PDA

View Full Version : Best Backcourt going forward: Beal/Wall or Irving/Waiters



HouRealCoach
03-01-2013, 10:25 PM
Both are very young but who would you take going forward

ManRam
03-01-2013, 10:28 PM
I still have faith in Wall, but Irving will be better.

Beal will be better than Waiters. But still, I think just because of Kyrie you have to take Cleveland. I do think Beal turns into a star though.

xxplayerxx23
03-01-2013, 10:29 PM
Close because I love beal but I think the Irving is a superstar and waiters is ganna be a solid scorer so ill go with them

garyraymond23
03-01-2013, 10:33 PM
Interesting comparison. I believe Kyrie Irving has superstar potential while I'm not sure Wall does. Kyrie has top 5 player in the NBA in a few years potential, I don't think Wall does in the slightest, maybe top 5 PG. Beal has looked ok, much better with Wall finally back and Waiters has looked surprisingly good as well.

Give me the duo with Kyrie.

Hawkeye15
03-01-2013, 10:37 PM
I think Irving will be exponentially better than Wall, and while Beal will probably be a bit better than Waiters, Irving really sells this comparison because of the small difference in the other two.

garyraymond23
03-01-2013, 10:40 PM
I will admit I've been thoroughly surprised with how well Waiters has performed this year, I expected him to be significantly worse.

Ill21
03-01-2013, 10:44 PM
Wall is average

garyraymond23
03-01-2013, 10:50 PM
Wall is average

Well that's just not true at all.

Raps18-19 Champ
03-01-2013, 10:52 PM
wall is average

lolololol.

xxplayerxx23
03-01-2013, 10:52 PM
Wall is average

Dis-agree with you on that one man. Wall is fast and can play. He is still young and talented I expect him to be a solid player if he can stay healthy, 17/9 type player IMO

WITZ
03-01-2013, 10:59 PM
Ill take the 2 guys in the back court that can create shots for themselves ,but it helps that one of those guys is Kyrie :laugh2:. Beal/Waiters are pretty close in talent imo but i don't like the fact that Beal is assisted on 78% of his jump shots.What happens if wall gets hurt again is he going to go back to playing to who he did the 1st 2 months of the season with no Wall.

Jint.
03-01-2013, 11:02 PM
the team with Kyrie Irving..

Hawkeye15
03-01-2013, 11:04 PM
at what point will we stop banking on Wall's "potential" though? I understand he is on a bad team, with a horrible coach, but he hasn't done a lot to show anyone he is anything more than a freak athlete with limitations.

shep33
03-01-2013, 11:05 PM
I think Irving > Beal + Wall.

D-Leethal
03-01-2013, 11:06 PM
Wall doesn't doesn't seem to have the brains to match his talent and raw ability, especially at the PG position. He only plays one speed, has tunnelvision, turnover prone, can't shoot. I don't see him ever being a top 10 PG and I think Beal will be the better player in that backcourt. Kyrie by himself is the better backcourt.

Melo15
03-01-2013, 11:11 PM
Ill take the 2 guys in the back court that can create shots for themselves ,but it helps that one of those guys is Kyrie :laugh2:. Beal/Waiters are pretty close in talent imo but i don't like the fact that Beal is assisted on 78% of his jump shots.What happens if wall gets hurt again is he going to go back to playing to who he did the 1st 2 months of the season with no Wall.

This is key for me. Obviously as a Cavs fan I'm going to take Irving/Waiters but I think this is crucial to the argument. Irving is obviously a better player than Wall but Beal and Waiters are very comparable. I think Dion being able to create his own shot gives him a slight edge for the time being. I do expect Beal to be the slightly better player going forward, though.

Eg714
03-01-2013, 11:17 PM
Give me curry and klay.

topdog
03-01-2013, 11:23 PM
I get the argument that a superstar and any one other player still means you have a superstar and that is pretty rare and special, but I am one to argue balance and I believe that Beal and Wall both have the potential to be fringe all-stars and very complimentary ones at that. I don't see Waiters as anything more than a high volume scorer. Irving is a King but a Pair always beats a single high card.

D-Leethal
03-01-2013, 11:26 PM
I get the argument that a superstar and any one other player still means you have a superstar and that is pretty rare and special, but I am one to argue balance and I believe that Beal and Wall both have the potential to be fringe all-stars and very complimentary ones at that. I don't see Waiters as anything more than a high volume scorer. Irving is a King but a Pair always beats a single high card.

Maybe in poker, but not in the NBA.

b@llhog24
03-01-2013, 11:29 PM
at what point will we stop banking on Wall's "potential" though? I understand he is on a bad team, with a horrible coach, but he hasn't done a lot to show anyone he is anything more than a freak athlete with limitations.

Because he's been injured like a mutha****er.

Hawkeye15
03-01-2013, 11:31 PM
Because he's been injured like a mutha****er.

I get that, but I just don't see anything but athletic ability with Wall. Same when he was at Kentucky. I don't think he is very intelligent.

b@llhog24
03-01-2013, 11:31 PM
Kyrie is so good that you actually have to stomach waiters. So them. Beal is dope doe.

b@llhog24
03-01-2013, 11:35 PM
I get that, but I just don't see anything but athletic ability with Wall. Same when he was at Kentucky. I don't think he is very intelligent.

He may never be a hyper efficient scorer. But he has all the tools to be on an ALL NBA defensive team, and is a pretty good passer and he's a good leader from my vantage point (says and tries to do the right thing). Wall will go as far as his jump-shot carries him.

Melo15
03-01-2013, 11:38 PM
I get the argument that a superstar and any one other player still means you have a superstar and that is pretty rare and special, but I am one to argue balance and I believe that Beal and Wall both have the potential to be fringe all-stars and very complimentary ones at that. I don't see Waiters as anything more than a high volume scorer. Irving is a King but a Pair always beats a single high card.

Coming into tonight Waiters was shooting 41% and Beal was shooting 40%, really no difference between the two. Then factor in this:

Dion's assist percentages on his shots:

Jump shots: 49%
Close: 29%
Dunk: 55%
Tips: 0%
Inside: 34%

Beal's assist percentages on his shots:

Jump shots: 78% (+29%, 1.59x more often)
Close: 60% (+31%, 2.07x more often)
Dunk: 82% (+27%, 1.49x more often)
Tips: 0%
Inside: 66% (+32%, 2.06x more often)

See these two links for the full stats:
http://www.82games.com/1213/12CLE7.HTM
http://www.82games.com/1213/12WAS7.HTM

One player is able to create on his own, the other thus far has not shown that ability. But sure, let's categorize one as a volume scorer over the other.

Mishmin
03-01-2013, 11:59 PM
the team with Kyrie Irving..

This right here

Arch Stanton
03-02-2013, 12:04 AM
Kyrie is so good that you actually have to stomach waiters. So them. Beal is dope doe.

I think Waiters actually plays better without Kyrie, and vice-versa. If the two want to co-exist, they need to figure out how to play better off the ball.

b@llhog24
03-02-2013, 12:26 AM
I think Waiters actually plays better without Kyrie, and vice-versa. If the two want to co-exist, they need to figure out how to play better off the ball.

I've noticed his play since Kyrie went down. And Kyrie can play off the ball but Waiters can't run an offense like he can.

Arch Stanton
03-02-2013, 12:30 AM
I've noticed his play since Kyrie went down. And Kyrie can play off the ball but Waiters can't run an offense like he can.

If you're interested read the first part of this article which talks about Kyrie/Waiters chemistry. http://www.cavstheblog.com/?p=18025

b@llhog24
03-02-2013, 01:03 AM
If you're interested read the first part of this article which talks about Kyrie/Waiters chemistry. http://www.cavstheblog.com/?p=18025

Nice breakdown. Although I disagree that Kyrie isn't an off ball threat and that Waiters has the necessary footwork to have a nice post game, he's certainly strong enough for it though. (Are they talking about this season or the future? Cause inevitably some of these problems won't be around 2-3 years from now).

And I've never seen that play by play software. Looks dope. But when they say "it's a high % area" are they referring to league wide splits or just Dion/Kyrie?

b@llhog24
03-02-2013, 01:07 AM
If you're interested read the first part of this article which talks about Kyrie/Waiters chemistry. http://www.cavstheblog.com/?p=18025


It’s lacking, but I don’t think it’s a talent/skill set issue, and thus, it is correctable. Kyrie is a generational wunderkind on offense, so I’m not going to put the onus on him to change his stripes, he just needs to be more willing to move without the ball after he gives it up. Dion is going to have to start playing like Gerald Wallace, though (minus the injuries). He should be in attack mode at all times. When Kyrie is vaporizing opponent ligaments, Dion needs to be curling around behind him filling the now-open space or crashing towards the hoop for a weakside bucket. Dion has shown a lot of growth already, especially in his half-court approach – I have confidence that with solid coaching, they will be devastating together.


Okay just read this part, it makes more sense now. Gforce (minus the defense, overall hustle ability) is an apt comparison.

D12 fan
03-02-2013, 01:13 AM
Imagine if Lebron goes back to Cleveland.

pg:Irving
sg:Waiters
sf:Lebron
pf:Thompson
c:Varejao

That is like the perfect lineup.:speechless:

Arch Stanton
03-02-2013, 01:33 AM
Nice breakdown. Although I disagree that Kyrie isn't an off ball threat and that Waiters has the necessary footwork to have a nice post game, he's certainly strong enough for it though. (Are they talking about this season or the future? Cause inevitably some of these problems won't be around 2-3 years from now).

And I've never seen that play by play software. Looks dope. But when they say "it's a high % area" are they referring to league wide splits or just Dion/Kyrie?

I don't want to say Kyrie isn't an off the ball threat, but he tends to play hero ball (and rightfully so). And so does Dion, and much of the team. They can't win with isos. At least not consistently.
Good question regarding "high % areas," and I don't know.

heyman321
03-02-2013, 01:35 AM
Lin/Harden will be better than both of them.

Arch Stanton
03-02-2013, 01:38 AM
Okay just read this part, it makes more sense now. Gforce (minus the defense, overall hustle ability) is an apt comparison.

If the Cavs get lucky in the lotto, I'd like to see them draft McLemore who might pair better with Irving. Then have Waiters come off the bench like at Cuse. At times if they want to go small, they could play all 3 guards together.

rockbottom2010
03-02-2013, 11:07 AM
u know i made this thread a couple of weeks ago....ur too late

xxplayerxx23
03-02-2013, 12:07 PM
Lin/Harden will be better than both of them.

Kyrie>harden soon :)

KnicksorBust
03-02-2013, 12:56 PM
Would I rather have a #1 with a #3/#4 or a #2 with a #3/#4?

It's so hard to get a franchise player and that's why Kyrie Irving is for the Cavs. To be honest, the Cavs SG could still be Anthony Parker I'd have taken that backcourt.

LanceUpperCut
03-02-2013, 01:18 PM
I'll easily go with Kyrie and Waiters at first I thought that Waiters would be a bust at number 4 but he is proving me wrong, Kyrie will be the best PG in the league 2-3 years from now. As for Beal love his game will be a solid player boarder line all-star but John Wall will never be anything special, a guy with great speed but isn't smart enough or have the shooters touch that will take him to the next level.

hugepatsfan
03-02-2013, 01:33 PM
John Wall isn't that good. He's not a franchise player. He's Rondo with more scoring prowess but less basketball IQ.

KnicksorBust
03-02-2013, 01:47 PM
John Wall isn't that good. He's not a franchise player. He's Rondo with more scoring prowess but less basketball IQ.

Wall isn't even close to Rondo's level defensively and Rondo isn't on Wall's level as a finisher. I get your point but that's a bad comparison.

papipapsmanny
03-02-2013, 02:50 PM
Here is my thing here. Between Injury and the lockout Wall hasn't even played the equivalent to 2 full NBA seasons. And up until this year he was playing with a squad of dumbasses. So I am saying if he is to have a breakout season it will be next year (assuming health)

His jump shot has improved if you can believe that or not. You can see it on his FTs and some of the jumpers he hit last night against the knicks were not being made before.

As for Beal the guy is a boss. He is 19! His stats in January, February, and now March are beastly for a 19 year old

Schulte212
03-02-2013, 03:24 PM
Irving is enough reason to go with Cavs backcourt, but I really like Waiters too. Don't get me wrong--Beal is great, but Waiters has outplayed him thus far.

Stats:

Waiters: 14.8 PPG/ 3.2 A/ 2.4 RPG/ 14.00 PER
Beal: 14.2 PPG/ 2.5 A/ 3.7 RPG/ 13.84 PER

Obviously quite comparable, but I like Waiters game a little more.

Tkwod5
03-02-2013, 03:24 PM
Great question. I think most would agree it should definitly be Waiters/Irving. They are a SUPREMELY talented duo. already great chemistry and work ethic. unfortunately, with beal being as good of a pure shooter as he is, i realy dont think john wall will blossom into what players and fans thought he would become. He wont be a dud, but he wont fully ever reach what was expected of him a few years back.

papipapsmanny
03-02-2013, 03:26 PM
Beal will be/maybe now is better than Waiters

Schulte212
03-02-2013, 03:41 PM
Beal will be/maybe now is better than Waiters

Why, though? Waiter's stats are marginally better this year, so you can't have come to that conclusion on statistics alone. Waiters was the Eastern Conference Rookie of the Month for February, so you can't really say that Beal has outplayed him as of late, either.

I feel like people discount Waiters because he was relatively unhyped heading into the draft, whereas Beas was among a handful of guys receiving lots of attention. Based on their play alone, I would take Waiters over Beal--although it is quite close.

HuRRiCaNeS324
03-02-2013, 03:44 PM
Should add Harden + Lin too.

Still take Irving and Waiters tho.

BKLYNpigeon
03-02-2013, 04:05 PM
Curry + Thompson.

ryder78c
03-02-2013, 04:12 PM
i take Walker/McLemore/MKG over Wall/Beal and Irving/Waiters cuz lets face it bobcats will most likely get pick #1 unless stern does have something to do with it ten the kings will and move to seattle

Redskins10
03-02-2013, 04:32 PM
Have you guys even seen Wall play? Honestly, all you commenting have no idea.

Hawkeye15
03-02-2013, 04:44 PM
Have you guys even seen Wall play? Honestly, all you commenting have no idea.

Yes, I have. Crazy athlete, seems like a good guy, wants to be a leader, but just doesn't play very intelligent at all.

KnicksorBust
03-02-2013, 04:55 PM
Have you guys even seen Wall play? Honestly, all you commenting have no idea.

I have watched him play a ton. Have you? If you want to add something to the discussion then go ahead because this post doesn't.

papipapsmanny
03-02-2013, 05:39 PM
Why, though? Waiter's stats are marginally better this year, so you can't have come to that conclusion on statistics alone. Waiters was the Eastern Conference Rookie of the Month for February, so you can't really say that Beal has outplayed him as of late, either.

I feel like people discount Waiters because he was relatively unhyped heading into the draft, whereas Beas was among a handful of guys receiving lots of attention. Based on their play alone, I would take Waiters over Beal--although it is quite close.

Beal was arguably better than Waiters in february, Beal is also 19, and Waiters 21. Beal had a struggle in his first 3 months, but that is expected for a teenager in the NBA.

Guppyfighter
03-02-2013, 05:41 PM
I'd rather have Beal than Waiters, but I'd rather have Kyrie over Beal and Wall.

Schulte212
03-02-2013, 09:06 PM
Beal was arguably better than Waiters in february, Beal is also 19, and Waiters 21. Beal had a struggle in his first 3 months, but that is expected for a teenager in the NBA.

You can make the argument that Beal was better in February, but it is a losing one. Waiters was rookie of the month for a reason.; if Beal was better, he would have won the award. And come on...we are talking about a 19 y/o and a 21 y/o. Waiters is only 22 months older than Beal. That difference is not enough to simply excuse away Beal's relatively poor play earlier this season.

Waiters wasn't hyped going into the draft, so I understand the reluctance to say he is better than Beal. However, nearly all the measurable cut in Waiters' favor.

Kashmir13579
03-02-2013, 09:09 PM
I take Kyrie.

Kashmir13579
03-02-2013, 09:11 PM
Should add Harden + Lin too.

Still take Irving and Waiters tho.
I'm definitely taking the Houston backcourt over these.

Redskins10
03-02-2013, 10:30 PM
I have watched him play a ton. Have you? If you want to add something to the discussion then go ahead because this post doesn't.

It's okay man.. Just admit you haven't watched him play, no shame in that.

If you did, you'd see how much he improves the Wizards defensively, how he's carried this team to a respectable record since his return, and how he's made Beal so much better: Improving his PPG from under double figures to around 15 PPG.

He's averaging 8 assists and 14 PPG and he isn't even fully healthy.

Bravo95
03-02-2013, 10:41 PM
Irving and Beal. Boom.

topdog
03-03-2013, 12:14 AM
Coming into tonight Waiters was shooting 41% and Beal was shooting 40%, really no difference between the two. Then factor in this:

Dion's assist percentages on his shots:

Jump shots: 49%
Close: 29%
Dunk: 55%
Tips: 0%
Inside: 34%

Beal's assist percentages on his shots:

Jump shots: 78% (+29%, 1.59x more often)
Close: 60% (+31%, 2.07x more often)
Dunk: 82% (+27%, 1.49x more often)
Tips: 0%
Inside: 66% (+32%, 2.06x more often)

See these two links for the full stats:
http://www.82games.com/1213/12CLE7.HTM
http://www.82games.com/1213/12WAS7.HTM

One player is able to create on his own, the other thus far has not shown that ability. But sure, let's categorize one as a volume scorer over the other.

This isn't an argument I feel can be settled by numbers in a rookie year (and I will remind everyone that Beal is a few years younger). I don't get why someone creating their own shot is assumed to be better than one who can complete assist plays spotting up. This is one of the reasons that I like the Beal-Wall tandem better - they can play off of each other whereas Waiters would seem to be more of a 6th man type who is more comfortable creating than spotting up.

Finally, it is rookie year and it takes every player time to adjust. Beal has been playing very well lately and the Wiz have been a ton better since Wall's return.

topdog
03-03-2013, 12:21 AM
You can make the argument that Beal was better in February, but it is a losing one. Waiters was rookie of the month for a reason.; if Beal was better, he would have won the award. And come on...we are talking about a 19 y/o and a 21 y/o. Waiters is only 22 months older than Beal. That difference is not enough to simply excuse away Beal's relatively poor play earlier this season.

Waiters wasn't hyped going into the draft, so I understand the reluctance to say he is better than Beal. However, nearly all the measurable cut in Waiters' favor.

That's a silly argument. It's a subjective award and not very meaningful either as far as awards go. Beal is shooting 37% on the year after spending much of the year at 33% and below (shooting a lot of 3s). That is far more encouraging than a "creator" who turns the ball over one less time than he assists per game, shoots 41% and doesn't get to the line any more than Beal does.

Showtime Steve
03-03-2013, 12:27 AM
Seems like wall/beal defend and rebound better.

papipapsmanny
03-03-2013, 12:47 AM
I believe Wall is capable of being a 18 points 5 rebounds and 10 assist guy who will shoot around 44-45% when/if he reaches his potential, and has all the capabilities of being a good defender.

That would be great from the point guard position.

Beal I really believe can be player in this league. He will be a scorer and an efficient one too who can rebound from the SG position pretty well.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 12:52 AM
That's a silly argument. It's a subjective award and not very meaningful either as far as awards go. Beal is shooting 37% on the year after spending much of the year at 33% and below (shooting a lot of 3s). That is far more encouraging than a "creator" who turns the ball over one less time than he assists per game, shoots 41% and doesn't get to the line any more than Beal does.

The silly thing would be to disregard the award as "subjective" simply because it cuts against your argument. You are right, it is not extremely meaningful, but is is specifically designed to honor the rookie who has been playing the best as of late. Obviously, the consensus is Waiters has been the best rookie the past month--hence the award. When we are comparing two Eastern conference rookies, how is the award not persuasive evidence?

The only thing that is really "subjective" is your own prognostications regarding how good Beal will be in the future. That's great and all, but I'm just pointing out that nearly all the measurable factors point to Waiters having the better season.

And seriously, think about what you are saying. You are arguing a guy who is shooting 37% is better than a 41% shooter simply because the 37% shooter shot the ball extremely poor early in the season and now is shooting less poor.

No one is arguing that Waiters is perfect. He has been better than Beal, though.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:06 AM
I'll take Irving and Waiters I feel Wall and Beal are a little too ineffcient to be very successful together. Although I'd take Beal over Waiters Irving has just been a much better player then Wall.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:10 AM
The silly thing would be to disregard the award as "subjective" simply because it cuts against your argument. You are right, it is not extremely meaningful, but is is specifically designed to honor the rookie who has been playing the best as of late. Obviously, the consensus is Waiters has been the best rookie the past month--hence the award. When we are comparing two Eastern conference rookies, how is the award not persuasive evidence?

The only thing that is really "subjective" is your own prognostications regarding how good Beal will be in the future. That's great and all, but I'm just pointing out that nearly all the measurable factors point to Waiters having the better season.

And seriously, think about what you are saying. You are arguing a guy who is shooting 37% is better than a 41% shooter simply because the 37% shooter shot the ball extremely poor early in the season and now is shooting less poor.

No one is arguing that Waiters is perfect. He has been better than Beal, though.

Beal has a higher TS% .512 to 495 higher efg% 470 to 453 better 3% 37% to 31% all while having a lower USG% how exactly has Waiters been better?

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:15 AM
Beal has a higher TS% .512 to 495 higher efg% 470 to 453 better 3% 37% to 31% all while having a lower USG% how exactly has Waiters been better?

I don't really understand this sentence, but it appears you have found three obscure stats that favor Beal.

I think I'll just leave this here for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ4JS6LPdEo

Sactown
03-03-2013, 01:24 AM
I don't really understand this sentence, but it appears you have found three obscure stats that favor Beal.

I think I'll just leave this here for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ4JS6LPdEo

Those aren't "obscure stats", they tell us about the efficiency of the two players, and how Beal is more efficient. Also one play means absolutely nothing... I've seen Beal play live.. Dude can ball, and the backcourt of Wall/Beal mesh much better than Irving/Waiters... Beal has the ability to play off the ball really well and that will help them in the long run..

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:31 AM
I don't really understand this sentence, but it appears you have found three obscure stats that favor Beal.

I think I'll just leave this here for you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ4JS6LPdEo

How about instead of acting like a jack *** you do some research and learn something? Those stats are 10x better then the basic stats of fg% and ppg. Learn something before talking out of your ***.

And showing a youtube clip of one play is just pathetic. I'm not trying to be rude but don't come on a basketball forum telling people their wrong when you don't even understand metric stats.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:33 AM
Those aren't "obscure stats", they tell us about the efficiency of the two players, and how Beal is more efficient. Also one play means absolutely nothing... I've seen Beal play live.. Dude can ball, and the backcourt of Wall/Beal mesh much better than Irving/Waiters... Beal has the ability to play off the ball really well and that will help them in the long run..

I think the question of which backcourt is better has been decided. Look at the poll. Irving makes it an obvious choice.

Look, its nice to find three obscure stats that favor Beal, but they are not really persuasive. How do you explain Waiters' higher PER if Beal is so much more efficient? Like I've said, Beal is a tremendous young player, but he is just not as good as Waiters.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:35 AM
True shooting percentage is a APBRmetrics basketball statistic meant to more accurately calculate a player's shooting than field goal percentage, free throw percentage, and three-point field goal percentage taken individually. Two- and three-point field goals and free throws are all considered in its calculation. It is abbreviated TS%.

eFG%
Effective Field Goal Percentage; the formula is (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA. This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal. For example, suppose Player A goes 4 for 10 with 2 threes, while Player B goes 5 for 10 with 0 threes. Each player would have 10 points from field goals, and thus would have the same effective field goal percentage (50%).

Usg%
Usage Percentage (available since the 1977-78 season in the NBA); the formula is 100 * ((FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV) * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Tm FGA + 0.44 * Tm FTA + Tm TOV)). Usage percentage is an estimate of the percentage of team plays used by a player while he was on the floor.


Here you go now you can have better understanding of stats that bring merit into your debates.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:35 AM
How about instead of acting like a jack *** you do some research and learn something? Those stats are 10x better then the basic stats of fg% and ppg. Learn something before talking out of your ***.

And showing a youtube clip of one play is just pathetic. I'm not trying to be rude but don't come on a basketball forum telling people their wrong when you don't even understand metric stats.

Sorry for upsetting you. How do you explain Waiters' higher Player Efficiency Rating?

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:37 AM
I think the question of which backcourt is better has been decided. Look at the poll. Irving makes it an obvious choice.

Look, its nice to find three obscure stats that favor Beal, but they are not really persuasive. How do you explain Waiters' higher PER if Beal is so much more efficient? Like I've said, Beal is a tremendous young player, but he is just not as good as Waiters.

I actually think PER is one of the most flawed metric stats out there. But if you want to use 1 stat to help your argument instead of multiple ones that is fine. Sometimes people will grasp at straws instead of admitting they were wrong.

topdog
03-03-2013, 01:37 AM
The silly thing would be to disregard the award as "subjective" simply because it cuts against your argument. You are right, it is not extremely meaningful, but is is specifically designed to honor the rookie who has been playing the best as of late. Obviously, the consensus is Waiters has been the best rookie the past month--hence the award. When we are comparing two Eastern conference rookies, how is the award not persuasive evidence?

The only thing that is really "subjective" is your own prognostications regarding how good Beal will be in the future. That's great and all, but I'm just pointing out that nearly all the measurable factors point to Waiters having the better season.

And seriously, think about what you are saying. You are arguing a guy who is shooting 37% is better than a 41% shooter simply because the 37% shooter shot the ball extremely poor early in the season and now is shooting less poor.

No one is arguing that Waiters is perfect. He has been better than Beal, though.

1. You are either mis-reading or mis-understanding. Both Beal and Waiters are shooting about 41% on the season, but Beal is shooting far better from 3 point range especially lately hence why it matters that his nice 37% on the year has been brought up from the first few months of shooting a lot of 3s at a 33% or worse clip i.e. he's shooting 40%+ from 3 while Waiters is shooting 40%+ altogether and 31% from 3.

2. Tell me who decides the Rookie of the Month and why it matters as an obscure award and I'll give your argument some credence. But first let me remind you that Beal was Eastern Conference Rookie of the Month in January.

3. You didn't address why being able to create his own shot somehow makes Waiters a better tandem member. The stats seem to point to Beal being a superior backcourt mate to either Wall or Irving due to his high 3pt shooting conversion and his ability to spot up rather than dribble after Wall/Irving have already opened up a shot as creators.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:39 AM
I actually think PER is one of the most flawed metric stats out there. But if you want to use 1 stat to help your argument instead of multiple ones that is fine. Sometimes people will grasp at straws instead of admitting they were wrong.

So you get angry when I disregard your stats, but you then in turn disregard mine simply because it cuts in Waiters' favor?

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:40 AM
Sorry for upsetting you. How do you explain Waiters' higher Player Efficiency Rating?

“Because [PER] is a cooked up formula that uses per minute and usage stats. Just because Hollinger made it up doesn’t mean it should be concrete. Sure, it can be used to get an idea of a players production and efficiency. But its not perfect and shouldn’t be considered a real stat. … Like points per game, rebounds per game, TO, blocks, assists.”

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:41 AM
So you get angry when I disregard your stats, but you then in turn disregard mine simply because it cuts in Waiters' favor?

I really could careless who is the better player I'm not a fan of either team. If Waiters had a higher TS% and efg% I'd say he's the better player. You picked the one stat that actually favors Waiters because of his USG% PER really doesn't have much to do with efficiency I'm not sure why you're grasping at straws so much. Does it really bother you that Beal is a little bit better?

Waiters is a great talent who might become the better player because he has a much better PG. But so far in this small sample size of this season Beal has been better. It doesn't matter to me I'm just reading off the stats take it as you will. I'm not here to tell you what to think I'm telling you who's been better.

I'm trying to help you understand metrics If Beal had the higher Per I'd tell you PER is probably me least favorite metric aside from OWS.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:44 AM
1. You are either mis-reading or mis-understanding. Both Beal and Waiters are shooting about 41% on the season, but Beal is shooting far better from 3 point range especially lately hence why it matters that his nice 37% on the year has been brought up from the first few months of shooting a lot of 3s at a 33% or worse clip i.e. he's shooting 40%+ from 3 while Waiters is shooting 40%+ altogether and 31% from 3.

2. Tell me who decides the Rookie of the Month and why it matters as an obscure award and I'll give your argument some credence. But first let me remind you that Beal was Eastern Conference Rookie of the Month in January.

3. You didn't address why being able to create his own shot somehow makes Waiters a better tandem member. The stats seem to point to Beal being a superior backcourt mate to either Wall or Irving due to his high 3pt shooting conversion and his ability to spot up rather than dribble after Wall/Irving have already opened up a shot as creators.

The main argument that favors Beal is his improved play. I am pointing out that Waiters was the consensus choice as the best rookie in the Eastern Conference last month--even in light of Beal's improved play. The people who pick this award are the same as those who pick MVP. Do you disregard the MVP award as "subjective" and useless as well?

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:46 AM
“Because [PER] is a cooked up formula that uses per minute and usage stats. Just because Hollinger made it up doesn’t mean it should be concrete. Sure, it can be used to get an idea of a players production and efficiency. But its not perfect and shouldn’t be considered a real stat. … Like points per game, rebounds per game, TO, blocks, assists.”

So let's disregard all the of the stats that favor Waiters, use the stats that favor Beal, and then say I am the one grasping at straws? :rolleyes:

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:49 AM
The fact that you said PER means Waiters is more efficnet kind of shows me you just looked at a random stat and thought it was better without even knowing what the stat means. A stat that in its formula that includes Rebounds, Assists, steals,. What does any of that have to do with being an efficient shooter? You know what rates shooting? TS% and Efg% both of which have Beal as the better and more efficient SCORER.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:50 AM
So let's disregard all the of the stats that favor Waiters, use the stats that favor Beal, and then say I am the one grasping at straws? :rolleyes:

You have no argument here bud stop with the child games. Beal is the better more efficient scorer are you going to bring Waiters Rebounding in a scoring argument? Because essentially that is what you did when you brought up PER. It helps to do research before talking ****.

You're really not even having a discussion you named one stat and don't even know what it means. Explain to me why PER is a more efficient stat then an actual stat that is efficiency%? I'm really not trying to be a dick here I'm trying to help you understand how to use stats so you can become more familial with metrics. I'm not really sure why you keep arguing when I'm helping you.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:50 AM
I really could careless who is the better player I'm not a fan of either team. If Waiters had a higher TS% and efg% I'd say he's the better player. You picked the one stat that actually favors Waiters because of his USG% PER really doesn't have much to do with efficiency I'm not sure why you're grasping at straws so much. Does it really bother you that Beal is a little bit better?

Waiters is a great talent who might become the better player because he has a much better PG. But so far in this small sample size of this season Beal has been better. It doesn't matter to me I'm just reading off the stats take it as you will. I'm not here to tell you what to think I'm telling you who's been better.

I'm trying to help you understand metrics If Beal had the higher Per I'd tell you PER is probably me least favorite metric aside from OWS.

I really appreciate your help. There are metric stats that favor Waiters, along with most of the more traditional statistics. Waiters is just better IMO.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:52 AM
The fact that you said PER means Waiters is more efficnet kind of shows me you just looked at a random stat and thought it was better without even knowing what the stat means. A stat that in its formula that includes Rebounds, Assists, steals,. What does any of that have to do with being an efficient shooter? You know what rates shooting? TS% and Efg% both of which have Beal as the better and more efficient SCORER.

Lol well I mean it is called the "Player Efficiency Rating." Pretty sure it is designed to factor in all of a player's contributions on the floor and attach a value to that. Sorry you don't like it.

Schulte212
03-03-2013, 01:54 AM
You have no argument here bud stop with the child games. Beal is the better more efficient scorer are you going to bring Waiters Rebounding in a scoring argument? Because essentially that is what you did when you brought up PER. It helps to do research before talking ****.

You're really not even having a discussion you named one stat and don't even know what it means. Explain to me why PER is a more efficient stat then an actual stat that is efficiency%?

What good is looking only at efficiency anyway? If a player shoots 3/3, they are more efficient than a player who shoots 12/18. Pretty obvious where a stat like PER is helpful. It actually incorporates on court production adjusted for pace.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 01:59 AM
What good is looking only at efficiency anyway? If a player shoots 3/3, they are more efficient than a player who shoots 12/18. Pretty obvious where a stat like PER is helpful. It actually incorporates on court production adjusted for pace.

It includes Usg% as one of its main formulas in the stat. So basically if you have the ball in your hands more then one player it thinks you're better. That is the problem with Per. I'm not even saying Waiters isn't the better all around player I'm talking scoring because that was what you were talking about when I quoted you. Per Isn't a good stat to use you're better off looking at all the stats like TS% EFG% AST% TRB% TOV% USG% then PER you get a much better idea who the player is looking at all those stats than using PER.

Part of EFG% is FGA so that isn't true if a player shot 3/3 and another 12/18 because it takes into account how many shots the player actually did. What you just told me is basically FG% when it's much much better.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 02:02 AM
You're very much entitled to your opinion perhaps you have some amazing scout eye and you just see how much better Waiters is who am I to say you're wrong with your opinion? I think Beal is the better more efficient scorer which I thought was the argument.

But for future reference on players you may not know as much about try to leave PER out as your main argument because you're 10x better off using all the metric stats then using PER you get a much better idea of what they do.

topdog
03-03-2013, 02:28 AM
The main argument that favors Beal is his improved play. I am pointing out that Waiters was the consensus choice as the best rookie in the Eastern Conference last month--even in light of Beal's improved play. The people who pick this award are the same as those who pick MVP. Do you disregard the MVP award as "subjective" and useless as well?

MVP has a far larger sample size that is being judged i.e. a complete season and 450+ players. Rookie of the year is barely important because #1 it includes about 40 players many of whom don't get much court time and #2 favors more "NBA ready" players who are generally a bit older but may not have the same upside. Diluting that by month really does make the "award" useless and quite obscure.

Since you are just picking and choosing which points you will respond to, this will be my last response to you (assuming you don't troll this post). Beal has an "elite skill" - his 3pt shooting. Imo, that bodes well for his NBA future and his ability to be a better backcourt mate. Waiters does not seem to have a definable elite skill nor is he highly efficient as an all-around player so I would wager that he will not be nearly the impact player that Beal will.

Rndy
03-03-2013, 03:12 AM
MVP has a far larger sample size that is being judged i.e. a complete season and 450+ players. Rookie of the year is barely important because #1 it includes about 40 players many of whom don't get much court time and #2 favors more "NBA ready" players who are generally a bit older but may not have the same upside. Diluting that by month really does make the "award" useless and quite obscure.

Since you are just picking and choosing which points you will respond to, this will be my last response to you (assuming you don't troll this post). Beal has an "elite skill" - his 3pt shooting. Imo, that bodes well for his NBA future and his ability to be a better backcourt mate. Waiters does not seem to have a definable elite skill nor is he highly efficient as an all-around player so I would wager that he will not be nearly the impact player that Beal will.

I agree with this I don't know a lot about either player given their small sample size of play and I just don't watch Cavs and Wizards games. But I always tend to lean to the better 3 point shooter because they bring something very important to basketball. Floor spacing which tends to get over looked on these message boards. If Cavs had Beal they'd be a better team.

Arch Stanton
03-03-2013, 04:07 AM
MVP has a far larger sample size that is being judged i.e. a complete season and 450+ players. Rookie of the year is barely important because #1 it includes about 40 players many of whom don't get much court time and #2 favors more "NBA ready" players who are generally a bit older but may not have the same upside. Diluting that by month really does make the "award" useless and quite obscure.

Since you are just picking and choosing which points you will respond to, this will be my last response to you (assuming you don't troll this post). Beal has an "elite skill" - his 3pt shooting. Imo, that bodes well for his NBA future and his ability to be a better backcourt mate. Waiters does not seem to have a definable elite skill nor is he highly efficient as an all-around player so I would wager that he will not be nearly the impact player that Beal will.

I agree that currently Beal better compliments Wall, than Waiters with Irving. I disagree when you say Waiters lacks a definable elite skill. That just tells me you don't really watch Cavs games except when they play Minny. Waiters has an elite ability to drive to the hoop. Efficiency wise he's pretty compatible to Beal. Actually might even have a better PER. Now will Beal turn into a better player, we shall see... But to suggest its a slam dunk is just silly.

Arch Stanton
03-03-2013, 04:24 AM
I think the disparity between Beal and Waiters is much closer than that of Wall and Irving. Whether or not you prefer Beal or Waiters is irrelevant, because Irving is a star and Wall is not.

SACNYY
03-03-2013, 04:33 AM
Jennings/Ellis

Rndy
03-03-2013, 04:52 AM
I think the disparity between Beal and Waiters is much closer than that of Wall and Irving. Whether or not you prefer Beal or Waiters is irrelevant, because Irving is a star and Wall is not.

Yep that is why this poll isn't even close. Wall still isn't the player he was supposed to be. I actually thought coming out of college he was going to be better then Rose. And really he's been very disappointing. It's not all his fault he's had terrible coaching along the way. But eventually something has to give on why he's so inefficient and why he doesn't take more advantage of his amazing skill set. Talent wise he's in the Rose and Westbrook mold but when it comes to results he's just not there. He gets his points but the amount of shots he has to take to get there isn't good. his organization has failed him but he eventually needs to take some of the blame.

I can't believe someone with the god given talent that Wall has is putting up a 406 efg% his ast% has consistently been very good which I find very impressive given the talent around him. But when you're putting up a 20 tov% that needs to be fixed quickly.

topdog
03-03-2013, 10:56 AM
I agree that currently Beal better compliments Wall, than Waiters with Irving. I disagree when you say Waiters lacks a definable elite skill. That just tells me you don't really watch Cavs games except when they play Minny. Waiters has an elite ability to drive to the hoop. Efficiency wise he's pretty compatible to Beal. Actually might even have a better PER. Now will Beal turn into a better player, we shall see... But to suggest its a slam dunk is just silly.

I have not seen a ton of Cavs, but Waiters needs to either get fouled more or shoot at a higher rate to justify his drives being an "elite skill" imo. Lots of NBA guards can get to the hoop. It is a matter of doing something once you get there that defines true talent.

I believe Waiters has a slightly better PER at the moment (both are 13.something). Beal has superior percentages in the shooting categories though and has a lower usage rate while most other stats are within a few points one way or the other.