Heard Magic and Wilbon Ragging on Metrics.

[KB21]

His usage is the key. Howard took 813 shots with the Lakers in 76 games. The season before he took 726 in only 54 games. 813 is the least amount of shots in a full season of games he has taken since his rookie year. I don't think its just coincidence that his scoring average dropped significantly. But hell, I ain't no rocket scientists so maybe it is and Howard really is no longer elite.

Do you think we can get him by just beating out a MLE?

You are not going to get anywhere using volume statistics with me. Volume stats mean very little when it comes to player value.

I stated above that Dwight's usage within the offense did decline. His USG% was around 27% two years ago and was around 22% this past year. There is a trade off between usage and efficiency. Typically, the more you increase your usage, the less efficient you will be. Last year, Dwight's usage declined. Based on that, you would anticipate that his efficiency would go up. It didn't. His efficiency stayed relatively the same as it was when he had a higher usage. Two year's ago, Dwight was the most efficient scorer in the NBA among players who had a usage percentage greater than 25. Last year, he was the 3rd most efficient scorer.

This past year, Dwight was 18th in scoring efficiency among player who had a usage percentage between 18 and 23%.

So, here is a simple scoring efficiency comparison between two free agent centers this offseason:

Player A: USG% 22.2, TS% 57.3

Player B: USG% 22.5, TS% 57.2

Both players are 27 years of age.

Now, this is just a comparison from a scoring efficiency standpoint, but Player A is Dwight. Player B is Nikola Pekovic.

Obviously, when you take into account everything else, Dwight has more impact on the game. However, is that impact at this point in his career enough to warrant paying him close to $100 million over 4 years vs paying Pekovic $36 million over 3 years?

Let me make it clear. Dwight's impact on the game is going to be greater than Nikola's impact.

Also, the only way I'd sign Dwight would be if I get Chris Paul as well. I'd sign Chris Paul by himself, but for Dwight, the two have to come together. The potential for a very good fit over the next 3 years is there. To do it, one would have to take less than a max deal, and I'd offer the less than max deal to Howard.

[NBASupes]

Which stat are you referring to, their simple rating? If so I haven't seen that stat referenced in any article that I can ever remember. If you are referring to +/- then that stat is listed all over the place and it's really too 'simple' to be used as a main stat to judge a player or to compare players.

Simple is a combination of both production and off/on. I like just using both individually.

It usually says what I need to know in few words.

KB21 tends to like stats that show how great someone is statistically. I could care less about that. I am all about impact as impact=championships. If you don't have great impact, you can't win championships.

I also like their Floor Time stats, their scoring which is critical when I am comparing what I see on tape to their stats, their T.O. and ball handling stat and their top five unit stats.

Someone on/off is extremely important. It can tell you to look into why someone like Jason Collins who gets greatly outproduce is such an asset for on/off. It also tells you to look into why someone like James Harden who greatly outproduces is such a nuisance on the court compared to off.

When you watch Collins you see someone who is great at defensive rotations and post defense. He is best used as a specialist.

When you watch Harden, you realize that his game involves low BBIQ Basketball when his TS% and WS says otherwise. You realize his game is basic. Three, drive, and try to draw contact for the foul using the PnR which he is extremely good at. He is also excellent in transition while being average in the half court setting. You realize his mid range game is awful. He can struggle to get his shot off and he is amazingly awful at defensive rotations and PnR defense. He is listed in my book as a loser NBA player. I wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. I personally do not want him near my NBA team. Zero impact player even if he is statistically a very good player and could be elite if you look at some statistics.

Collins and Harden are my outliers. I had numerous amount of them. One was Paul George last year(11-12) (positive) and one was Blake Griffin (10-11) negative.

You have guys like Kobe who while can have inconsistent impact still have a positive impact on their teams success. Westbrook is one that list as well.

[MaceCase]

The things that stats don't show is Howard in the lane changing shots, while Mike Conley puts up 17.3 and 8.3 in 6 games against Paul in the playoffs, Conley only averaged 14.6 and 6.1 in the regular season. Gasol played worse against Howard than he did against Duncan when they lost. A players stats don't show that shit unless you watch the games and look at what the opposing teams box score is like.

You might as well say that they don't show Kobe getting a double team thus leaving teammates open for easier shots either but.....these things would show up in plus/minus and ASPM right? If a player's presence on the courtt make's the other team score less and his team score more then it will indeed show up in the stats. You are making even more mistakes by picking particular small samples as proof against the larger body and harping against an award which is selected by dumbasses like Wilbon and Magic. Take it up with them for selecting Marc over Dwight, it's their eyes that passed judgment, not statiticians.

No they don't work like that and most stats are weighted to the offense. The reason is obvious, you can't measure a player missing a shot when all D12 did was almost block it. But you can measure a assist even though it takes the 2nd player making the damn shot..

Its pretty obvious that scoring is the small mans stat, where most formulas miss out is giving 100% credit for a pass. and 100% credit to the player making the shot. The scorer is the one doing the hardest part at least 75% of the time.

Uhm what? What is the argument here? I took every counting stat on a basic boxscore and added them up.....Harden came out in front. You don't even know what the hell the stat is that KB mentioned but you just want to "analyze" it and project flaws onto it because it disagrees with your notion of which you have inadequate backing behind besides "I saw".

There's nearly a stat for everything. Defensive impact? Defensive Win Shares, opponent PER, Defensive Rating, +/- etc. There are passing stats for how much a player is assisted on his own baskets and on even where he passes his own assists to such as assist leading to a layup, assist leading to a 3 pointer, etc.

Are you just going to look at everything that shows that Dwight was ranked behind other players and just say they are bollocks because your own opinion doesn't jive with it? Sure, no one stat or even the combination of all of them is perfect but Magic and Wilbon just showed that neither are your eyes.

[KB21]

82 games plus minus stats are simple stats. They are not adjusted to include other factors that effect a player on the court the way ASPM does.

[NBASupes]

You are not going to get anywhere using volume statistics with me. Volume stats mean very little when it comes to player value.

I stated above that Dwight's usage within the offense did decline. His USG% was around 27% two years ago and was around 22% this past year. There is a trade off between usage and efficiency. Typically, the more you increase your usage, the less efficient you will be. Last year, Dwight's usage declined. Based on that, you would anticipate that his efficiency would go up. It didn't. His efficiency stayed relatively the same as it was when he had a higher usage. Two year's ago, Dwight was the most efficient scorer in the NBA among players who had a usage percentage greater than 25. Last year, he was the 3rd most efficient scorer.

This past year, Dwight was 18th in scoring efficiency among player who had a usage percentage between 18 and 23%.

So, here is a simple scoring efficiency comparison between two free agent centers this offseason:

Player A: USG% 22.2, TS% 57.3

Player B: USG% 22.5, TS% 57.2

Both players are 27 years of age.

Now, this is just a comparison from a scoring efficiency standpoint, but Player A is Dwight. Player B is Nikola Pekovic.

Obviously, when you take into account everything else, Dwight has more impact on the game. However, is that impact at this point in his career enough to warrant paying him close to $100 million over 4 years vs paying Pekovic $36 million over 3 years?

Let me make it clear. Dwight's impact on the game is going to be greater than Nikola's impact.

Also, the only way I'd sign Dwight would be if I get Chris Paul as well. I'd sign Chris Paul by himself, but for Dwight, the two have to come together. The potential for a very good fit over the next 3 years is there. To do it, one would have to take less than a max deal, and I'd offer the less than max deal to Howard.

You are discounting the situation too much in terms of free agency. This logic is fine for a causal conversation but if you are a GM, you have to look at numerous things. When I watched D12 in LA. It was bad at first, decent in the middle and he was elite at the end. His offensive numbers were down but that is more due to the lack of personnel fit more than anything else. While I see your points to a degree. It's mighty dangerous to use Pek in contrast to Dwight. A center who cannot protect the rim and lacks the ability to defend the PnR is a major liability defensively in today's NBA. So while you could stretch your reasoning to some degree. What Dwight gives you, most NBA players just can't give you. He literally might be the most impactful NBA defender since Bill Russell. Honestly, his instincts and defensive BBIQ is more impressive than his athletic ability which you are greatly overusing to describe his defensive impact.

[NBASupes]

82 games plus minus stats are simple stats. They are not adjusted to include other factors that effect a player on the court the way ASPM does.

What other factors really matter in terms of being impactful or not being impactful. It doesn't take Calculus to learn 2*2= 4.

I used to get into it with this guy on Realgm name Tsherkin because he was this stat wiz who swore on his opinions using advanced stats. I respected a lot of his opinions but a lot of times, he completely dismissed real game footage. That's something I take into great account. So you can use any stat that's there. I remember this one site where Josh Smith was some type of God at several years. He was the only player since... to ... and stuff like that.

This is a simple game, do not try to over-analyze it.

[Buzzard]

You are not going to get anywhere using volume statistics with me. Volume stats mean very little when it comes to player value.

I stated above that Dwight's usage within the offense did decline. His USG% was around 27% two years ago and was around 22% this past year. There is a trade off between usage and efficiency. Typically, the more you increase your usage, the less efficient you will be. Last year, Dwight's usage declined. Based on that, you would anticipate that his efficiency would go up. It didn't. His efficiency stayed relatively the same as it was when he had a higher usage. Two year's ago, Dwight was the most efficient scorer in the NBA among players who had a usage percentage greater than 25. Last year, he was the 3rd most efficient scorer.

This past year, Dwight was 18th in scoring efficiency among player who had a usage percentage between 18 and 23%.

So, here is a simple scoring efficiency comparison between two free agent centers this offseason:

Player A: USG% 22.2, TS% 57.3

Player B: USG% 22.5, TS% 57.2

Both players are 27 years of age.

Now, this is just a comparison from a scoring efficiency standpoint, but Player A is Dwight. Player B is Nikola Pekovic.

Obviously, when you take into account everything else, Dwight has more impact on the game. However, is that impact at this point in his career enough to warrant paying him close to $100 million over 4 years vs paying Pekovic $36 million over 3 years?

Let me make it clear. Dwight's impact on the game is going to be greater than Nikola's impact.

Also, the only way I'd sign Dwight would be if I get Chris Paul as well. I'd sign Chris Paul by himself, but for Dwight, the two have to come together. The potential for a very good fit over the next 3 years is there. To do it, one would have to take less than a max deal, and I'd offer the less than max deal to Howard.

And you are not getting anywhere with me basing your opinion solely on metrics/stats. You ask the question concerning impact as if it is not important. The difference between a contender and a pretender is very small. Just as the talent level in the NBA is very tight.

Miami barely getting by a very old Spurs team is a perfect example of how close it really is. On paper (stats), the Heat should have ran the Spurs off the court if all we did was compare big three against big three. Go grab that metric and do the numbers. Bet you plenty that Bron, Wade, and Bosh's totals beat Parker, Duncan, and Manu's totals by what you would call a substantial difference.

We get Howard over Nikola, metric or no metric, we are a better team. And those small differences that you can't measure is why. Its also why someone like D12 or Duncan are still better players than the guys who supposedly out stat them.

[KB21]

What other factors really matter in terms of being impactful or not being impactful. It doesn't take Calculus to learn 2*2= 4.

I used to get into it with this guy on Realgm name Tsherkin because he was this stat wiz who swore on his opinions using advanced stats. I respected a lot of his opinions but a lot of times, he completely dismissed real game footage. That's something I take into great account. So you can use any stat that's there. I remember this one site where Josh Smith was some type of God at several years. He was the only player since... to ... and stuff like that.

This is a simple game, do not try to over-analyze it.

This is a simple game, but fans tend to value the wrong things within the simplicity of the game. Fans in general value volume scoring and not efficient scoring, yet scoring efficiency has the highest impact on winning games than any other statistic.

From a defensive standpoint, fans in general value volume blocks and volume steals and pay little attention to actual shot defense. No one has come up with a good metric for shot defense yet though.

The simplicity of the game boils down to this. There are four factors that account for something like 90-95% of your point differential, which is the key to winning basketball games. Those four factors are effective field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage, turnover percentage, and free throw attempts per field goal attempt. These are measured both offensively and defensively. The most impactful factor is effective field goal percentage. When you combine effective field goal percentage and your FTA/FGA numbers, you get your true shooting percentage.

eFG% is a better metric to use than FG% because FG% counts three point shots the same as 2 point shots, and three point shots are quite a bit more valuable.

[NBASupes]

And you are not getting anywhere with me basing your opinion solely on metrics/stats. You ask the question concerning impact as if it is not important. The difference between a contender and a pretender is very small. Just as the talent level in the NBA is very tight.

Miami barely getting by a very old Spurs team is a perfect example of how close it really is. On paper (stats), the Heat should have ran the Spurs off the court if all we did was compare big three against big three. Go grab that metric and do the numbers. Bet you plenty that Bron, Wade, and Bosh's totals beat Parker, Duncan, and Manu's totals by what you would call a substantial difference.

We get Howard over Nikola, metric or no metric, we are a better team. And those small differences that you can't measure is why. Its also why someone like D12 or Duncan are still better players than the guys who supposedly out stat them.

That's the thing about guys who understand stats but have little understanding of the game. They have a hard time understanding impact is much more important than stats and that personnel is the holy grail of Basketball. Not just having a superstar which goes along way.

[Buzzard]

Are you just going to look at everything that shows that Dwight was ranked behind other players and just say they are bollocks because your own opinion doesn't jive with it? Sure, no one stat or even the combination of all of them is perfect but Magic and Wilbon just showed that neither are your eyes.

When you don't like the answer you get, you go into bash mode Mace. I have no idea how or why they let you use a title here when your primary job is to be antagonistic. It does not work with me. I watch a lot of basketball which requires my eyes and when I look at stats for comparison, I measure big man against big man and guard against guard etc etc etc Is that so hard for you to fathom?

Every comparison I made concerning Howard was big vs big and from that I drew the conclusion that Howard was, even in a off year, the best big man in the NBA. Me being old school, I like the best big man in the game over the best guards in the game. If you don't like it, get the f*** over it. Or not. Do you really think I care?

Edited June 22, 2013 by Buzzard

[NBASupes]

This is a simple game, but fans tend to value the wrong things within the simplicity of the game. Fans in general value volume scoring and not efficient scoring, yet scoring efficiency has the highest impact on winning games than any other statistic.

From a defensive standpoint, fans in general value volume blocks and volume steals and pay little attention to actual shot defense. No one has come up with a good metric for shot defense yet though.

The simplicity of the game boils down to this. There are four factors that account for something like 90-95% of your point differential, which is the key to winning basketball games. Those four factors are effective field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage, turnover percentage, and free throw attempts per field goal attempt. These are measured both offensively and defensively. The most impactful factor is effective field goal percentage. When you combine effective field goal percentage and your FTA/FGA numbers, you get your true shooting percentage.

eFG% is a better metric to use than FG% because FG% counts three point shots the same as 2 point shots, and three point shots are quite a bit more valuable.

Number one, if we are talking in these types of statistical figures, we aren't just regular fans so let's hold the general assumption line for another topic to save us time.

Efficiency can be misunderstood. Some low BBIQ efficient players in the NBA like Nene, Harden, D. Jordan and Ibaka.

There are some high BBIQ low effciency players like Kobe, Z-Bo. and Rondo.

Efficiency like other stats can be flawed depending on who we are discussing.

Defense is something you have to watch. No one has really created a great stat for defense. You just have to watch them play.

Those four factors are effective field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage, turnover percentage, and free throw attempts per field goal attempt. These are measured both offensively and defensively.

I have my own four for a team which is not based off of any stats. How many two way players do you have? What type of size do you have? Do you have a superstar or two? How smart does your team play? If you rank off the charts more than anyone else, then that will probably be your NBA champion because the NBA playoffs is all about match-ups. If you matchup well v. everyone, no one will beat you.

The most impactful factor is effective field goal percentage. When you combine effective field goal percentage and your FTA/FGA numbers, you get your true shooting percentage.

eFG% is a better metric to use than FG% because FG% counts three point shots the same as 2 point shots, and three point shots are quite a bit more valuable.

No, eFG% is not impactful because it doesn't tell you how they draw fouls. Only the tape can tell you that. If you watch someone like James Harden, you can easily tell his FT attempts will go down due to his lack of versatility in his game. Then you look at Kobe, his might go up because Kobe is an extremely crafty player who game is better suited for the playoffs than the regular season where he can zone in on the defensive weaknesses. Like i said, all these stats can be flawed just due to the tape that nothing is constant in this sport. The only thing that is constant is in the playoffs, they don't give those 50/50 calls much and the game is much more physical and attention to detail is much greater for all teams and referees as well. This is why you see major drops in the zero impact guys once they enter the playoffs but you see the high BBIQ very skilled guys raise to the occasion. It's not that the Kobe's want it more than the Harden's. It's just that their game is much more capable than the Harden's of the world.

I use Harden a lot because he is just an easy target. He's one player who stat guys love and who guys who use stats but watch the games can't stand.

[AHF]

You are not going to get anywhere using volume statistics with me. Volume stats mean very little when it comes to player value.

I stated above that Dwight's usage within the offense did decline. His USG% was around 27% two years ago and was around 22% this past year. There is a trade off between usage and efficiency. Typically, the more you increase your usage, the less efficient you will be. Last year, Dwight's usage declined. Based on that, you would anticipate that his efficiency would go up. It didn't. His efficiency stayed relatively the same as it was when he had a higher usage. Two year's ago, Dwight was the most efficient scorer in the NBA among players who had a usage percentage greater than 25. Last year, he was the 3rd most efficient scorer.

There is a legit variable in your analysis that isn't accounted for - Mike D'Antoni. The underlying premise is your statement is that "all things being equal" you would anticipate that a player whose usage goes down will be more efficient. D'Antoni terribly misused Dwight and Gasol last season. Gasol's numbers look even worse than Dwight's. In addition to the injury factors for both players, I think D'Antoni's use of these guys was a big contributing factor in their relative poor performance. Put Gasol on another team and his numbers will radically improve. Same goes for Dwight but to a lesser extent.

D'Antoni handling big men is like a coach asking Josh to shoot jumpers. Even if usage decreases, you will still see mediocre to crappy results relative to what the player would be capable of if used in a more appropriate way.

Edited June 22, 2013 by AHF

[KB21]

That's the thing about guys who understand stats but have little understanding of the game. They have a hard time understanding impact is much more important than stats and that personnel is the holy grail of Basketball. Not just having a superstar which goes along way.

What you don't seem to understand is that a player's impact on the game is something that can be measured. This isn't some mystical ability that cannot be measured.

Since you want to make a blanket statement about those of us who understand the stats by saying that we don't understand the game, I'll make another blanket statement.

Those of you who don't understand stats but believe you understand the game think that missing shots creates value for the team that is missing the shots. It is the casual fan mentality where you look at a player who scores 25 PPG and think he is a good scorer, but you ignore the fact that he takes 30 shots to get 25 PPG.

[MaceCase]

When you don't like the answer you get, you go into bash mode Mace. I have no idea how or why they let you use a title here when your primary job is to be antagonistic. It does not work with me. I watch a lot of basketball which requires my eyes and when I look at stats for comparison, I measure big man against big man and guard against guard etc etc etc Is that so hard for you to fathom?

Every comparison I made concerning Howard was big vs big and from that I drew the conclusion that Howard was, even in a off year, the best big man in the NBA. Me being old school, I like the best big man in the game over the best guards in the game. If you don't like it, get the f*** over it. Or not. Do you really think I care?

LOL! Why is it when you are repeatedly pointed out as being wrong you then claim that you are being personally attacked? You need to get over it, you were the one that said the stat was "f***ed up" and offered cynicism that Dwight should be signed by the MLE. It wasn't a simple matter of "I disagree but whatever".

If it's your opinion that you would take Patrick Ewing over Michael Jordan because you value bigmen more than guards then so be it, you are entitled to that wonderful opinion. Don't attack others and their metrics or their own opinions for thinking otherwise or feign some faux-persecution complex.

[KB21]

There is a legit variable in your analysis that isn't accounted for - Mike D'Antoni. The underlying premise is your statement is that "all things being equal" you would anticipate that a player whose usage goes down will be more efficient. D'Antoni terribly misused Dwight and Gasol last season. Gasol's numbers look even worse than Dwight's. In addition to the injury factors for both players, I think D'Antoni's use of these guys was a big contributing factor in their relative poor performance. Put Gasol on another team and his numbers will radically improve. Same goes for Dwight but to a lesser extent.

D'Antoni handling big men is like a coach asking Josh to shoot jumpers. Even if usage decreases, you will still see mediocre to crappy results relative to what the player would be capable of if used in a more appropriate way.

That is a good point. I think even when taking into account that variable, it isn't a situation where D'Antoni tried to make Dwight a jump shooting big man similar to Chris Bosh, who is probably the ideal big man for his system. Dwight's eFG% was still a very efficient one, so that tells me that he wasn't taking a lot of jump shots that he can't hit.

[Buzzard]

LOL! Why is it when you are repeatedly pointed out as being wrong you then claim that you are being personally attacked? You need to get over it, you were the one that said the stat was "f***ed up" and offered cynicism that Dwight should be signed by the MLE. It wasn't a simple matter of "I disagree but whatever".

If it's your opinion that you would take Patrick Ewing over Michael Jordan because you value bigmen more than guards then so be it, you are entitled to that wonderful opinion. Don't attack others and their metrics or their own opinions for thinking otherwise or feign some faux-persecution complex.

Any stat that says a team should value Harden, CP3, Wesbrook, and 34 yr old Kobe, out on the perimeter over Dwight in the paint is wrong. You don't have to like my opinion. But it is my opinion. And its not based on favoritism for the hometown player, the end all be all of advanced stats, or a biased opinion towards all bigs or dislike for all guards.

Its based on an ability to watch a game, read a box score, and think for myself. I don't think I am the only one who does this. Last seasons draft here for the dynasty league went like this.

1-Bron

2-Durant

4-CP3

5-Howard

10-Wesbrook

16-Harden

27-Kobe Bryant

This draft was not about stats. None were used. It was not about contracts, none were used. It was only about picking players fans would want to build a team around. I am not the arrogant opinionated one here. Most fans at least in this draft, valued Howard over Westbrook, Harden, and Bryant by a pretty wide margin. I guess we are just wrong.

[Admin]

What you don't seem to understand is that a player's impact on the game is something that can be measured. This isn't some mystical ability that cannot be measured. Since you want to make a blanket statement about those of us who understand the stats by saying that we don't understand the game, I'll make another blanket statement. Those of you who don't understand stats but believe you understand the game think that missing shots creates value for the team that is missing the shots. It is the casual fan mentality where you look at a player who scores 25 PPG and think he is a good scorer, but you ignore the fact that he takes 30 shots to get 25 PPG.

You had me cracking up on the mystical ability part! I completely agree with the point you're making here as well.

[MaceCase]

Any stat that says a team should value Harden, CP3, Wesbrook, and 34 yr old Kobe, out on the perimeter over Dwight in the paint is wrong.......

............ I am not the arrogant opinionated one here.

Bravo.

"I will prove that any stat that ranked players based on their actual year's production wrong by using irrefutable evidence of a fantasy draft done before the previous season."

[Admin]

The stats may (and do) show that these perimeter players are 'better' players but you also have to consider some type of weight or scale or whatever that says that good/great big men are always more valuable than good/great perimeter players. Harden, Westbrook, etc. may have had better seasons than Dwight last year but if health isn't an issue and salaries are equal or not part of the equation I would guarantee you that 9/10 GMs would take Dwight over those guys and just after Lebron and Durant.

[Buzzard]

The stats may (and do) show that these perimeter players are 'better' players but you also have to consider some type of weight or scale or whatever that says that good/great big men are always more valuable than good/great perimeter players. Harden, Westbrook, etc. may have had better seasons than Dwight last year but if health isn't an issue and salaries are equal or not part of the equation I would guarantee you that 9/10 GMs would take Dwight over those guys and just after Lebron and Durant.

Seriously, how can any big man standing around in the paint be more Important than guys shooting 3s and getting assist? We must be crazy to think that.