Kyrie Irving and the impacts on Cleveland's Draft Pick

[Peoriabird]

25 minutes ago, noble said:

You say us predicting a bad season is whining. No, it is us looking at the roster and saying what we think will happen. It diesnt have to ve sunny and positive all the time. I'm fine with losing a ton of games as long as it nets us a great draft pick and we pick it well. Just because we think the team will be bad this season doesn't mean we aren't fans or won't watch, it just means we aren't expecting the playoffs or to win a lot of games.

I was just repeating his words

[Lurker]

If you're going to use analytics to prove a point, use them for more than just when it proves your point that you like, please use it for every point even if you hate the point it's being used for. Don't yell at me when I'm saying that the analytics show that so and so overachieved and really should have missed the playoffs and so and so badly underachieved. Both teams in this case should have not played one playoff game if you look at the analytics.

Not going to name names but the person I'm quoting will know who I'm talking to here.

You still need to be careful with using analytics but in this case that I'm talking about with the first so and so team, said team did not pass the eye test or analytics test. The only thing they had an advantage of, at all in this person's eyes, was the coach and since said coach is not Dan Quinn like he's getting absolutely slammed now and I'm not meaning just here, folks at the other place said the Hawks desperately need their own Dan Quinn (when we need to wait and see if the Falcons jump was legitimate....EVERY coach seemingly has a second year jump today).

[thecampster]

6 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

If it makes you feel better to whine about something that hasn't happened then have at it...I was just suggesting to you go make money if you are truly the nostradumis you claim to be.

Secondly, there maybe some here that appreciate your constant whining but as a general rule, its one of the most unappealing  traits to have. Just saying.

Holy crap...I'm a whiner?  I'm telling my mom on you.

[thecampster]

4 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

I was just repeating his words

Okay Sunshine, lets see if I can lay this out without whining like the little girl my wife wishes I was.

 

Dwight Howard.  Generous debate on this board exists as to whether Dwight was net positive for the Hawks last year or not. What isn't debatable is his statistics. He was a 13/13 guy last year (rounded) in just under 30 minutes of play time. He has been replaced by Dedmon and Plumlee. Now the curious player to me here isn't Dedmon but Plumlee. When healthy, Plumlee has been a very intriguing player who has made his teams better. The problem is health.  Dedmon played 17.5 minutes last year and averaged 5.1 points and 6.5 rebounds in that time. If we extrapolate his stats out to 29.7 minutes per game he comes back as 8.66/11.   Plumlee average 2.4 and 3.2 in just over 13 minutes of work. If we added Dedmon and Plumlee's numbers together they = a little more than 30 minutes a game and equal 7.5/8.7.  Statistically, Replacing Howard with Dedmon and Plumlee is a net loss of 5-6 points and 1.5-4 rebounds per game depending on how you look at their stats.  Average it to 5.5/2.75 loss daily on the offensive end.

Paul Millsap. Millsap is a consistent 18/8 guy in this league for the last few years. He plays average to above average defense and is a phenomenal team guy and honestly was one of my least favorite Hawks. I just didn't see him moving the needle despite his consistent play. We replaced him primarily with a player that I believe in 4 -5 years will be better than Millsap ever was...that said...he is a rookie. On the depth chart, Paul is replaced by Ersan and Ersan is replaced by Collins. It is going to be hard to quantify the offensive difference here, but I believe it is fair to say that Ersan is slightly below Paul (say 2 points, 1 rebound) and Collins will be slightly below Ersan as a rookie. A fair assessment of year 1 of Collins would be that we get probably 4 less points and 2 less rebounds from the PF position. In my humble opinion, Millsap didn't move the needle and Ersan/Collins are intangibles players.  So it is really hard to gauge this, but it is safe to assume it is a minor net loss for Ersan to replace Paul and Collins to replace Ersan at the NBA level team concept (at least for the first 40 games).

Tim Hardaway. At the SG spot, Hardaway measured a +6 PER against his opponents last year. It was at the 2 that he shined. You are replacing that with Marco Bellinelli. Who is a fine NBA player in his own right. But in every statistical measure, both offensively and defensively, THjr is a better 2 guard.  There is no debate. Not including the ridiculously small sample from Tavares, Hardaway was our best player last year in simple rating from 82games.com. He held a 60% win share at the 2 guard. His clutch statistics are off the chart with a 66% win share and a 31.2 points per 48 minutes in clutch time. His clutch time efg% was 64.8%.  Statistically speaking, Hardaway was a super clutch performer last year that won the Hawks games when others couldn't.  Bellinelli by contrast,  held a -3.3 PER at the 2 guard last year. That is a 9.3 PER swing from Hardaway. All of his clutch statistics are a significant downgrade from THj, but the most obvious of which is his 11.2 less points per 48 in the clutch. His net points per 100 possessions is -.6.  Hardaways is a +9.5.  There is no arguing that the Hawks took a huge step back with Bellinelli.

 

If you argued that the loss of Dwight coupled with his replacements cost a modest 2 point/game swing. That the loss of Millsap causes a modest 2 ppg swing and the same with Hardaway (it is going to be much, much more).  The Hawks go from -.8 PPG to -6.8 ppg this year.  Now surprises happen, but last year the Nets held a -6.7 and the Lakers were -6.9 per game.  The Nets finished with 20 wins and the Lakers with 26.  My prediction seems spot on. 

I am not being a negative Nancy, I'm being real. When you tank, it takes a while to grow. I am just hoping all the tankers are still posting here in February.

Now couple all of this with the loss of Calderon, Humpries and Sefalosha....all who added wins to the Hawks last year in some small fashion and you have a young squad that either must really step up or a whole lot of other teams need to experience a flu epidemic. 

[Peoriabird]

2 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Okay Sunshine, lets see if I can lay this out without whining like the little girl my wife wishes I was.

 

Dwight Howard.  Generous debate on this board exists as to whether Dwight was net positive for the Hawks last year or not. What isn't debatable is his statistics. He was a 13/13 guy last year (rounded) in just under 30 minutes of play time. He has been replaced by Dedmon and Plumlee. Now the curious player to me here isn't Dedmon but Plumlee. When healthy, Plumlee has been a very intriguing player who has made his teams better. The problem is health.  Dedmon played 17.5 minutes last year and averaged 5.1 points and 6.5 rebounds in that time. If we extrapolate his stats out to 29.7 minutes per game he comes back as 8.66/11.   Plumlee average 2.4 and 3.2 in just over 13 minutes of work. If we added Dedmon and Plumlee's numbers together they = a little more than 30 minutes a game and equal 7.5/8.7.  Statistically, Replacing Howard with Dedmon and Plumlee is a net loss of 5-6 points and 1.5-4 rebounds per game depending on how you look at their stats.  Average it to 5.5/2.75 loss daily on the offensive end.

Paul Millsap. Millsap is a consistent 18/8 guy in this league for the last few years. He plays average to above average defense and is a phenomenal team guy and honestly was one of my least favorite Hawks. I just didn't see him moving the needle despite his consistent play. We replaced him primarily with a player that I believe in 4 -5 years will be better than Millsap ever was...that said...he is a rookie. On the depth chart, Paul is replaced by Ersan and Ersan is replaced by Collins. It is going to be hard to quantify the offensive difference here, but I believe it is fair to say that Ersan is slightly below Paul (say 2 points, 1 rebound) and Collins will be slightly below Ersan as a rookie. A fair assessment of year 1 of Collins would be that we get probably 4 less points and 2 less rebounds from the PF position. In my humble opinion, Millsap didn't move the needle and Ersan/Collins are intangibles players.  So it is really hard to gauge this, but it is safe to assume it is a minor net loss for Ersan to replace Paul and Collins to replace Ersan at the NBA level team concept (at least for the first 40 games).

Tim Hardaway. At the SG spot, Hardaway measured a +6 PER against his opponents last year. It was at the 2 that he shined. You are replacing that with Marco Bellinelli. Who is a fine NBA player in his own right. But in every statistical measure, both offensively and defensively, THjr is a better 2 guard.  There is no debate. Not including the ridiculously small sample from Tavares, Hardaway was our best player last year in simple rating from 82games.com. He held a 60% win share at the 2 guard. His clutch statistics are off the chart with a 66% win share and a 31.2 points per 48 minutes in clutch time. His clutch time efg% was 64.8%.  Statistically speaking, Hardaway was a super clutch performer last year that won the Hawks games when others couldn't.  Bellinelli by contrast,  held a -3.3 PER at the 2 guard last year. That is a 9.3 PER swing from Hardaway. All of his clutch statistics are a significant downgrade from THj, but the most obvious of which is his 11.2 less points per 48 in the clutch. His net points per 100 possessions is -.6.  Hardaways is a +9.5.  There is no arguing that the Hawks took a huge step back with Bellinelli.

 

If you argued that the loss of Dwight coupled with his replacements cost a modest 2 point/game swing. That the loss of Millsap causes a modest 2 ppg swing and the same with Hardaway (it is going to be much, much more).  The Hawks go from -.8 PPG to -6.8 ppg this year.  Now surprises happen, but last year the Nets held a -6.7 and the Lakers were -6.9 per game.  The Nets finished with 20 wins and the Lakers with 26.  My prediction seems spot on. 

I am not being a negative Nancy, I'm being real. When you tank, it takes a while to grow. I am just hoping all the tankers are still posting here in February.

Now couple all of this with the loss of Calderon, Humpries and Sefalosha....all who added wins to the Hawks last year in some small fashion and you have a young squad that either must really step up or a whole lot of other teams need to experience a flu epidemic. 

You forgot to add Bembry's increase in production at the 2

[thecampster]

Assuming Bud plays him.  Look, its all moving parts at this point. I don't expect Bellinelli to be here in March, not sure about Plumlee (I believe he is auditioning to be healthy enough to trade), but as currently constructed...no...they aren't winning 30 games.

[Peoriabird]

1 minute ago, thecampster said:

Assuming Bud plays him.  Look, its all moving parts at this point. I don't expect Bellinelli to be here in March, not sure about Plumlee (I believe he is auditioning to be healthy enough to trade), but as currently constructed...no...they aren't winning 30 games.

We'll have to wait and see

[Lurker]

Dwight was not a net positive for the Hawks last year. They were perfectly fine without him.

[KB21]

The Hawks were -2.3 with Dwight on the court and +0.1 with him off the court.  

[thecampster]

47 minutes ago, KB21 said:

The Hawks were -2.3 with Dwight on the court and +0.1 with him off the court.  

And yet you still need to replace his production.  The 3 players lost accounted for 46.1 points, 23.6 rebounds, 7.4 assists per game in a total of 90.3 minutes.  I don't see that magically appearing with this group.

[thecampster]

Let me clarify what that means.  In order to replace the production of just those 3 players, you need 3 players each playing 30.1 minutes per game and each averaging 15.4 points, 7.9 rebounds and 2.5 assists per game.  We might have gotten 1 but we didn't get 3.

[KB21]

15 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Let me clarify what that means.  In order to replace the production of just those 3 players, you need 3 players each playing 30.1 minutes per game and each averaging 15.4 points, 7.9 rebounds and 2.5 assists per game.  We might have gotten 1 but we didn't get 3.

It's not so much of an issue with replacing his individual production.  I'm not high on this team, but I have very little doubt that the combination of Dedmon's overall defense and understanding of his offensive role as a rim runner and Mike Muscala's ability to stretch the floor as a stretch five will have more of an overall positive impact on the team's overall point differential than having Dwight and his 13/13 would have had.  

The biggest issue this team will have and the biggest negative impact on this team is the lack of Paul Millsap's production and his overall leadership, especially combined with the fact that the Hawks are going to rely on young players to produce this year.  

[hazer]

27 minutes ago, thecampster said:

Let me clarify what that means.  In order to replace the production of just those 3 players, you need 3 players each playing 30.1 minutes per game and each averaging 15.4 points, 7.9 rebounds and 2.5 assists per game.  We might have gotten 1 but we didn't get 3.

That's by design. If we replicate all those nimbers, we're still just middle of the pack playoffs team. And we all know there's no longer any point in that. If we only replace some of those nimbers, then we get higher draft picks and still "possibly" (but unlikely) compete for the last playoff spot if a few of our guys have killer seasons (playoff Dennis, playoff Printz, Gaze of old, ROTY Collins, so forth).

Edited July 24, 2017 by hazer

[thecampster]

http://mikecheck.blog.myajc.com/2017/07/20/hawks-not-a-good-team-but-could-be-very-good-in-one-area/