Hendrix wrote:vini_vidi_vici wrote:Okay so who are we replacing with TH 1 for 1?? I mean otherwise were trading multiple players and then the team is changed in other ways. Again why I hate the rabbit holes, I hate fantasy trades.
Who is going to replace the 17.6 REB% from last year? Could it just be TH is slumping, and he will improve to career norms atleast, or even last years numbers??
This isnt about post defense, the team is 16th in PITP per 100 against.
They got outscored by 2 to CHI in the paint, and 8 by MEM. They didnt "destroy" the Raps inside. We lost to CHI because we bricked uncontested looks.
They are outscoring OPPs as a whole in the paint on the season by 1.3 PPG.
People want to make moves based on 2 teams. I just wanted a 2nd round birth at the beginning of the season, now ppl are advocating trading people to match up (hopefully better?) to a 1 team in the East, and a team in the West. Expectations need to be tempered I think, yes everything isnt perfect, but what team is?
You can't say we lost to the Bulls because we bricked uncontested shots. That was 1 thing. There are many things going on in a basketball game. We win that game if do a lot of things different than just bricking uncontested shots.
1) We win if we don't let Pau score at will on us.
2)We win if don't let them post a 34.2 ORB% vs. us.
3)And, of course, we win if we don't brick uncontested shots.
This is about addressing the first 2 things.
It is all well and good that your individual expectations at the start of the season were to make the 2nd round. But, that doesn't mean other people don't want to at least try and get further. If you (for arguments sake) are the 3rd best team in a conference, you don't just lie down and accept that the 2nd round is where we get off. There is nothing wrong with trying to get further than that.
This is about rebounding, and it is about post defense. It's all well and good that we are 16th in PITP. You don't just accept that something is 'good enough' because we are league average at it (and PITP is kind of a bad way to look at post scoring anyways). You can be better than 16th.
I don't know who we trade, and for who. Maybe it's a 1 for 1 trade Maybe we add Fields or Hayes in, or even our low 1st if the player is good enough. I don't know at this point. Mozgov is interesting. Another name that might be interesting that hasn't been brought up is Dalembert (~19rb%, 24drb%, good post D, can finish better offensively than Hayes).
Did Pau score at will on TH?? Not one shot came against TH according to shot log. Shouldnt we advocate getting rid of JV/AJ if thats the case?? They also have CH if they need a matchup Post D big. And another in a suit, worst case scenerio.
And yet we had the same amount of OREBs as CHI (13). TH also had the highest NetRTG on the team FWIW.
We can be better at virtually every single statistic (we arent #1 in), im not sure what that proves, you guys are isolating post defense (and wrongly equating it to THs production, despite the team being league average, hardly an issue re: PITP per 100), and REBs (something TH has shown he can do well, and improve on current #s). I didnt say we got destroyed inside, again thats the context via another poster.
No one is saying laying down, but youre hyper focused on the negative (being out rebounded), even though a) REB% doesnt equate to Ws (that ive read), and b) PPL advocating trading to address the need, despite having the T21st REB% guy in the league last year slumping quite abit in that regard.
Mozgov had a worse DRPM than Hayes last year. Havent updated this years.
Team DRTG while Mozgov on the court 109.4, off of it 105.3, this year. He allows OPPs to shoot 1.3 FG% better than avg.
Im not opposed to Mozgov, but hes not going to come in and drastically change any of it.
Dalembert is meh. Decent this year (in SSS), not that great the year before. Neither are needle movers, just lateral moves at best IMO and I wouldnt add 1sts for.
Hendrix wrote:I don't think I need to prove it, it's intuitive. Take a step back from the numbers for a second. A defensive possession ends when you get the defensive board.
To take it to extremes to flesh it out.
Example 1) Team 'a' gets 100 possessions in a game. Team 'b' posts a 50 drb%. Team 'a' will end up taking 150 shots at the basket during those 100 possessions.
Example 2) Team 'a' gets 100 possessions in a game. Team 'b' posts a 100 drb%. Team 'a' will end up taking 100 shots at the basket during those 100 posessions.
All things equal, the team that takes 150 shots is going to post a higher ORTG, than the team that posted 100 shots. Conversely, the team that gave up 150 shots posts a worse DRTG, than the team that gave up 100 shots.
Edit- actually if a team posted a 50% drb%, they would give up more than the 150 shots I said, but I don't feel like doing the math, and I think it still illustrates the point.
First you cant give up more shots than possessions.
Second the differential this year in REB% is 9.6% (top to bottom) not 50%, that is a big distinction.
Third that is merely anecdotal, again there isnt any proof that I know of. K guys I really need to go, take care all, drive safe out there. Interesting discussion nonetheless even if I disagree.
