Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 59
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    28,503
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    no why would i base my valuations on media award voting lol
    Interesting. So MVP, Roy, Most improved, 6th man etc none of it means anything? I'm just trying to get your angle on this.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,008
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    Interesting. So MVP, Roy, Most improved, 6th man etc none of it means anything? I'm just trying to get your angle on this.

    In terms of understanding actual on court impact? Nope. Any given season will have multiple players performing at an MVP level in terms of on court impact, is the winner of the award inherently more impactful than other players performing at an MVP level? Nope. Narrative + historical bias's come into play (e.g. team record, slant towards scoring, etc.).

    Speaking of scoring bias, ROY and MIP are more often than not simply a race to who can average the most PPG. Same with MIP. A player isn't going to get any of these awards for their defense, or even playmaking.

    And then there's the matter of who votes on these awards. Do you think people like Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless have a firm grasp on player evaluation? Because they're voters. We all rag on ESPN and their lack of actual analysis, yet many still lean on media awards to help fuel their argument. Do you see how contradictory this is?

    There's a good Thinking Basketball podcast episode with former Clippers front office worker Mo Dakhil, where they dive into the methodology and mindset when it comes to teams voting on awards. Essentially, there is no methodology, and the voting is often handed off to an intern, or someone low level, because the actual analytics team can't be pressed to sit down and take time to evaluate the voting options in a meaningful way. It's a combination of them not having the time to do so and also them just not giving a ****.


    The reality is people lean on these awards as shorthand for their own "analysis". No one wants to conduct their own film study, or peer over tracking data, or try and contextualize adjusted plus minus metrics by cross referencing it with lineup data. Only weirdos like me and a few others actually take the time to contextualize the stats they're looking at with tape study.

    Player evaluation actually takes a lot of time and thoughtfulness. Heading over to bball reference and hitting "sort" on whatever nonsense "advanced" metrics they have and then using media awards to confirm your own biases is the most common approach, but isn't actually a form of meaningful player evaluation.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    28,503
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    In terms of understanding actual on court impact? Nope. Any given season will have multiple players performing at an MVP level in terms of on court impact, is the winner of the award inherently more impactful than other players performing at an MVP level? Nope. Narrative + historical bias's come into play (e.g. team record, slant towards scoring, etc.).

    Speaking of scoring bias, ROY and MIP are more often than not simply a race to who can average the most PPG. Same with MIP. A player isn't going to get any of these awards for their defense, or even playmaking.

    And then there's the matter of who votes on these awards. Do you think people like Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless have a firm grasp on player evaluation? Because they're voters. We all rag on ESPN and their lack of actual analysis, yet many still lean on media awards to help fuel their argument. Do you see how contradictory this is?

    There's a good Thinking Basketball podcast episode with former Clippers front office worker Mo Dakhil, where they dive into the methodology and mindset when it comes to teams voting on awards. Essentially, there is no methodology, and the voting is often handed off to an intern, or someone low level, because the actual analytics team can't be pressed to sit down and take time to evaluate the voting options in a meaningful way. It's a combination of them not having the time to do so and also them just not giving a ****.


    The reality is people lean on these awards as shorthand for their own "analysis". No one wants to conduct their own film study, or peer over tracking data, or try and contextualize adjusted plus minus metrics by cross referencing it with lineup data. Only weirdos like me and a few others actually take the time to contextualize the stats they're looking at with tape study.

    Player evaluation actually takes a lot of time and thoughtfulness. Heading over to bball reference and hitting "sort" on whatever nonsense "advanced" metrics they have and then using media awards to confirm your own biases is the most common approach, but isn't actually a form of meaningful player evaluation.
    You make valid points. Im not a fan of SAS or Skip Bayless etc. But I do think that they present themselves in a controversial way on purpose to gain more attention. In terms of knowledge of the game? I think they have a pretty good grasp. Also aside from them there are alot of analytical people in those votes. But I do get what your're saying. Not all the awards are based strictly on performance.

    With that being said, I think the DPOY usually does go to someone deserving because its not based on just scoring as you said. Rudy Gobert really is a phenomenal defensive presence. If Simmons won the DPOY would it be fair to say that hes deserving?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,008
    Quote Originally Posted by smith&wesson View Post
    You make valid points. Im not a fan of SAS or Skip Bayless etc. But I do think that they present themselves in a controversial way on purpose to gain more attention. In terms of knowledge of the game? I think they have a pretty good grasp. Also aside from them there are alot of analytical people in those votes. But I do get what your're saying. Not all the awards are based strictly on performance.

    With that being said, I think the DPOY usually does go to someone deserving because its not based on just scoring as you said. Rudy Gobert really is a phenomenal defensive presence. If Simmons won the DPOY would it be fair to say that hes deserving?
    I think in terms of raw impact probably not. Simmons defensive archetype is really awesome. He can more or less guard 1-5 (although him on centers is less than ideal), and the versatility he's shown on that end is something that I think will shine more in the playoffs where games are more scheme intensive. The reality is though that traditional rim protectors ultimately save more points on defense than players of Simmons archetype. Someone like Gobert, Giannis, Bam, etc. ultimately provide more overall defensive value. At this point, I know Gobert isn't the sexy exciting choice but realistically it's probably him.

    If Simmons were to win though I really wouldn't be upset. The style of defense he brings to the table is really awesome, and deserves appreciation. And again I think his defense could ultimately show out more in the postseason. So if he wins it might not be the most accurate choice, but it's fine.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    7,102
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    I think in terms of raw impact probably not. Simmons defensive archetype is really awesome. He can more or less guard 1-5 (although him on centers is less than ideal), and the versatility he's shown on that end is something that I think will shine more in the playoffs where games are more scheme intensive. The reality is though that traditional rim protectors ultimately save more points on defense than players of Simmons archetype. Someone like Gobert, Giannis, Bam, etc. ultimately provide more overall defensive value. At this point, I know Gobert isn't the sexy exciting choice but realistically it's probably him.

    If Simmons were to win though I really wouldn't be upset. The style of defense he brings to the table is really awesome, and deserves appreciation. And again I think his defense could ultimately show out more in the postseason. So if he wins it might not be the most accurate choice, but it's fine.
    Outside of defense, Ben is a good facilitator, no?

    He's top 15 in APG. He's top 100 in ast/to ratio, this could be better for sure but he's still positive at 2:1 being grouped right around LeBron and Wes. Also, Ben averages so many assists with only the 5th highest usage rate on his team, at best; arguments could be made he has only the 7th highest usage rate on his team.

    Compared to other guys in the top 15, lead their teams in usage rate. Only Harden and CP3 are lower, but still top 3.

    I'm just not sure what metrics are being used to assume Ben shouldn't be in the top 10 PGs with that considered into the full scope of the game.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,008
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Outside of defense, Ben is a good facilitator, no?

    He's top 15 in APG. He's top 100 in ast/to ratio, this could be better for sure but he's still positive at 2:1 being grouped right around LeBron and Wes. Also, Ben averages so many assists with only the 5th highest usage rate on his team, at best; arguments could be made he has only the 7th highest usage rate on his team.

    Compared to other guys in the top 15, lead their teams in usage rate. Only Harden and CP3 are lower, but still top 3.

    I'm just not sure what metrics are being used to assume Ben shouldn't be in the top 10 PGs with that considered into the full scope of the game.
    I would say he's an okay facilitator. Sure 7 assists per game, but that doesn't describe the kind of assists he's getting. The issues with his game on offense are pretty easy to spot on film. He's next to useless off ball, as he's not a catch and shoot threat, but also not a mover off ball. The majority of the time he's stationary around the three point line. So essentially when he doesn't have the ball in his hands he has almost no value. It's not impossible to have value off ball if you're not a shooter. Like it would be awesome to see him cut more aggressively, or run pin downs for teammates or even try and gain position in the post with another ball handler out there...but he just doesn't do these types of things very often.

    And then the issue when he does have the ball in his hands is once again, easy to identify on film. He spends the majority of of possessions probing behind the arc waiting for someone to get open through off ball action, then feeds them. This type of non-creation for teammates really hurts him as a playmaker, as he doesn't rack up a ton of layup assists, and honestly his drive and kick frequency is weirdly low for a finisher of his caliber as well. I think he has good vision and is an incredible weapon on the break when he's aggressive, but those opportunities are few and far between. Once the game slows down to plodding half court possessions his limitations are magnified a ton.

    As for the usage thing, all usage measures is your FGA+turnovers, there's no component to acknowledge actual playmaking. With his scoring being pretty average it makes sense that his USG is low.

    A better, more literal metric we could look at is his time of possession with the ball per game, in which he's top 15.

    https://www.nba.com/stats/players/to..._OF_POSS&dir=1

    Being on ball that much and not having a versatile scoring pallet to draw upon to pressure defenses will inevitably lead to marginal returns on offense. To fully unlock a great passer's playmaking they have to be a viable half court scoring threat, which as of now, Simmons really isn't.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    7,102
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    I would say he's an okay facilitator. Sure 7 assists per game, but that doesn't describe the kind of assists he's getting. The issues with his game on offense are pretty easy to spot on film. He's next to useless off ball, as he's not a catch and shoot threat, but also not a mover off ball. The majority of the time he's stationary around the three point line. So essentially when he doesn't have the ball in his hands he has almost no value. It's not impossible to have value off ball if you're not a shooter. Like it would be awesome to see him cut more aggressively, or run pin downs for teammates or even try and gain position in the post with another ball handler out there...but he just doesn't do these types of things very often.

    And then the issue when he does have the ball in his hands is once again, easy to identify on film. He spends the majority of of possessions probing behind the arc waiting for someone to get open through off ball action, then feeds them. This type of non-creation for teammates really hurts him as a playmaker, as he doesn't rack up a ton of layup assists, and honestly his drive and kick frequency is weirdly low for a finisher of his caliber as well. I think he has good vision and is an incredible weapon on the break when he's aggressive, but those opportunities are few and far between. Once the game slows down to plodding half court possessions his limitations are magnified a ton.

    As for the usage thing, all usage measures is your FGA+turnovers, there's no component to acknowledge actual playmaking. With his scoring being pretty average it makes sense that his USG is low.

    A better, more literal metric we could look at is his time of possession with the ball per game, in which he's top 15.

    https://www.nba.com/stats/players/to..._OF_POSS&dir=1

    Being on ball that much and not having a versatile scoring pallet to draw upon to pressure defenses will inevitably lead to marginal returns on offense. To fully unlock a great passer's playmaking they have to be a viable half court scoring threat, which as of now, Simmons really isn't.
    Appreciate that metric, it is a good one, you're right. Maybe if he becomes a more willing shooter, I was hoping Doc and/or Morey could get him to do that.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    57,957

    Top 10 point guards in the league right now

    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    I would say he's an okay facilitator. Sure 7 assists per game, but that doesn't describe the kind of assists he's getting. The issues with his game on offense are pretty easy to spot on film. He's next to useless off ball, as he's not a catch and shoot threat, but also not a mover off ball. The majority of the time he's stationary around the three point line. So essentially when he doesn't have the ball in his hands he has almost no value. It's not impossible to have value off ball if you're not a shooter. Like it would be awesome to see him cut more aggressively, or run pin downs for teammates or even try and gain position in the post with another ball handler out there...but he just doesn't do these types of things very often.

    And then the issue when he does have the ball in his hands is once again, easy to identify on film. He spends the majority of of possessions probing behind the arc waiting for someone to get open through off ball action, then feeds them. This type of non-creation for teammates really hurts him as a playmaker, as he doesn't rack up a ton of layup assists, and honestly his drive and kick frequency is weirdly low for a finisher of his caliber as well. I think he has good vision and is an incredible weapon on the break when he's aggressive, but those opportunities are few and far between. Once the game slows down to plodding half court possessions his limitations are magnified a ton.

    As for the usage thing, all usage measures is your FGA+turnovers, there's no component to acknowledge actual playmaking. With his scoring being pretty average it makes sense that his USG is low.

    A better, more literal metric we could look at is his time of possession with the ball per game, in which he's top 15.

    https://www.nba.com/stats/players/to..._OF_POSS&dir=1

    Being on ball that much and not having a versatile scoring pallet to draw upon to pressure defenses will inevitably lead to marginal returns on offense. To fully unlock a great passer's playmaking they have to be a viable half court scoring threat, which as of now, Simmons really isn't.
    Excellent post.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,766
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Half your list aren't "pure point guards" lol

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    12,883
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    anyone who has Ben Simmons top 5 is out of their mind lmfao. Hell top 10 is a stretch
    You crazy. He's probably the best defensive PG in the league. Just because defense doesn't show up in the sexy assist numbers doesn't mean he's not a great PG

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    57,957
    Quote Originally Posted by THE MTL View Post
    You crazy. He's probably the best defensive PG in the league. Just because defense doesn't show up in the sexy assist numbers doesn't mean he's not a great PG
    Sure it does. Marcus smart has never been a “great” PG either


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    117,849
    Quote Originally Posted by VCaintdead17 View Post
    anyone who has Ben Simmons top 5 is out of their mind lmfao. Hell top 10 is a stretch
    yea why would a pg that puts up 16/8/8 with defensive player of the year defense be in the top 5 let alone top 10... My god the horror. I am not even a simmons fan but he is def a top 5-10 pg

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    32,341
    I got like two lists in and was already disgusted. Westbrook does not belong in a "top" anything list unless it's a list of worst contracts in the league. The fact that people actually had him ahead of guys like CP3 and Simmons is mind blowing to me.

    I have made little effort to come up with a list of point guards, but I can assure you I could find 10 point guards I'd rather have on my team than Westbrook.


  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    11,008
    I think you can cherry pick your way into a Westbrook is top 10 argument. On the back half of last season when he lowered his 3PA volume and focused on primarily pressuring the rim with downhill penetration he seemed to genuinely improve the team offense when he was out there. He's played at an all star level for the month of March and April as well this season. Collectively this is like 40 to 50 games.

    With Westbrook the key to him unlocking his value on offense has always been putting him in a position where his all time great playmaking outweighs his horrid scoring efficiency. I think the pendulum starts to swing back towards positive value on offense when he's only slightly below league average scoring efficiency, so like, that 52% to 55% TS range. At that rate he's not bricking enough possessions to tank an offense, and is providing enough high level playmaking value to offset his scoring woes.

    I still probably don't have him top 10 because you can't really cherry pick like that, but at the very least he's shown he can still fit into a team offense when the circumstances hit right.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    7,102
    Quote Originally Posted by mightybosstone View Post
    I got like two lists in and was already disgusted. Westbrook does not belong in a "top" anything list unless it's a list of worst contracts in the league. The fact that people actually had him ahead of guys like CP3 and Simmons is mind blowing to me.

    I have made little effort to come up with a list of point guards, but I can assure you I could find 10 point guards I'd rather have on my team than Westbrook.
    I just think he was in a no win situation on the Rockets, playing next to another point guard. That never has been his strength, and never will be.

    His top 8 five man units that season are with Harden in the back court with him. That experiment was never going to work. Even 14 of his top 20 five man units from that season features Harden, it was doomed from the start. A vast majority of those 20 are 3 guard lineups as well.

    Westbrook needs the ball in his hands surrounded by pure wings who can shoot/cut and a traditional big to be successful.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •