Historically poor defense, once again, by the Raptors
Forget about the final score of last night’s victory against the Chicago Bulls.
Chicago Bulls 89
TORONTO RAPTORS 99
Wed Nov 12 2009 - Game Scoreboard
Instead, for the next few minutes, mull over the stark reality … and the long term consequences … of the following numbers:
* Prior to last night’s contest the Raptors had surrendered an average of 118.1 points per game, historically, amongst the worst defensive performances in the NBA since the introduction of the 3PT-shot [1979-1980]
* Prior to last night’s contest the Bulls had averaged only 88 points scored per game this season
* By half-time of last night’s game Chicago had already amassed 60 points and built a 7 point lead [60-53], primarily, on the strength of their above average performance in the 2nd quarter [35 PTS; FG: 15-23/65.2%; FT: 4-4/100.0%; 4 ORb; 3TO]
* Despite scoring only 18 points in the 3rd quarter [FG: 7-19/36.8%; FT: 3-4/75.0%; Technical: 1-1/100%; 1 ORb; 2 TO], Chicago retained a 1 point lead [Chi 78, TOR 77] at the start of the final period … while playing the 2nd bill of a back-2-back
* The Bulls held onto their lead for the first 5:36 of the 4th quarter [Chi 88, TOR 85], despite shooting poorly from the field [FG: 3-10/30.0%; FT: 4-4/100%; 2 TO]
* Chicago, then, failed to convert a single field goal attempt during the final 6:24 of the 4th quarter [FG: 0-11/0.0%; FT: 1-2/50.0%; 5 ORb; 3 TO], while registering only 11 points in the final frame
|
POSSESSION OUTCOME CHART FOR CHICAGO 6:24 – 0:00 of the 4th Quarter |
||
|
Poss. # |
Player |
Outcome |
|
1 |
Noah |
TO – 3 sec violation |
|
2 |
Deng |
TO – Bad Pass |
|
3 |
Rose |
J2, miss |
|
4 |
Deng |
J2, miss |
|
5 |
Gibson |
FT, miss; FT, miss |
|
6 |
Deng |
J2, miss |
|
7 |
Hinrich |
J2, miss |
|
8 |
Hinrich |
J2, miss |
|
9 |
Deng |
TO – Traveling |
|
10 |
Rose |
J2, miss |
|
11 |
Rose |
DLU, miss |
|
12 |
Noah |
T2, miss |
|
13 |
Salmons |
J2, pull-up, miss |
|
14 |
Salmons |
J3, miss |
|
15 |
Deng |
J2, miss |
|
16 |
Hinrich |
FT, miss; FT, make |
Yes, the Raptors did manage to increase the overall level of their “effort”, in the 2nd half of last night’s game, on the defensive end of the floor.
BUT … and it’s a pretty BIG one, at this point …
A. How much of Chicago’s inability to score the ball in the 2nd half of the final quarter was actually due to the Raptors’ improved defense?
vs
B. The simple fact that the Bulls ran out of gas?
[playing in a back-2-back without Tyrus Thomas and with Derrick Rose's overall athleticism still limited, due to his lingering achilles tendon injury]
Even if the Raptors happen to begin their upcoming 4-game road trip with a W against the LA Clippers … should their Team Defense continue to yield points at the present alarming rate … there’s a very real possibility they will return to the cozy confines of the ACC, sporting a 5-7 W-L record, having lost 3 consecutive games, i.e. @ Phoenix, @ Denver and @ Utah.
For a team whose stated goal this season was to finished with one of the league’s best marks in terms of Defensive Field Goal Percentage Allowed … the warning lights must be flashing ‘Red Alert’ at the intersection of Bay Street and Lakeshore Boulevard.
Tags: Chicago Bulls, Toronto Raptors
November 12th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
Might actually agree on last nights outcome, sure looked like they ran out of gas.
The goal of being in the top tier defensive FG% does seem funny, because, man our D has sucked.
Optimist that I am, it can only improve right. An astute NBA observor could say that as these 9 new players, yes some defensively challenged, continue to familiarize themselves with both their new teammates and there new system the natural progression would be for their defence to get show signs of improvement.
Continued optimist that I am, seeing how, for the most part, this team has won 4 of their 8 games, against playoff caliber teams(ug! Grizzlies) based mainly on individual offensive outputs, you have to admit, we have some real offensive potential. Wait until they get more familiar with each other.
Guess my point is, we might not have to be a top-tier defnsive team to win some games. It’ll remain our goal. Triano’s in it for the long term, continue working on that goal. Could take years.
While on subject of team goals, lets be honest, I do not think we will compete for Eastern Conference this year. Its not our goal. We are buildng towards it. We got a relatively young team and some desirable commoditiesif changes are required, be it mid season, next season or next after that.
Your prediction of 1 and 3 in next four would be odds on. Next would probably be 0 for 4. I would not be surprised either way. Anything greater than 1 victory would be sweet.
November 13th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Tinman,
re: “Optimist that I am, it can only improve right.”
No.
It could actually:
1. Stay the same as it is right now;
2. Improve; or,
3. Become even worse.
—————————–
re: “An astute NBA observor could say that as these 9 new players, yes some defensively challenged, continue to familiarize themselves with both their new teammates and there new system the natural progression would be for their defence to get show signs of improvement.”
No.
IMO, an astute NBA observer would expect that … for an authentically solid team in this league … Defense is actually what tends to come together first, as it’s being formed into a cohesive unit, not Offense.
When a team’s Offense is what comes together first, in general, it means that this team has very little chance of advancing in the playoffs, should it be so fortunate to even qualify for post-season play.
—————————–
re: “Continued optimist that I am, seeing how, for the most part, this team has won 4 of their 8 games, against playoff caliber teams(ug! Grizzlies) based mainly on individual offensive outputs, you have to admit, we have some real offensive potential. Wait until they get more familiar with each other.
IMO, there has been solid “offensive potential” on each of the Raptors teams for the last several seasons.
2005-2006, 27 wins
2006-2007, 47 wins
2007-2008, 41 wins
2008-2009, 33 wins
As such, “offensive potential” is not what determines how well this team, or any other in the NBA, will fare when it comes to advancing in the playoffs.
—————————–
re: “Guess my point is, we might not have to be a top-tier defnsive team to win some games. It’ll remain our goal. Triano’s in it for the long term, continue working on that goal. Could take years.
While on subject of team goals, lets be honest, I do not think we will compete for Eastern Conference this year. Its not our goal. We are buildng towards it. We got a relatively young team and some desirable commoditiesif changes are required, be it mid season, next season or next after that.”
My annual goals for the Raptors would be:
1. Hire and retain quality individuals with a high level of Basketball Acumen, a commitment to winning the championship, and a sincere interest in representing the organization in a first-class manner.
2. Win more games than you lose.
3. Qualify for the playoffs.
4. Qualify for a Top 4 seed.
5. Advance beyond the 1st Round.
6. Advance to the Conference Finals.
7. Advance to the NBA Finals.
8. Win the NBA Championship.
Winning a bunch of regular season games; playing a high scoring, entertaining brand of basketball; and, making a bottom-line profit should not even enter into the equation … for a legit owner of a franchise in the NBA.
Each year, some of those 8 goals would be attainable; while other specific ones would not be attainable, just yet.
There’s no shame in failing to reach specific goals, on a temporary basis.
As long as there’s a comprehensive, integrated Plan Of Attack to bring them about over the long haul, then there is nothing wrong with building a championship calibre organization, slowly but surely, brick by brick.
The shame comes when you actually have the resources that MLSE has and yet still have NO DISCERNIBLE PLAN OF ATTACK to ever win the NBA Championship down-the-road.
—————————–
re: “Your prediction of 1 and 3 in next four would be odds on. Next would probably be 0 for 4. I would not be surprised either way. Anything greater than 1 victory would be sweet.”
Agreed.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
“Winning a bunch of regular season games; playing a high scoring, entertaining brand of basketball; and, making a bottom-line profit should not even enter into the equation … for a legit owner of a franchise in the NBA.”
I think that last sentence fragment says it all. We don’t have an owner who is willing to put finances aside and assemble a winning team. We have a business entity that is responsible to a very wide base of constituents, the vast majority of whom put financial stability ahead of winning games (and rightly so, given that the largest shareholder is a PENSION fund!). I wonder if the RIM guys have any money left over after their legal bills…
November 13th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
So, what do you consider reasonable goals for a 33 win team. Surely your top 3 goals listed. Possibly # 5 as well.
Sounds like we are on track.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Tinman,
IMO, the first mistake would be to see the Raptors as just a 33-win team, given the actual history of the franchise:
———————
#14 2008-09 NBA Toronto Raptors 33-49 .402 4 -2.53 107.0 110.0 Mitchell (8-9), Triano (25-40)
#13 2007-08 NBA Toronto Raptors* 41-41 .500 2 2.47 110.2 107.0 Lost Eastern Conference First Round Mitchell (41-41)
#12 2006-07 NBA Toronto Raptors* 47-35 .573 1 0.61 107.0 106.0 Lost Eastern Conference First Round Mitchell (47-35)
#11 2005-06 NBA Toronto Raptors 27-55 .329 4 -3.03 109.5 112.7 Mitchell (27-55)
#10 2004-05 NBA Toronto Raptors 33-49 .402 4 -1.81 106.9 108.7 Mitchell (33-49)
#9 2003-04 NBA Toronto Raptors 33-49 .402 6 -3.42 97.0 100.4 O’Neill (33-49)
#8 2002-03 NBA Toronto Raptors 24-58 .293 7 -6.09 100.5 107.0 Wilkens (24-58)
#7 2001-02 NBA Toronto Raptors* 42-40 .512 3 -0.71 102.6 103.1 Lost Eastern Conference First Round Wilkens (42-40)
#6 2000-01 NBA Toronto Raptors* 47-35 .573 2 1.69 105.9 103.4 Lost Eastern Conference Semifinals Wilkens (47-35)
#5 1999-00 NBA Toronto Raptors* 45-37 .549 3 -0.46 104.7 104.9 Lost Eastern Conference First Round Carter (45-37)
#4 1998-99 NBA Toronto Raptors 23-27 .460 6 -1.32 102.0 103.9 Carter (23-27)
#3 1997-98 NBA Toronto Raptors 16-66 .195 8 -8.33 101.2 111.0 Walker (11-38), Carter (5-28)
#2 1996-97 NBA Toronto Raptors 30-52 .366 8 -2.56 104.6 108.0 Walker (30-52)
#1 1995-96 NBA Toronto Raptors 21-61 .256 8 -7.21 103.8 111.8 Malone (21-61)
———————
The goals for the 2009-2010 Toronto Raptors SHOULD be consistent with the goals of a +42-win team … which has simply been Lost at Space for the last 8 years.
Goals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 should, by now, be well-established annual benchmarks for this franchise, properly understood.
Unfortunately … those who see it this way, in Raptorville, are still few and far between.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Scott G.,
At this point, anyone but MLSE might just do for me, including Mr. Balsillie.
Unlike others, perhaps, I respect the ability of someone with what it takes to run counter to the prevailing culture and succeed in a big way, while asking for and taking no prisoners.
In my judgment, Jim has the goods to become a successful owner in the NBA.
November 13th, 2009 at 5:58 pm
So, what 42 team win do you now think is in a position to compete for your points 4, 6,7, and 8.
Fact of the matter, the JO experiment was a step backwards. Unfortunate miscalculation from BC, but what is done is done. We went back to square 2.
Half of the goals you have stated are unrealistic.
Ya gotta stay real.
November 13th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Tinman,
When the Raptors last won 47 games, how many wins did the Orlando Magic accumulate that same season?
3 years later … if your question is:
IMO, which +42-win team from a few years ago is in the best position to take a legit crack at achieving stated Goals 4, 6, 7 and 8 this year?
The answer is … Orlando.
The job that Otis Smith and Dave Twardzik have done so far is first rate.
In fact, 3 years ago, in communication with Pat Williams, I extoled the virtues of the talent they had on their roster that I thought would eventually become the foundation blocks of a legit contender for the Magic, if their team’s management was astute enough to make it work.
IMO, what some might consider to be “unrealistic” goals in the situation which the Raptors find themselves today is simply a function of a limited imagination and a lack of personal experience in the construction of something from scratch.
PS. Those who’ve already done this, know full well that setting “realistic” goals, exclusively, is strictly for “losers”.
PPS. The next best bet in the EC this season is the Atlanta Hawks.