Did the Hawks change their mind after a week?

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, DS5 said:

Baze + Cleveland's 1st for Wesley Matthews. 

I wonder if that'd be an overpay at this point.  DAL should be desperate.

[Thomas]

Don't know if overpay can be in the conversation if we rid ourselves of the Baze deal.

[AHF]

5 minutes ago, Thomas said:

Just has that NBA defensive feel to me. Hustles and think that will pay off. Guess he'll have some of the early stuff Dennis went through acclimating to the minutes but it needed to happen. Maybe he really counts by playoff time. Thinking he will be prepared for then by being in the rotation now.

I've been hoping Prince ends up as our SF starter since the offseason.  Totally on board.

[DS5]

I'd think that Dallas will want either picks or young players, and I'd rather give up Cleveland's first than either of our young wings

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, DS5 said:

Baze + Cleveland's 1st for Wesley Matthews. 

Hell yes! Been begging for Wes for a minute now.

[sturt]

8 hours ago, AHF said:

The +/- stat is the only one where Kyle is close to Prince and Bembry and they are nearly as bad as him in that one.  Every other stat shows Kyle has been much better this season.  I still contend his proper role should have been limited minutes off the bench from the beginning and every stat of his improved when he was finally put in something closer to that role (including his +/-).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

[AHF]

As I said, simple plus/minus is the only statistic that makes any of these guys look good versus Korver.  

Once you start getting into the more advanced versions of it, it doesn't quite look the same.

Korver is better than THJr, Bazemore, Prince and Bembry in VORP.

Better than them all in box score plus/minus.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2017.html#advanced::25

 

Rk	Player	PER	TS%		OWS	DWS	WS	WS/48		BPM	VORP
										▼
7	Kyle Korver	11	0.594		0.8	0.9	1.7	0.092		-0.3	0.4
8	Tim Hardaway	13.9	0.547		0.7	0.7	1.4	0.087		-2	0
9	Kent Bazemore	9.5	0.449		-0.9	1.4	0.5	0.024		-2.3	-0.1
11	Taurean Waller-Prince	10	0.5		-0.1	0.4	0.3	0.055		-3	-0.1
13	Malcolm Delaney	7.8	0.47		-0.7	0.6	0	-0.003		-6.2	-0.7
14	DeAndre' Bembry	7.7	0.492		-0.1	0.1	0	0.004		-7.2	-0.1

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, AHF said:

As I said, simple plus/minus is the only statistic that makes any of these guys look good versus Korver.  

Once you start getting into the more advanced versions of it, it doesn't quite look the same.

Korver is better than THJr, Bazemore, Prince and Bembry in VORP.

Better than them all in box score plus/minus.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2017.html#advanced::25

 

Rk	Player	PER	TS%		OWS	DWS	WS	WS/48		BPM	VORP
										▼
7	Kyle Korver	11	0.594		0.8	0.9	1.7	0.092		-0.3	0.4
8	Tim Hardaway	13.9	0.547		0.7	0.7	1.4	0.087		-2	0
9	Kent Bazemore	9.5	0.449		-0.9	1.4	0.5	0.024		-2.3	-0.1
11	Taurean Waller-Prince	10	0.5		-0.1	0.4	0.3	0.055		-3	-0.1
13	Malcolm Delaney	7.8	0.47		-0.7	0.6	0	-0.003		-6.2	-0.7
14	DeAndre' Bembry	7.7	0.492		-0.1	0.1	0	0.004		-7.2	-0.1

I can make up a metric that says Kyle is better than Lebron.  Just give me about 15 minutes and an abacus.  I'll give it a catchy acronym like TRIPE or BULL.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, kg01 said:

I can make up a metric that says Kyle is better than Lebron.  Just give me about 15 minutes and an abacus.  I'll give it a catchy acronym like TRIPE or BULL.

Just saying, about every number shows Korver has not been the biggest problem among our wings.  Pretending like he was a waste of space - particularly in his role as a reserve - because of looking at simple plus/minus is disingenuous, IMO.  It is one number that does not carry a ton of significance on its own and is context dependent.

When I see so many other very main stream metrics like WS/48, PER, etc. I don't throw those out because of simple plus/minus.  

The guy is gone now so it isn't worth going too far down the rabbit's hole just saying that I don't buy into the people who are relying solely on that metric and saying "addition by subtraction."  KK was very solid in a reserve role for us.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, AHF said:

Just saying, about every number shows Korver has not been the biggest problem among our wings.  Pretending like he was a waste of space - particularly in his role as a reserve - because of looking at simple plus/minus is disingenuous, IMO.  It is one number that does not carry a ton of significance on its own and is context dependent.

When I see so many other very main stream metrics like WS/48, PER, etc. I don't throw those out because of simple plus/minus.  

The guy is gone now so it isn't worth going too far down the rabbit's hole just saying that I don't buy into the people who are relying solely on that metric and saying "addition by subtraction."  KK was very solid in a reserve role for us.

I actually agree with you totally.  He was good for us once we decreased his minutes and thereby forced him more into a role more consistent with his current state of being.

{Disclaimer: No calculators were damaged during this discussion.}

[sturt]

Isn't VORP a statistic that also only reflects one's offensive contribution?

 

 

Can Kyle be an asset off the bench for Team X, playing more typically against another teams second string?

It makes sense that he could. I'm just not yet seeing any number that reflects that that's what happened for us. I'm cautious that the theory is more logical to assume than it is something actually born out in practice.

 

And to be fair, at least a far as what I've said... clearly it made sense to move on, given the young alternatives we have. And then, all the more so, given the carrot of a 1st round asset that will have some value.

 

 

[AHF]

40 minutes ago, sturt said:

Isn't VORP a statistic that also only reflects one's offensive contribution?

 

 

Can Kyle be an asset off the bench for Team X, playing more typically against another teams second string?

It makes sense that he could. I'm just not yet seeing any number that reflects that that's what happened for us. I'm cautious that the theory is more logical to assume than it is something actually born out in practice.

 

And to be fair, at least a far as what I've said... clearly it made sense to move on, given the young alternatives we have. And then, all the more so, given the carrot of a 1st round asset that will have some value.

 

 

VORP stands for value over replacement player and measures both defense and offense.  It is intended to compare that person's production to the average player at that position across all teams.  

For an example, on the 2001-02 Pistons Ben Wallace was 6th in scoring with 7.6 points per game while Jerry Stackhouse led the team with 21.4 ppg.  Wallace's VORP for that season is 5.9 while Stackhouse's is 1.9.

Value over Replacement Player

Value over Replacement Player (VORP) converts the BPM rate into an estimate of each player's overall contribution to the team, measured vs. what a theoretical "replacement player" would provide, where the "replacement player" is defined as a player on minimum salary or not a normal member of a team's rotation. A long and comprehensive discussion on defining this level for the NBA was had at Tom Tango's blog, and is worth a read. (Tom Tango is a baseball sabermetrics expert, and one of the originators of the replacement level framework and the Wins Above Replacement methodology common now in baseball.)

 

What is Box Plus/Minus?

Box Plus/Minus (BPM) is a box score-based metric for evaluating basketball players' quality and contribution to the team. It is the latest version of a stat previously called Advanced Statistical Plus/Minus; it is NOT a version of Adjusted Plus/Minus, which is a play-by-play regression metric.

BPM relies on a player's box score information and the team's overall performance to estimate a player's performance relative to league average. BPM is a per-100-possession stat, the same scale as Adjusted Plus/Minus: 0.0 is league average, +5 means the player is 5 points better than an average player over 100 possessions

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, AHF said:

VORP stands for value over replacement player and measures both defense and offense.  It is intended to compare that person's production to the average player at that position across all teams.  

For an example, on the 2001-02 Pistons Ben Wallace was 6th in scoring with 7.6 points per game while Jerry Stackhouse led the team with 21.4 ppg.  Wallace's VORP for that season is 5.9 while Stackhouse's is 1.9.

Value over Replacement Player

Value over Replacement Player (VORP) converts the BPM rate into an estimate of each player's overall contribution to the team, measured vs. what a theoretical "replacement player" would provide, where the "replacement player" is defined as a player on minimum salary or not a normal member of a team's rotation. A long and comprehensive discussion on defining this level for the NBA was had at Tom Tango's blog, and is worth a read. (Tom Tango is a baseball sabermetrics expert, and one of the originators of the replacement level framework and the Wins Above Replacement methodology common now in baseball.)

 

What is Box Plus/Minus?

Box Plus/Minus (BPM) is a box score-based metric for evaluating basketball players' quality and contribution to the team. It is the latest version of a stat previously called Advanced Statistical Plus/Minus; it is NOT a version of Adjusted Plus/Minus, which is a play-by-play regression metric.

BPM relies on a player's box score information and the team's overall performance to estimate a player's performance relative to league average. BPM is a per-100-possession stat, the same scale as Adjusted Plus/Minus: 0.0 is league average, +5 means the player is 5 points better than an average player over 100 possessions

@sturt why'd you get him started with tha nimbers??!?!

[AHF]

VORP, PER, WS/48, BPM, etc. are all performance driven.  They look at what a player has done on both sides of the court and run their numbers against a normative performance and spit out their evaluations.  None are perfect proxies for performance and all have their flaws.

Plus/Minus is a mix of performance and context driven.  If you have the 20th best player in the league who backs up the best player in the league, he will have a negative plus/minus all things being equal because the team does better with a superior alternative (i.e., if you back up LeBron it is unlikely your plus/minus will look very good because the team will perform better with LeBron in your place).   Conversely, a player with a horrible backup will look very positive all things being equal because his replacement is so inferior (i.e., LeBron's plus/minus will look better if he is being backed up by Kent Bazemore where the team falls apart when he leaves the game than if he is being backed up by prime Scottie Pippen who would keep things at a much more steady level).  Of course, all things are not equal and other things can drive plus/minus outside of player performance as well.  (Suck on these apples kg! Test for who is reading.) Players used situationally may have +/- numbers that are driven by their situations more than their performance (such as whether a player's time is on the floor against the opposing team's best players or weak players, minutes in garbage time, etc.).  Players who play in lineups with great players or great chemistry (or the opposite with terrible players or chemistry) see their numbers influenced by the success of the whole array of players in the lineups in which they participate.  

Plus/Minus is one useful tool that has to be used in combination with other stats, your viewing of the games, etc.

 

[sturt]

From our good friends at basketball-reference.com, prefacing the section that speaks to VORP being a box score sourced stat:

From our good friends at 82games...

 

 

I would further suggest that, on a team that approaches defense from a philosophy that Bud has outright said does not differentiate between wings (2s and 3s), any box score oriented stat attempting to measure defense is inherently reliant, rather, on assuming the SG defends against the other teams SG, and same for SFs... setting up a built-in flaw from the git-go.

 

 

[AHF]

You friends at 82games actually criticize the simple plus/minus stat that they supply in favor of an adjusted plus/minus stat they don't provide.

Quote

Adjusted Plus-Minus: The Basics

By now, many basketball fans are familiar with the basic plus-minus concept, as it’s been showing up for years in game commentary at both the NBA and college levels. You might see it alluded to in a game graphic that looks something like this:

	Minutes	Scoring Margin
Miami Heat with Wade:	33	+14
Miami Heat without Wade:	15	-11

In essence, the plus-minus stat simply keeps track of the net changes in score when a given player is either on or off the court. Logically, of course, the players who make the greatest overall contributions to team success should be the ones with the largest positive plus-minus impact. Unfortunately, however, the plus-minus stat doesn’t always fare particularly well in the messy real world of NBA basketball. For one thing, some players spend most of their time on the court in the company of very good teammates, while others frequently play in tandem with much weaker players. The plus-minus stat doesn’t account for these inequities at all. Likewise, some guys always find themselves matched against the opponent’s best players, while others more often face the opposing team’s second unit. That’s another big problem as far as the plus-minus stat is concerned. What’s needed, of course, is some way of adjusting the plus-minus stat to account for all such potential confounds.

This is exactly what the adjusted plus-minus stat does: it reflects the impact of each player on his team’s bottom line (scoring margin), after controlling statistically for the strength of every teammate and every opponent during each minute he’s on the court. 

http://www.82games.com/ilardi1.htm

The simple plus/minus stat offered by 82games is worth looking at but it is highly influenced by factors other than a player's individual performance.

[sturt]

16 minutes ago, AHF said:

You friends at 82games actually criticize the simple plus/minus stat that they supply in favor of an adjusted plus/minus stat they don't provide.

http://www.82games.com/ilardi1.htm

The simple plus/minus stat offered by 82games is worth looking at but it is highly influenced by factors other than a player's individual performance.

I must be missing it, but I'm failing to find an indication that they are not using what they've endorsed. Forgive if I'm just blind... always possible.

Wrote to them to ask that direct question.

[REHawksFan]

3 hours ago, AHF said:

As I said, simple plus/minus is the only statistic that makes any of these guys look good versus Korver.  

Once you start getting into the more advanced versions of it, it doesn't quite look the same.

Korver is better than THJr, Bazemore, Prince and Bembry in VORP.

Better than them all in box score plus/minus.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/ATL/2017.html#advanced::25

 

Rk	Player	PER	TS%		OWS	DWS	WS	WS/48		BPM	VORP
										▼
7	Kyle Korver	11	0.594		0.8	0.9	1.7	0.092		-0.3	0.4
8	Tim Hardaway	13.9	0.547		0.7	0.7	1.4	0.087		-2	0
9	Kent Bazemore	9.5	0.449		-0.9	1.4	0.5	0.024		-2.3	-0.1
11	Taurean Waller-Prince	10	0.5		-0.1	0.4	0.3	0.055		-3	-0.1
13	Malcolm Delaney	7.8	0.47		-0.7	0.6	0	-0.003		-6.2	-0.7
14	DeAndre' Bembry	7.7	0.492		-0.1	0.1	0	0.004		-7.2	-0.1

If THJ has a better PER and higher VA and EWA, how does he not compare to KK?  Looks to me like THJ is clearly statistically superior while Prince is about the same in limited minutes.  Everyone is better than Baze but we all knew that. 

[Guest]

I think Imma just...