RealGM

fishercob wrote:

"Offensive Rating" is a statistic used in basketball to measure either a team's offensive performance or an individual player's efficiency at producing points for the offense. It was created by author and statistician Dean Oliver.

Shooting efficiency and offensive efficiency are not one in the same.

Hmm understood, but essentially oRTG is how many points a player scores per 100 possessions correct? I always found individual oRTG misleading without looking at team oRTG with it. Last years Spurs TEAM oRTG was 112 compared to the Kings, 104. When you consider that, the individual oRTG disparity between the two players seems less impressive.

GhostsOfGil wrote:

fishercob wrote:

"Offensive Rating" is a statistic used in basketball to measure either a team's offensive performance or an individual player's efficiency at producing points for the offense. It was created by author and statistician Dean Oliver.

Shooting efficiency and offensive efficiency are not one in the same.

Hmm understood, but essentially oRTG is how many points a player scores per 100 possessions correct? I always found individual oRTG misleading without looking at team oRTG with it. Last years Spurs TEAM oRTG was 112 compared to the Kings, 104. When you consider that, the individual oRTG disparity between the two players seems less impressive.

A team's Offensive Rating is the product of the individual Offensive Ratings of the players on the team. You have cause and effect backwards here.

GhostsOfGil wrote:His efficiency was off the charts good.

No, not really. But, yes, he shot well. That's the thing he did best.

GhostsOfGil wrote:Leonard had the benefit of playing off 3 future HOFs... and played for a franchise that is the GOAT for grooming young talent.

Teams are good, because their players are good. Not the other way around. The players do well, and that makes for a good team. In other words, good teams have better players than bad teams. Is there yet another way to say this obvious thing?

GhostsOfGil wrote:Take a look at KT's game log post Monte trade:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/players/4892/gamelog

This guy is a stud.

You mean "this guy scores a lot of points." If you list nba players in order of the number of points they score, you do not get an ordered list of the best players. Thompson, overall, on all his numbers compared to other players at his position, was neither "a stud" nor even close to an average player at his position.

GhostsOfGil wrote:His advanced shooting %s are impressive if you look at rookie guards who shot at a high volume.

But we're not trying to find out whether he was good among "rookie guards who shot at a high volume". We're trying to judge whether he was good among NBA players at his position. Overall, no he wasn't.

As I said Leonard is a much better player than Thompson. Obviously, Faried is as well. Actually it's a long list of rookies who performed better than Thompson. Vesely included.

payitforward wrote:A team's Offensive Rating is the product of the individual Offensive Ratings of the players on the team. You have cause and effect backwards here.

A TEAMS offensive rating is a product of MULTIPLE individual offensive ratings. When you considere Leonard played in a highly effective offensive, it's bound to have a positive impact on his individual performance.

payitforward wrote:Teams are good, because their players are good. Not the other way around. The players do well, and that makes for a good team. In other words, good teams have better players than bad teams. Is there yet another way to say this obvious thing?

I'm not sure how saying "a good team is good because it has good players," has anything to do with rookie player development. You are a Wizards fan. You more than anyone should know what kind of impact a good organization can do for a player's growth.

payitforward wrote:As I said Leonard is a much better player than Thompson. Obviously, Faried is as well. Actually it's a long list of rookies who performed better than Thompson. Vesely included.

Ehh. Now your just reaching. I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning behind that..

"
Klay Thompson was voted by NBA general managers as the player most likely to have a breakout season in 12-13 with 13.3% of the vote.

James Harden was selected last season with 21.4% of the vote.

Kyrie Irving and Kawhi Leonard each received 10.0% of the vote this season, followed by Paul George and Harden again with 6.7% of the vote."

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/22 ... z2A3XSdv00

Per the discussion on the previous page or so, we were on solid ground GOG in our comments on Klay Thompson. On draft night I would have been happy with Thompson or Leonard, but the need for Thompson was a tick higher IMO

That Klay Thompson MIGHT have a breakout season this season in no way supports the argument that he had a good rookie season. He showed some promise, but his overall performance was below average for an NBA player. He shoots the ball well, but there's more to basketball than shooting. And, despite the good shooting, his overall offensive rating was below average.

Ask Kobe and the rest of the USA Basketball Olympic squad and coaches who impressed them the most on the USA Select squad that scrimmaged them this summer? Kyrie Irving and Klay Thompson is who i recall they mentioned during the summer. If Klay was below average as rookie, then what does that make Vesely? lol

What impresses players and what wins games are not often the same thing.

And, Klay Thompson's performance at the Olympic camp (whatever it was) also does not address his performance as a rookie during the regular season.

Nivek wrote:What impresses players and what wins games are not often the same thing.

And, Klay Thompson's performance at the Olympic camp (whatever it was) also does not address his performance as a rookie during the regular season.

Who were your Top-3 picks for us in 2011? I assume you would have taken Leonard.

GhostsOfGil wrote:A TEAMS offensive rating is a product of MULTIPLE individual offensive ratings. When you considere Leonard played in a highly effective offensive, it's bound to have a positive impact on his individual performance.

Huh? If his teammates shoots a higher %, that will make his own shots go in more often? I don't think so. Plus, there is no data whatever to support this contention.

GhostsOfGil wrote:I'm not sure how saying "a good team is good because it has good players," has anything to do with rookie player development. You are a Wizards fan. You more than anyone should know what kind of impact a good organization can do for a player's growth.

I wasn't talking about "rookie player development" I was comparing how well two players performed -- Leonard much better than Thompson. Viz.: "As I said Leonard is a much better player than Thompson."

As to the impact of a good organization on a player's growth, no thanks on that either. Note that JaVale McGee played just about exactly as well for Denver as he did for us, and I read many media comments about how much better he was over there. One I read said that you could tell by how he ran down the court that he was much better (!). BS is a portable element.

Vesely better rookie than Thompson -- you commented: "Now your just reaching. I'd be interested in hearing your reasoning behind that.."

If you list all 3s who played 20+ minutes and look at overall productivity measures, you'll see PER (which *way* overvalues volume shooting) puts Thompson in the top 30%. If you look instead at WS40, he ranks in the bottom 25%. Whether you trust either of these measures, that differential tells you that the only thing he did well is shoot. He did the other stuff so badly that it pulled him way way down in a measure that takes that stuff more seriously.

If you look at the two players WP48 -- which incorporates correction for position difference -- Vesely ranks slightly above average for the season (and significantly above average for the last 2/3 of the season); Thompson ranks extremely low.

The raw numbers support this. Per 40 minutes, looking at guys who played 20 minutes a game, Thompson was one of the worst rebounding 3s in the league. He was below average in steals and waay above average in turnovers. He fouled a lot as well. Although his FT% was outstanding, he got to the line seldom and was way below average in made FTs. His 2pt FG% was also below average.

What did he do well? He shot an exceptional 3pt %, and he took a ton of them. That's what he did well. That and nothing else. It's a good thing, and of course it's highly visible (not getting a rebound isn't visible, for example). Helps him look good.

Take a look at this comparison of numbers between Leonard and Thompson. They played almost exactly the same number of minutes per game. Compare the numbers across the board, and tell me Leonard isn't much better.

http://bit.ly/TtVqJI

There is no comparison.

I'm just wondering when did Klay Thompson become a SF? That makes as much sense as putting Nick Young at SF. Just because GSW went small when they had no other options doesn't mean he's a full time 3.

I think the Klay Thompson love affair on this board has to do with the fact the we as a group tend to overvalue the outside shooting aspect, maybe it's because beyond our hope regarding Beal, our roster is basically filled with bricklayers.

closg00 wrote:

Nivek wrote:What impresses players and what wins games are not often the same thing.

And, Klay Thompson's performance at the Olympic camp (whatever it was) also does not address his performance as a rookie during the regular season.

Who were your Top-3 picks for us in 2011? I assume you would have taken Leonard.

At 6, my pick would have been Faried, who YODA rated as the 3rd best player in the draft. YODA didn't love Leonard as much as some folks here did. At 18, I'd have to go back and see who was available.

Haven't seen any pre-season games but I see that, so far, Jan is shooting 51.9% and avg 5.7ppg on 24.3mpg

Has most of his makes been dunks, as per last season, or is he showing some signs of having a jump shot this pre-season?

Dat2U wrote:I'm just wondering when did Klay Thompson become a SF? That makes as much sense as putting Nick Young at SF. Just because GSW went small when they had no other options doesn't mean he's a full time 3.

According to 82 games, Klay spent the magority of his minutes at the 2 ( 6% of floor time at the 3).

Dat2U wrote:I think the Klay Thompson love affair on this board has to do with the fact the we as a group tend to overvalue the outside shooting aspect, maybe it's because beyond our hope regarding Beal, our roster is basically filled with bricklayers.

You know what, you may be right.

payitforward wrote:I wasn't talking about "rookie player development" I was comparing how well two players performed -- Leonard much better than Thompson. Viz.: "As I said Leonard is a much better player than Thompson."

Yes but I was.. Your response came after my comment about rookie development.

payitforward wrote:As to the impact of a good organization on a player's growth, no thanks on that either. Note that JaVale McGee played just about exactly as well for Denver as he did for us, and I read many media comments about how much better he was over there. One I read said that you could tell by how he ran down the court that he was much better (!).

? I'm not sure what you are implying here... I never made that argument. With that said, I disagree about the impact an organization has on a player.. and we'll just leave it at that.

PIF, you mis understand me. I not once, made an argument that Leonard was better than Klay. The original comment was backing closg on my opinion of Klay's strong rookie campaign.

zardsfan wrote:Haven't seen any pre-season games but I see that, so far, Jan is shooting 51.9% and avg 5.7ppg on 24.3mpg

Has most of his makes been dunks, as per last season, or is he showing some signs of having a jump shot this pre-season?

he's made some jump shots but he doesn't have any offensive game still

Apparently, when they told Vesely he needed to gain some bulk, he pulled a Cherokee Parks and gained 30 lbs of fat in the offseason.

He is obviously a step slower and has lost about 12 inches off of his vert.

Zonkerbl wrote:Apparently, when they told Vesely he needed to gain some bulk, he pulled a Cherokee Parks and gained 30 lbs of fat in the offseason.

He is obviously a step slower and has lost about 12 inches off of his vert.

Is this true? They told him to bulk up? If so, I'm wondering when folks are going to catch on that "bulk" isn't as important in basketball as strength and agility.

If the Zards mgt. did indeed tell Jan to "bulk up" my guess is they were really talking about him getting stronger rather than bulkier. "Bulk up" is just a generic term, imo. No one tells a person to "strength up."

I've been following the Leonard vs.Thompson debate...very interesting. I think comparing Thompson and Leonard is a little bit of apples and oranges since they bring different skills/strengths to the table. Both players had solid rookie seasons that showed their impressive potential.

I wanted the Zards to draft Leonard with the 6th pick and he's proven to be worthy of being that pick. Thompson is probably going to be one of the best shooters of his generation of NBA players. Yes, Thompson will need to do more than shoot well to be a great player, but guys with Klay's shooting ability are not easy to find. He's special in that regard.