponent is doing. This is the reason why Val is barely playing above 20 minutes a game, despite posting some impressive numbers. All the opponent has to do is dress a small lineup and they know they won't have to deal with Val at all.

[Raps in 4]

I hate it when Casey reacts to what the opponent is doing instead of letting the opponent adjust to what he's doing.

When the opponent goes small, Casey goes small. If the opponent is playing big, Casey goes big.

I'd like to see Casey one of these days say, f#@k it, I know you're playing small, but I'm going to put Val on the court and crush you inside on every offensive possession until you put a big out there that can match him. But it doesn't happen.

That's precisely why we almost lost the Phoenix game.

Phoenix was throwing a three point guard offence against us, and shooting threes. It's never a great idea analytically speaking to trade twos for threes, especially when the opponent is making a high percentage.

But the small ball lineup didn't actually stop them from draining threes (in fact, that's when they made their run). Jonas could have given us guaranteed buckets (it's not like we were trying to trade threes for threes, we took plenty of long twos during that stretch iirc) as well as slowed down the tempo.

[OvertimeNO]

Just want to add, I like Casey. He's a good coach. But if he wants to become a great coach, like Pop, he has to dictate the tempo, he has to dictate the style of game that's going to be played. He can't be reactionary all the time and he can't always be concerned with what the opponent is doing. This is the reason why Val is barely playing above 20 minutes a game, despite posting some impressive numbers. All the opponent has to do is dress a small lineup and they know they won't have to deal with Val at all.

It could go both ways though, right? You could argue just as strongly that the Raps ARE forcing opponents to adjust to them (PHO's Hail Mary lineup being a prime example). There's equal merit in having a consistent strategy - which I think the Raptors do, on both ends - but also making adjustments in response to the opponent's adjustments.

[OakleyDokely]

Just want to add, I like Casey. He's a good coach. But if he wants to become a great coach, like Pop, he has to dictate the tempo, he has to dictate the style of game that's going to be played. He can't be reactionary all the time and he can't always be concerned with what the opponent is doing. This is the reason why Val is barely playing above 20 minutes a game, despite posting some impressive numbers. All the opponent has to do is dress a small lineup and they know they won't have to deal with Val at all.

It could go both ways though, right? You could argue just as strongly that the Raps ARE forcing opponents to adjust to them (PHO's Hail Mary lineup being a prime example). There's equal merit in having a consistent strategy - which I think the Raptors do, on both ends - but also making adjustments in response to the opponent's adjustments.

That's a good point. But I just don't think trying to match Phoenix's small lineup is all that smart, because their small lineup will beat our small lineup. We need to take advantage of true bigmen like Val, which not many teams in the league have.

[victor page]

There is a decade long obsession on this board with European players, it completely distorts a lot of people 's opinions on JV. Yes he's good, and may get a lot better.

But right now his defensive instincts are at a grade 9 level. He is so slow to help, and has no concept of how to block or alter a shot without fouling. When he shows improvement on that early in games, then you give him 4th quarter minutes.

The raptors had no trouble scoring on Phoenix whatsoever, so even though JV was killing it early, taking him out had no negative impact (cause Lou and Kyle were making buckets almost at will ). Casey was looking for more stops which at this point in his career, JV can't help with.

[OvertimeNO]

Just want to add, I like Casey. He's a good coach. But if he wants to become a great coach, like Pop, he has to dictate the tempo, he has to dictate the style of game that's going to be played. He can't be reactionary all the time and he can't always be concerned with what the opponent is doing. This is the reason why Val is barely playing above 20 minutes a game, despite posting some impressive numbers. All the opponent has to do is dress a small lineup and they know they won't have to deal with Val at all.

It could go both ways though, right? You could argue just as strongly that the Raps ARE forcing opponents to adjust to them (PHO's Hail Mary lineup being a prime example). There's equal merit in having a consistent strategy - which I think the Raptors do, on both ends - but also making adjustments in response to the opponent's adjustments.

That's a good point. But I just don't think trying to match Phoenix's small lineup is all that smart, because their small lineup will beat our small lineup. We need to take advantage of true bigmen like Val, which not many teams in the league have.

Well, that's a coaching philosophy discussion that's been covered ad nauseum. I do think an adjustment was warranted. Was it the best possible choice? Maybe, maybe not. But in the end, we won, so it couldn't have been the worst choice. Sometimes you just have to be content with not making the worst choice, especially when "best" is impossible to prove.

[dagger]

That's precisely why we almost lost the Phoenix game.

Phoenix was throwing a three point guard offence against us, and shooting threes. It's never a great idea analytically speaking to trade twos for threes, especially when the opponent is making a high percentage.

But the small ball lineup didn't actually stop them from draining threes (in fact, that's when they made their run). Jonas could have given us guaranteed buckets (it's not like we were trying to trade threes for threes, we took plenty of long twos during that stretch iirc) as well as slowed down the tempo.

Jonas does not give you guaranteed buckets, he's shooting about 55%, and you know he would muff a couple of posts just on the percentages. if we were not stopping them from shooting enough threes, it would be worse with two bigs. Not stopping them enough is a defensive matter, and swapping a guard/defender for Jonas would not improve that. Nor did we have an issue with scoring. In the end, the defensive did tighten up enough, PHX did miss a couple of good looks, and Lowry and DeMar made it to the line to ice the game.

[AkelaLoneWolf]

I hate it when Casey reacts to what the opponent is doing instead of letting the opponent adjust to what he's doing.

When the opponent goes small, Casey goes small. If the opponent is playing big, Casey goes big.

I'd like to see Casey one of these days say, f#@k it, I know you're playing small, but I'm going to put Val on the court and crush you inside on every offensive possession until you put a big out there that can match him. But it doesn't happen.

That's precisely why we almost lost the Phoenix game.

Phoenix was throwing a three point guard offence against us, and shooting threes. It's never a great idea analytically speaking to trade twos for threes, especially when the opponent is making a high percentage.

And 15 games in, there is lots of time for JV, and there is something to be said about enhancing the group dynamic by winning. When we hit a rough patch, where the collective shooting of our guards dips, that's a good time to force the game inside.

I could have said, a few days ago, that it was just as important to get Vasquez and Williams going, and Casey, by using them with starters more against Phoenix and now Atlanta, has succeeded in getting them into high gear. Some of that came at the expense of Ross and JV, but it's also in a good cause. We could also be Detroit, forcefeeding a post game to Drummond for which he is singularly unprepared or incapable - in the name of developing him. In the meantime, what Detroit is succeeding in doing is extending a losing culture, without necessarily making Drummond a better/more confident post player.

I agree that his numbers should be increased over the course of a season but we need to start now so jv is comfortable with his role come playoff time.
And I disagree with the notion that somehow developing players has to be at the expense of winning. Our model isn't the PIstons. Its the Spurs. They haven't had any issues with developing Splitter or Kawhi Leonard while playing championship basketball. And neither should we.
Its up to Casey to come up with a system that accomodates both. And I'm not sure Casey is up to the task.

[aminiaturebuddha]

I can understand both sides of the argument. What I disagree with is the notion that we can "afford" anything. I'm as happy with the 13-2 start as any, and I'm fairly confident that the team can adapt for the long term without giving up too much, but I'm also wary of complacency. It's a long season and anything can happen.

I agree. I love Zach Lowe's stuff and think he's probably the most intelligent basketball writer out there currently, but I don't agree with him here.

I don't really like the "Raps have success because they've played an easy schedule" narrative (because the key point is that they've taken advantage, and that's why they've been successful), but the fact is that we have played a relatively easy schedule, and it is going to get harder, if only considering home versus road games. Maybe it's true that we've "banked" wins as Lowe says, but that's not to play around with the lineup, but rather to have those wins banked against a tougher upcoming schedule.

That said, sure, of course I'd like to get Val some more crunch-time minutes, but I think he'll get there eventually. He is developing and seems to be on the right path. I'm not concerned.

[anotherhomer]

i'm going to have to agree with Lowe

Casey's done a good job this year but his development of younger players leaves something to be desired.

His utilization of Jonas could definitely be better and quite unfortunate because the team will need Jonas to take that next step forward.

Unfortunately, Casey's done a good job that no one will rock the boat here.1000000000000000

[Local_NG_Idiot]

Just want to add, I like Casey. He's a good coach. But if he wants to become a great coach, like Pop, he has to dictate the tempo, he has to dictate the style of game that's going to be played. He can't be reactionary all the time and he can't always be concerned with what the opponent is doing. This is the reason why Val is barely playing above 20 minutes a game, despite posting some impressive numbers. All the opponent has to do is dress a small lineup and they know they won't have to deal with Val at all.

It could go both ways though, right? You could argue just as strongly that the Raps ARE forcing opponents to adjust to them (PHO's Hail Mary lineup being a prime example). There's equal merit in having a consistent strategy - which I think the Raptors do, on both ends - but also making adjustments in response to the opponent's adjustments.

That's a good point. But I just don't think trying to match Phoenix's small lineup is all that smart, because their small lineup will beat our small lineup. We need to take advantage of true bigmen like Val, which not many teams in the league have.

Did Casey not do this in the 4th against Phx when he rolled out Val/DD/Ross/Lou/Lowry against them?

[Patman]

The keyword here is investment. That means it's not about instant payoff.

That's how the Spurs turned Splitter from a borderline scrub (he was a star in Europe, but didn't start well in the NBA) to a championship starting centre.

There were plenty of learning experiences to be had, when Pop could've easily just subbed him out for a vet.

My tentative argument against this is that Pop has the luxury of a stable of vets who've played under him for years and years, and are familiar with the multiple incarnations of his system.

Casey has a team that has only had one .500 season and playoff series to its credit. It's been one month. Let's see if what's working is actually working before calling to mess around with it - who knows, it's possible we might end up with far bigger problems than JV not getting 4th Q minutes.

You bring up a good point, but I think we can find a happy medium.

[m83588333]

Phoenix was throwing a three point guard offence against us, and shooting threes. It's never a great idea analytically speaking to trade twos for threes, especially when the opponent is making a high percentage.

But the small ball lineup didn't actually stop them from draining threes (in fact, that's when they made their run). Jonas could have given us guaranteed buckets (it's not like we were trying to trade threes for threes, we took plenty of long twos during that stretch iirc) as well as slowed down the tempo.

Jonas does not give you guaranteed buckets, he's shooting about 55%, and you know he would muff a couple of posts just on the percentages. if we were not stopping them from shooting enough threes, it would be worse with two bigs. Not stopping them enough is a defensive matter, and swapping a guard/defender for Jonas would not improve that. Nor did we have an issue with scoring. In the end, the defensive did tighten up enough, PHX did miss a couple of good looks, and Lowry and DeMar made it to the line to ice the game.

You also give up defensive rebounds when you go small. An Oreb is the same as a turnover. When teams jack up shots and miss and get the OReb they will eventually hit the three. Good teams late score high % low post twos and limit teams to single possessions as much as possible. Last 4 minutes no OReb or TO and Low Post 2s eating the clock.

[dagger]

Splitter didn't start a significant number of games until his third season. In his rookie season, at age 25, he started six games, and in his second season, he started 2. He had the age, experience, and body development when he arrived in Europe. He's a testament to patient development.

[OvertimeNO]

The keyword here is investment. That means it's not about instant payoff.

That's how the Spurs turned Splitter from a borderline scrub (he was a star in Europe, but didn't start well in the NBA) to a championship starting centre.

There were plenty of learning experiences to be had, when Pop could've easily just subbed him out for a vet.

My tentative argument against this is that Pop has the luxury of a stable of vets who've played under him for years and years, and are familiar with the multiple incarnations of his system.

Casey has a team that has only had one .500 season and playoff series to its credit. It's been one month. Let's see if what's working is actually working before calling to mess around with it - who knows, it's possible we might end up with far bigger problems than JV not getting 4th Q minutes.

You bring up a good point, but I think we can find a happy medium.

Like I said before, I find good points on either side of the argument. The one thing I can't stand is that anything/everything HAS TO BE RIGHT NOW/YESTERDAY/BEFORE JV WAS BORN.

It's been one month. JV is 22. There's plenty of time.

[Sheldon Cooper]

People really need to give this a break. The best thing about Casey is he doesn't care what anyone else thinks, he will play whomever gives us the best chance to win in the 4th quarter. Valanciunas is coming along just fine. Can we just give it a rest?

In unrelated news, Casey >>> Lowe. There is a reason why one of them mans an NBA bench and the other toils as a Grantland writer.

[ash_k]

You cannot have him out there in the 4th, if it is just to REbound and play D...you have to use him offensively ..you have to..

We can win games sure ...Val's development is the difference between a DEEP RUN/and eventual championship contending team AND just being a "TREADMILL" team (for the lack of a better term).

If you don't plan on running plays in the 4th for him then you might as well sit him..the man is an offensive player first!