Bellinelli v Korver Redux

[HomoSapien]

I haven't saw sufficiently explained reasoning to make me understand the choice is all. I've seen Beli is just better with no back up points.

Belinelli is significantly better at getting to the basket, is a better free-throw shooter which is somewhat important here because he also gets to the line more, and while he has a lower TS% it's important to note that both that and his PER are trending upwards right now.

I've seen that Korver gets shut down based on a 5 game sample size, which is ridiculous. Then how did any specialist shooter, say Steve Kerr or older Robert Horry, thrive in the playoffs, they had no more tools than Korver.

I agree this is silly. There were times where Kukoc disappeared in the playoffs too, but that didn't lessen his importance. That being said, throughout the course of his career he's struggled in the playoffs for other teams as well which also can't be ignored.

And I've seen Marco can 'do more' offensively, even though its not leading to more points for him (well 1 more per 36) or better efficiency. While he actually produces less assists, rebounds, etc. It's not leading to his non-Rose lineups being as productive on offense as Korver's were.

Again, his numbers are trending upwards now. His stats are affected by the initial lack of minutes as well as the early inconsistent playing time. If he simply replicates his typical contributions, he'll be around 15ppg per 36. On a team that has historically had its issues offensively, 1 extra point is significant and 2 extra points is huge. I still don't think we can just dismiss the style difference. We desperately needed a second ball-handler out there. Obviously, there are still better players than Marco at this, but just the fact that he is capable of it matters.

Who can do more offensively, Danny Granger, or prime Reggie Miller? But who would you rather have?

Well, this seems rather unfair.

[Kirk Boozer]

Who can do more offensively, Danny Granger, or prime Reggie Miller? But who would you rather have?

Well, this seems rather unfair.

Seems fair to me...

... Korver is a more efficient scorer than Kobe (higher TS% and higher eFG%), who would you rather have?

Just one more blatant example as to why a lot of these advanced stats are pretty useless in real-life basketball.

[the ultimates]

And for the record its Miller. Thats whether you use regular stats advanced stats or the eye test.

[johnnyvann840]

It's all nice and dandy to see Marco do well but to be honest, I'm going to hold off any further judgement on the matter until I see how he plays off of Derrick - that's the most crucial unknown right now. All signs point to it working well, but how we imagine looks good on paper doesn't always mean it will work in reality.

Or how crapstastic it looks on paper before someone comes along and surprises in the actuality

Marco is putting up close to equal his career numbers so far this season as to the best season he had when he was playing with Chris Paul in New Orleans

I have seen enough to form a view on how he and Derrick Rose should benefit each other's games.

In fact , if this team can go where I think it can go ( to the Eastern Conference Finals against the Heat ) then I think we are better equipped this team ( overall ) then what we were last time we got spanked

Marco and his ability to create as opposed to Korver being a screen / curl running shooter only is a big part of that possibility

Well said. I concur.

[Rerisen]

Who can do more offensively, Danny Granger, or prime Reggie Miller? But who would you rather have?

Well, this seems rather unfair.

Seems fair to me...

... Korver is a more efficient scorer than Kobe (higher TS% and higher eFG%), who would you rather have?

Kobe, because he scores like 20 more points a game than Korver, on efficiency far better than league average and that of his team. Volume and efficiency are the twin pillars of scoring.

The example of Miller and Granger, they score about the same, the big difference is efficiency. Reggie was way more efficient - almost to the exact amount that Korver is over Marco - and despite that he couldn't create a shot or get to the basket as well as Granger his impact on an offense was much greater. Same as Korver and Beli, Beli can do a bit more, score in more ways, but Korver makes the bigger impact, because he simply scores more points on the possessions he uses on offense. Volume is a wash. Beli's ability to get to the rim and dribble is only producing 1 more point per 36 for himself at noticeably less efficiency, and it not producing more baskets for the team either as he averages less assists than Korver per minute. This adds up to less offensive impact, which is clear in the plus/minus data, both raw and advanced, both last year, historically, and indeed this season as well where Korver is impacting the ATL offense more than Beli is the Bulls.

Can make all the arguments you want about Beli being more versatile, but so far, its not overcoming that Korver is simply so much more efficient as a shooter. Which seems to have more ancillary benefits to a team offense as well, via spacing, executing system offensive plays (where Korver was much better) vs Beli's ability to dribble to the rim once or twice more a game.

Korver is currently 17th in the NBA in scoring efficiency (min 100 pts & minutes). The player immediately above him is LeBron James, others ahead, Steve Nash, Kevin Martin, Ray Allen. The best offenses are the ones that produce the most points per possession, this should be self evident. Now Korver only scores 40% as much volume as say LeBron James, but its still highly helpful to your offense to get even that much at that level.

To digress a bit, Beli's getting to the rim is also overstated because he only finishes 52.7% of his plays at the rim this year. Which is kinda poor, in case it's been overlooked he tends to miss a lot of those crazy layups he tries. Beli at the rim is a less efficient means to get points than a Kyle Korver three pointer, of which he shoots 3 more attempts per 36 than Belinelli.

Not saying the guy sucks, he's been decent for us. And if you need a starter while Rose is out, making us miss ball handling that much more critically, then you might even prefer him. Kyle was worse without Rose. But on a healthy team where Rose is doing 75% of the playmaking, Korver offers better synergy. Neither guy is an ideal starting SG for a championship team, but off the bench, Korver is easier to use, both for system offense and as 3pt spacer and deadly spot up guy for Rose. Beli needs the ball more, how much is he going to deserve it with Rose back?

[[d][R][o][s][e]]

i think most of us are envisioning Beli as a 2nd ball handler and a shot creator thereby lessens the pressure of Rose to do hero ball every possession. if successful, Rose can conserve his energy or coast during the game and wills himself if needed. Korver on the other hand, he needs Rose to find him or other teammates to get his shot.

[Rerisen]

i think most of us are envisioning Beli as a 2nd ball handler and a shot creator thereby lessens the pressure of Rose to do hero ball every possession. if successful, Rose can conserve his energy or coast during the game and wills himself if needed. Korver on the other hand, he needs Rose to find him or other teammates to get his shot.

I think his ability at it is just overstated. He's very average or mediocre as a ball handler actually. And he doesn't set people up hardly ever with it. 2 assists per 36 minutes is pretty terrible, i.e. people use to rip Gordon's distribution and he averaged over 3 assists. People act like Marco is Jamal Crawford or something getting a shot whenever he wants. Isolation is not his best suite at all. He scores at .99 PPP overall, but on isolation just .78, and .94 PnR ball handler. But his most taken shot is spot up, like Kyle's was, and Marco scores better there (1.1 PPP) than he does creating with the ball. But he doesn't actually generate as many spot ups as Kyle, because he isn't as good off ball.

I think this club has been so deficient at creating shots beside D-Rose, that people forget that most guards in the league can do this stuff at some level between rudimentary and great. So like a man dying of thirst in the desert, who sees even a muddy puddle to drink from, we are so quick to leap on the first basic ability guard we have had in a while who can even dribble competently, and declare him the answer to our offensive achilles. I think it is still going to be there myself, and Marco isn't to the level of creator that can solve it. That if he could, our offense would be better than 19th when last year I don't recall it dropping below 15th, even without D Rose. But we shall see more when Rose comes back.

[BULLHITTER]

So far this team has some high points reminiscent of last year, but also has a lot more low points too. What I see, and I think the numbers have backed this up so far, we are just a bit worse on both ends. Maybe 2-4 games worse over a full season. And that is counting Rose at his normal 100% level when he comes back. Which would still give us an outside shot. Of course, if he isn't able to be the same, then it will all be moot.

If my assessment is on, to shed so much money and still stay almost as good, is indeed an accomplishment in a shrewd management sense. But it offers little solace to the fan wanting the best team possible.

^^THIS AND...

I think his ability at it is just overstated. He's very average or mediocre as a ball handler actually. And he doesn't set people up hardly ever with it. 2 assists per 36 minutes is pretty terrible, i.e. people use to rip Gordon's distribution and he averaged over 3 assists. People act like Marco is Jamal Crawford or something getting a shot whenever he wants. Isolation is not his best suite at all. He scores at .99 PPP overall, but on isolation just .78, and .94 PnR ball handler. But his most taken shot is spot up, like Kyle's was, and Marco scores better there (1.1 PPP) than he does creating with the ball. But he doesn't actually generate as many spot ups as Kyle, because he isn't as good off ball.

I think this club has been so deficient at creating shots beside D-Rose, that people forget that most guards in the league can do this stuff at some level between rudimentary and great. So like a man dying of thirst in the desert, who sees even a muddy puddle to drink from, we are so quick to leap on the first basic ability guard we have had in a while who can even dribble competently, and declare him the answer to our offensive achilles. I think it is still going to be there myself, and Marco isn't to the level of creator that can solve it. That if he could, our offense would be better than 19th when last year I don't recall it dropping below 15th, even without D Rose. But we shall see more when Rose comes back.

call me a hater or whatever, but this pretty much sums up my total feelings about this incantation of chicago bulls. way to give that starving man a cracker, reinsdorf

[BuffaloBull]

I'd be really wary about making statistical comparisons to last season with/without Rose and all that, just because the lockout had such a huge effect on team performance: the whole league got dragged down about 2 points from where they are this season. So couple offense being suppressed with the other ancillary effects of a condensed season (rewarding teams with depth etc) and I think it throws a lot of factors that you can't tease out.

To the original topic, it's way to early to say anything one way or another about Belli vs. Korver. Kyle was a great offensive weapon for us, especially in set pieces and with Derrick, but Belli seems to be better adding scores around the margins, off of broken or dying plays, which is a really hard effect to quantify by looking at overall efficiency: If you can shoot 40% in a situation where as a team, you usually shoot 30%, that's a huge offensive pickup, even though 40% by itself is nothing to crow about.

I really want the Bulls to be active around drafttime, and the Korver TPE, perhaps, could be used to move up or add a player. So I'd rather have Marco + the Korver TPE than just Korver. Of course, who knows if it will actually be used or not...

[GetBuLLish]

Anyway, if we can't use team comparison, we can't use individual performance, we can't use lineup data, then let's just throw out all objective evidence in measuring players. Be nice if people would actually explain what they do rate players on though, beside just, "I think this guy is better". Might as well just have polls then and dispense with posts altogether.

You know what this somewhat, somewhat reminds me of? When the Bulls were doing great without Rose and a number of people on this board started talking about how the team was better without Rose. When I (and others) pointed out how the Bulls were better in almost every single category (including winning %) w/ Rose, the response was something like, "But they LOOK better!"

Beli's ability to get to the rim and dribble is only producing 1 more point per 36 for himself at noticeably less efficiency, and it not producing more baskets for the team either as he averages less assists than Korver per minute. This adds up to less offensive impact, which is clear in the plus/minus data, both raw and advanced, both last year, historically, and indeed this season as well where Korver is impacting the ATL offense more than Beli is the Bulls.

Can make all the arguments you want about Beli being more versatile, but so far, its not overcoming that Korver is simply so much more efficient as a shooter. Which seems to have more ancillary benefits to a team offense as well, via spacing, executing system offensive plays (where Korver was much better) vs Beli's ability to dribble to the rim once or twice more a game.

Korver is currently 17th in the NBA in scoring efficiency (min 100 pts & minutes). The player immediately above him is LeBron James, others ahead, Steve Nash, Kevin Martin, Ray Allen. The best offenses are the ones that produce the most points per possession, this should be self evident. Now Korver only scores 40% as much volume as say LeBron James, but its still highly helpful to your offense to get even that much at that level.

To digress a bit, Beli's getting to the rim is also overstated because he only finishes 52.7% of his plays at the rim this year. Which is kinda poor, in case it's been overlooked he tends to miss a lot of those crazy layups he tries. Beli at the rim is a less efficient means to get points than a Kyle Korver three pointer, of which he shoots 3 more attempts per 36 than Belinelli.

Not saying the guy sucks, he's been decent for us. And if you need a starter while Rose is out, making us miss ball handling that much more critically, then you might even prefer him. Kyle was worse without Rose. But on a healthy team where Rose is doing 75% of the playmaking, Korver offers better synergy. Neither guy is an ideal starting SG for a championship team, but off the bench, Korver is easier to use, both for system offense and as 3pt spacer and deadly spot up guy for Rose. Beli needs the ball more, how much is he going to deserve it with Rose back?

Fantastic post.

[GMgoran]

Bellinelli is a better basketball player than Korver ... Is he a better fit for this Bulls team, we will see once Rose is back ...

[DuckIII]

Per 36 numbers this year:

A: 14.3 Pts 2.0 Ast 2.6 Reb 1.0 Stl 0.1 Blk 1.4 TO 41.2% FG 41.5% 3pt 87.7% FT 55.1% TS 49.2% eFG

B: 13.1 Pts 2.1 Ast 4.7 Reb 1.3 Stl 0.6 Blk 1.1 TO 42.9% FG 43.3% 3pt 83.9% FT 61.3%TS 59.1% eFG

Somehow, multiple people believe that Player A is "significantly better" and that it's not even a question. Pretty foolish, IMO.

Anyways, I've always thought that Korver was the better player for this team. I'm pretty close to being on the fence now, with a very slight leaning towards Korver still. We'll really find out the answer come playoff time.

The only Belli numbers that matter are when the Bulls play him starters minutes. That is who he is and that should be his role. What is that data?. oh and defense.

[Mech Engineer]

i think most of us are envisioning Beli as a 2nd ball handler and a shot creator thereby lessens the pressure of Rose to do hero ball every possession. if successful, Rose can conserve his energy or coast during the game and wills himself if needed. Korver on the other hand, he needs Rose to find him or other teammates to get his shot.

That's the problem when comparing Korver and Belinelli. There are numerous Belinelli types in the league but compartively there are less elite-shooter Korver types. There are plenty of Korver types but not many with that deadly a shot, shooting motion and that height. The ball handling skills of Belinelli looks very attractive because he is probably the best ball handler the Bulls have had for any position other than a PG in the last few years.

Ideally, in my world, I would want both Belinelli and Korver. Both bring different things to the team and the offense would be more potent. Obviously, you can't run out a line-up of Rose, Korver, Belinelli, Noah and Deng....but for some time, they could have.

[blumeany]

Korver gives you a little more size, better rebounding, and better 3pt shooting. Biggest thing that Marco gives you over Kyle is the ability to take it to the rim. The vast majority of the time Kyle solely ran around screens to try and get an open shot. I see Marco, more often then not, taking it to the rim - which keeps defenses honest.

[samwana]

I'd like to see Belinelli with Rose first to really come to a conclusion in this case. Korver was a great shooter to have, but he couldn't dribble to save his live. Korver got the ball a lot with just a little time on the clock left, Beli too, difference is that Kyle had to hoist up a shot, b/c he can't dribble, Beli can also put the ball on the floor and make something happening. He can also help out getting the ball across, stuff Korver hardly could. I'm glad to see Beli do fine, I like him now that he is no Badinelli anymore

I'd like to see the first 30 games of Korver with the Bulls to see how he does there. The team was struggeling there mightily too. Since a few games the chemistry is slowly getting better and all guys are playing better. Has that something to do with Marco starting instead of Rip? Maybe, but it shows that it takes a while. To get an equal comparison I think we have to wait till the regular season is over, have Marco play with Rose and see how his stats are.

With all the talk of Rose working out with the team a little already and the next step being going through full contact, I start to look forward even more than before and I am really excited to see Marco and Rose on the floor together. Just like I want to see Rose with Jimmy Buckets or Rose with Teague. Ok Rose with whomever

[Mech Engineer]

I'd like to see Belinelli with Rose first to really come to a conclusion in this case.
With all the talk of Rose working out with the team a little already and the next step being going through full contact, I start to look forward even more than before and I am really excited to see Marco and Rose on the floor together. Ok Rose with whomever

That will be the fun part to see but will Thibs even give them a chance this season if Rip is around. Remember Rip and Rose are used to each other and Rip starts. With Rose probably being limited in his minutes to begin with, I doubt Marco and Rose will get a lot of time together this season to develop good chemistry.

[DuckIII]

As a starter for the Bulls, Marco is averaging 15.3 ppg, 3.1 rpg, 1.8 apg, and 1.3 spg on 43% from the field, 41% from 3pt. Since being wrongly demoted to a bench role and non-starters minutes a few games ago, he did play starters minutes once. He put up 17 pts, 2 rbs and 3 assists on efficient shooting. I don't know how to convert any of this into advanced stats.

If you want to broaden it to include some higher minute back-up stints, and include every game in which Marco has played more than 20 minutes, he's averaging 14.3 ppg on 32 minutes per game, which is 16.1 per 36. And that's an 18 game sample size. I didn't take the time to break out the rest of the numbers, and am not aware of anywhere that will do it for me, so this is all you get from me.

But the point is, there's big-minute Marco (i.e., used right Marco) and Rip's bitch Marco (i.e., used wrong Marco). The only argument out there with even a semblance of defensibility (even including the complete overlooking of defense and diversity of skill set) in favor of Korver, requires that we blend the statistics of used wrong Marco with used right Marco. And even then, with that short-sighted analysis, its neck and neck.

Used in the way that we can all see is the proper way, being only inhibited by the inevitable Rip-spoiled-bitch meltdown if he's demoted, Marco is superior to Korver. Plus the obvious eye-test and defense thing (i.e. that other 50% of the game being overlooked).

[Ralphb07]

Which he may take since it's doubled and he might of found a home here... I don't see any team going beyond full MLE for him and Marco seems like a guy that would take a little less to stay here.

Hell, can't see a team going full MLE for him. 3-4M seems about right.

Which is great for us then. Marco should be a Bull next season.

[Ralphb07]

I was a big Marco supporter when we signed him and thought his game fit what we needed. Watching him more IMO I'd take him over Korver. Yes Kyle is the better shooter but I don't think we could play Kyle 30+ minutes like we can with Marco. Is Marco a shut down defender, no but he plays solid defense and is just more mobile than Korver out there. Also the ability to create his own shot and get to the basket helps us big time.

I would be nice to have both really though. If we could sign Marco and find a way to bring Korver back this summer that would be flat out awesome.

[dice]

marco is not as good a defender as korver, who improved a lot once he joined the bulls. sorry