Uncle Drew and the Frye Effect

timgator · Post #41 » by **timgator** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:28 am

Very nice analysis. This just makes me scratch my head even a little more, though. I'd like to see how Spencer Hawes' situation would compare since he was a FA and had the best 3pt FG% last year. Based on stats alone (because I haven't seen Hawes play much at all), I just can't fathom how Frye would get $10MM more (actually about $15-20MM when figuring in the highest state income tax in CA to the lowest in FL) when Hawes is younger and has significantly better stats. I'm on board with pretty much everything else we've done since Henny arrived, but this signing just confuses me because of the contract figures.

doct3r dr3 · Post #42 » by **doct3r dr3** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:59 am

basketballRob wrote:I think Drew's stats are pretty close to Frye's at the same age. Who knows what type of players these guys might turn into. We forget how young a player like Harkless is, he could still end up having a Rashard Lewis type career. With Frye opening the offense he will get plenty of corner 3's.

It's a fair point. Nicholson isn't Channing Frye yet, but Channing Frye wasn't Channing Frye until his fifth season.

Their per 36 numbers through their first two seasons are very similar.

Frye: 15.4 pts, 8.0 reb, 1.2 ast, 0.7 stl, 0.9 blk, 2.0 to, .454 fg% (13.8 fga), .222 3p% (0.3 3pa), .813 ft% (3.5 fta)

Drew: 15.2 pts, 7.6 reb, 1.0 ast, 0.6 stl, 0.8 blk, 1.9 to, .481 fg% (13.5 fga), .315 3p% (1.3 3pa), .808 ft% (2.2 fta)

drsd · Post #43 » by **drsd** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:45 am

doct3r dr3 wrote:... Channing Frye wasn't Channing Frye ...

Hmm

..

Mad Guru · Post #44 » by **Mad Guru** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:42 am

How do you get the stats listed in this article, what website or data base are you querying?

Flannerz · Post #45 » by **Flannerz** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:19 pm

I'm at work so will have to read it later

doct3r dr3 · Post #46 » by **doct3r dr3** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:32 pm

Mad Guru wrote:How do you get the stats listed in this article, what website or data base are you querying?

nbawowy.com

Mad Guru · Post #47 » by **Mad Guru** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 12:50 pm

doct3r dr3 wrote:
Mad Guru wrote:How do you get the stats listed in this article, what website or data base are you querying?

nbawowy.com

Nice, we should try to get more articles like this going during the season.

spinedoc · Post #48 » by **spinedoc** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:45 pm

A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause? Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

Potterman · Post #49 » by **Potterman** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:04 pm

spinedoc wrote:A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause? Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

I liked your thoughtfulness.

One big reason though is that like it or not, the Suns really don't have "superstars" per say. They did have a great guard rotation and good team ball though. None of those players to my estimation have the defensive capability our back court does (minus the shooting).

Not making the playoffs I think is simply a matter of location. They are west coast, and easily would be a eastern playoff team.

Defense is an issue with their players, but if the system is to try and run the opposing team out of the gym. (Which works when your players aren't as talented us some of the other Western super powers.) It's a decent system.

Does the chance for offensive rebounds from our bigs outweigh the ability we have of Nicholson and Frye to shoot? Sadly neither player screams "offensive rebound threat" so playing to a strength comes into play.

Potterman · Post #50 » by **Potterman** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:05 pm

On a side note, I don't think I like the stretch 4 system either. It does currently play into our current strengths I think though. Plus the true Power Fowards of old are such an extinct breed.

If Antione Walker were in his prime, he would be in paradise.

OrlandoNed · Post #51 » by **OrlandoNed** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:09 pm

spinedoc wrote:A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause? Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

The traditional PF is a dying breed. Having Frye on the court will make the game so much easier for Oladipo and Payton. The Suns didn't have a chance to keep Frye because we got to him first and gave him a very generous offer that'd he be crazy to turn down.

I can't believe you don't like the signing because of rebounding. Really? Look at Vucevic's and Tobias's rebounding numbers from last year. Vuc was the 6 best rebounder at the center spot and Harris was the 4th best rebounder at the SF spot.

Potterman · Post #52 » by **Potterman** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:14 pm

OrlandoNed wrote:
spinedoc wrote:A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause? Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

The traditional PF is a dying breed. Having Frye on the court will make the game so much easier for Oladipo and Payton. The Suns didn't have a chance to keep Frye because we got to him first and gave him a very generous offer that'd he be crazy to turn down.

I can't believe you don't like the signing because of rebounding. Really? Look at Vucevic's and Tobias's rebounding numbers from last year. Vuc was the 6 best rebounder at the center spot and Harris was the 4th best rebounder at the SF spot.

Not to mention, Dipo gets 4 rebounds a game, and it looks like Payton likes to gobble up rebounds as well.

Last Guardian · Post #53 » by **Last Guardian** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:28 pm

We were pretty good though when we had a stretch 4. The main problem is we didn't have any attacking guards to utilize the space. We simply ended up jacking contested 3's most of the time or get an awkward running hook attempt from Dwight.

This time around we have the proper guards to take advantage of the extra space.

Reading this though makes me miss Ryan Anderson. I consider him a lot more dangerous a shooter than Frye and he is a great rebounder to go along with it.

Melvinlocker · Post #54 » by **Melvinlocker** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:39 pm

spinedoc wrote:A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause? Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

Can't wait to see your video and statistical analysis on the traditional PF.

doct3r dr3 · Post #55 » by **doct3r dr3** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:11 pm

spinedoc wrote:A very detailed and thorough dissertation, but sadly one sided argument, in favor of the stretch four. Did you think about any of the cons of such an offense when writing this? For example, the effects of rebounding on a team, whether it be lower numbers from the traditional power position, or long carums off the rim? The opposing teams fastbreak transition due to the long rebounds, or foul trouble it may cause?

The Suns' overall rebound rate wasn't negatively affected by Frye's presence (TRR: 44.5-->45.1; TRB%: 49.9-->50.2). The offensive rebounding rate did go down (12.1-->11.6), in part because of the decrease in offensive rebounding percentage (27.0-->25.9). But the team's shooting efficiency increased so much (eFG%: 49.2-->53.8) it overwhelmed whatever effect that might have on scoring, and the Suns scored far more per 100 possessions (104.9-->113.1).

On defense, Suns opponents attempted about one more field goal attempt off defensive rebounds per 100 possessions with Frye on the floor (21.5-->22.7), and they converted these attempts at a higher eFG% (46.5-->53.5), but that resulted in a negligible overall impact on their overall scoring output, in points per 100 possessions (106.8-->107.0). Frye's overall impact on offense seems to dramatically outweigh his overall impact on defense.

The approach of conceding defensive rebounds, and defending hard on the perimeter is an approach that the Miami Heat used successfully to win two titles.

spinedoc wrote:Also, I don't see how advantageous it is to drew drafting Gordon, acquiring Frye, and retaining KOQ. I have other questions too, why didn't the suns go to the playoffs with this offense? Why didn't they try hard to keep frye? I hate the stretch four going back to shard. In fact, if hate were people, I'd be China. I don't mind a different look coming off the bench, but I despise constructing a team around it. I'm hoping Gordon develops very quickly, but I prefer KOQ there instead.

Aaron Gordon is a SF, and O'Quinn can play C.

Melvinlocker · Post #56 » by **Melvinlocker** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:39 pm

In addition to the above post, eFG% is the most important factor in winning basketball games while rebounding ranks about third. Here is a link to an article by Kevin Pelton about the four factors of winning basketball.

http://www.nba.com/thunder/news/factors050127.html

According to the study that Pelton used, he weighted the total impact of each factor on wins (offensively and defensively) as follows:

EFG%- 41.9%

Rebounding- 17%

Freethrows- 15.2%

Turnovers- 25.8%

There is some debate as the exact weighting of the numbers but this is more or less the accepted paradigm. I am working on an analysis of Frye and his impact in these areas and will probably post it this offseason (hint: he measures out well).

surflawyer · Post #57 » by **surflawyer** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:12 pm

I had to take a sick day off from work just to get the time to read this but well done. :thumbsup:

MagicHolland · Post #58 » by **MagicHolland** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:03 pm

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s2YJvXbnU4[/youtube]

Just take a look at this video and ignore the fast breaks.. Frye is involved in pretty much every play Dragic makes. I think Oladipo will like playing with him.

Swiftraven · Post #59 » by **Swiftraven** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:30 pm

Tom Haberstroh of ESPN agrees with you.

http://orlandomagicdaily.com/2014-artic ... nings.html

Melvinlocker · Post #60 » by **Melvinlocker** » Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:52 pm

This post seriously needs to reach 50+ And 1's