vvoland wrote:Looks like we just have different definitions for things. To me a 3 seed and a 5 seed are both 'good teams.' They're not great, almost by definition, but they're 'good teams'. I typically equate 'good' to 'consistently above average.'
I haven't watched nearly as much ATL as you have but I think DJM is a credible shooter, just not sure he's a quality one. I tend to think of 3pt shooters in 3 categories, based on how much the defense wants them to shoot: please do, ambivalent, and "Noooo!". Like your example, Dray will get wide open 3's, as many as he wants, until he shoots near 40% in a season where he takes a lot of them and actually hurts the defense. Right now, both he and JK are in the 'unguarded' bucket. The ambivalent bucket is where Wigs has found himself since showing he can hit them in GS. Teams close out, they're not daring him to shoot, but they're not chasing him off the line either. The other bucket is Steph, Klay (still), and shooters like that. I would say DJM made his way into the ambivalent bucket but will probably never graduate to "Noooo!" Franz started out in the middle but might f-- around and find himself in 'please do' as soon as next season. We'll see how JK improves but I'd bet he'd find himself in the middle rather soon.
If your argument really is that a #2 scoring option is either an elite defender or 3pt shooter, I think you'll lose that one. Again, you may not like where that team is headed, like Sac or Orl, but they are, in fact, teams that have a no2 scoring options that is neither. The sample size is getting smaller with every year as 3pt shooting because almost a pre-requisite but if you go back even 5-10 years, you'll find that much of the league fit that description.
Not sure that I would call DDV their 2nd option but, sure. It's really more like 2nd option by commitee and as their last two games have shown, they really just spam Brunson PnRs regardless of how well it's going. It's an option and, if I squint real hard, I can see him being the nominal no. 2. But i'm squinting real hard.
I get that they're both accurate in what they measure but it just seems so weird that JK has such an advantage over FW in the NBA metric and is 2x the OTHER way in SS. That seems like a fundamental disagreement with two metrics that measure similar, not identical, game actions (the assumption is that the man closing out is the closest defender and that the closest defender will close out, not just stand there). I fully accept that I may be reading the NBA stat incorrectly.
One last thing on FW. I'm not saying he hasn't improved. He's improved on things he's already doing well and the improvement is marginal. It's not like DJM and his 3pt shot after leaving SAS or Barnes and his 3pt shooting this season. or JK and his FT%. That's why I don't think FW has the ceiling some do. Will he be a scorer? Probably not. Will he be the primary or secondary creator? I'd bet against it. So, again, what's the role? 3rd option on both ends? If he's your best defender you're probably in a lot of trouble, right? and if he's your best offensive option, I don't even need to ask the question.
I'd say that if you say "<insert team> wins the title" and you didn't need to add a holy sh*t to either end of it, they are good. Its a very scientific and data based way to look at it, I know
Called DDV their 2nd option because he really is. Most plays attempted/touches that isnt Brunson. Its not as clear as most teams, but its their current reality
As for NBA.com/SS - the only time theres real discrepancies is when a guy like Kuminga or Draymond is compared to someone who isnt like them. System really isn't supposed to measure 2 guys in a rock fight from 3 because.. whats the value there? Plus cross-referencing is a bitch, because you can't just slap the 2 things together. Has to be done game to game - which shot had which level of coverage, etc. Lots of data cleaning.. so the payout better be worth it. Cant imagine that. But until teams actually look at Kuminga and don't invite the 3pter, hes a liability
I'd say your take on FW/JK in terms of improvement is almost the opposite of what's been proven to work in terms of future prediction. Making marginal improvements across the board, well except shooting, bodes well for continued improvement. Example: lets say there are tiers here, 1-5, 1 being awful, 2 poor, 3 good, 4 great, 5 elite. Instead of looking at it like 1-2-3-4-5, the reality is more like 1-2--3---4----5. Meaning its much harder to from good to great than awful to poor. Improving on something you're already good at is a fantastic sign - and to that end, Kuminga did improve on something he's good at too: finishing. That bodes well for his cutting/finishing game. But everywhere else he fell short... and since the Warriors only really needed that finishing/cutting to complement their very perimeter game, he's getting more shine than he should.
Now look at Franz, who apparently had a bad game 2 after a good game 1 (I'd assume? Metrics liked it anyways). He's not addressing the Magic's big need, but if he was? He'd be hailed as a superstar. Its just perception based on fit. But your perception is definitely slanted of him: he scored 19.7 ppg with a miserable 3ball this year, improving his midrange and finishing. If he hit his career average on 3s, he'd be a 22-23ppg guy. On top of that, 5 rebs, 3-4 assists, and one of the top 5-6 defensive SFs in the game. He's the secondary creator for them - right now. He's their best defender, right now. And for all the handling/creating he does, low turnovers. There's no shame in being 2nd to this guy, and JK's definitely 2nd to this guy if we're comparing them. Its not close and probably wont ever be, barring something that defies the long odds
