Bradley Beal

[fishercob]

At some point people will realize that the points in the middle stages of the game are just as important as those at the end.

No they won't unfortunately. They never will.

"But can he make them when it counts?!?!"

[payitforward]

I think we're watching this year's Rookie of the Year.

CHA made a mistake* (sorry Dat).

* = half season + could be too small a sample size. We'll see.

If we only include rookies w/ 1000 or more minutes (and finesse Andre Drummond onto the list @ 986 minutes), the best rookie seasons so far, in order, are by:

Andre Drummond (by a lot!)
Anthony Davis
Maurice Harkless
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
Bradley Beal

I used WP48 to generate the list. Kev's list may be a little different but probably not very. Andre Drummond is so far ahead of everyone else it's ridiculous. In short, he's putting the best numbers overall of any Center in the league. Period.

The surprise on the list, obviously, is Mo Harkless. He is a very low usage player who produces by rebounding a lot, almost never turning it over, stealing at a respectable clip, and getting points off high % stuff.

[Nivek]

Unfortunately, stat guys are now feeding into it with all these permutations of "clutch" stats. Bill James was on the right track when he wrote that every at-bat in Major League Baseball is "clutch."

About the only semi-persuasive argument I've heard about end-of-game plays being more important was that in a close game, plays can force a greater swing in expected winning percentage than plays earlier in the game. A three in the 1st quarter might increase the odds of winning only a little at that point in the game, but a three at the buzzer can swing a 75% chance of losing to a 100% win.

But, make a few more plays earlier in the game, and maybe you don't even get to a point where you need a "clutch" play to win it late.

[I_Like_Dirt]

The one set of numbers I saw that might lead me to draw the conclusion that late-game numbers were more valuable had to do with the referees, specifically that they tended to be more biased towards a team that was trailing by a certain margin throughout the game. This would mean that points through the middle of the game might be either (a) the result of referees being biased towards a team that was trailing, or (b) scored to build a lead that the referees would likely erase in the end in order to make the score close towards the end of the game.

[Higga]

Beal will win ROY, because that's how we do it in D.C. First Harper, then RG3, now Beal.

D.C.: Where rookie domination happens.

[pancakes3]

I appreciate Beal as much as the next guy but it's runaway Lillard like it was when John Wall finished 2nd to Blake Griffin.

[tontoz]

I appreciate Beal as much as the next guy but it's runaway Lillard like it was when John Wall finished 2nd to Blake Griffin.

The ROY should be a runaway for Davis.

[TheBigThree]

Just want to point out that Beal is officially over 40% from the field. Given where he started, it really goes to show you how torrid his shooting has been over the past two months.

[hands11]

Unfortunately, stat guys are now feeding into it with all these permutations of "clutch" stats. Bill James was on the right track when he wrote that every at-bat in Major League Baseball is "clutch."

About the only semi-persuasive argument I've heard about end-of-game plays being more important was that in a close game, plays can force a greater swing in expected winning percentage than plays earlier in the game. A three in the 1st quarter might increase the odds of winning only a little at that point in the game, but a three at the buzzer can swing a 75% chance of losing to a 100% win.

But, make a few more plays earlier in the game, and maybe you don't even get to a point where you need a "clutch" play to win it late.

Nice breakdown. Chicken and the Egg stuff.

No doubt, making shots late are more "Clutch" as you pointed out. More pressure..because..it may be the last shots of the game. As you get into the playoffs, you need players who are clutch down the stretch.

Any of those stops that are often identified as momentum spots would be important. First quarter to start. End of first.. end of half... start of 3rd. But starting around 6-8 minutes left in the game, that is clutch time.

[hands11]

Just want to point out that Beal is officially over 40% from the field. Given where he started, it really goes to show you how torrid his shooting has been over the past two months.

Funny thing is, for the year, he is shooting a lower percent than Wall

But for Jan. .447
But for Feb. .478

If he keeps that up, he will be in the .435 range before long.

Hey, anyone notice he shrunk ? Now he is only 6-3" I thought he was listed at 6-4" before.

[willbcocks]

He shoots a lot of 3s. Wall doesnt shoot 3s. It makes sense that his fg% is lower.

Same with Harkless--for a guy who doesnt shoot 3s or get to the line, is 46% efficient? He's played well and does other things, but i question any statistical method that puts him above Beal, MKG, Waiters or Lillard. It seems to be weighted too heavily towards big men stats.

[hands11]

http://www.monumentalnetwork.com/videos ... ec17ed0000

Beal is just so solid and mature.

[nate33]

He shoots a lot of 3s. Wall doesnt shoot 3s. It makes sense that his fg% is lower.

Same with Harkless--for a guy who doesnt shoot 3s or get to the line, is 46% efficient? He's played well and does other things, but i question any statistical method that puts him above Beal, MKG, Waiters or Lillard. It seems to be weighted too heavily towards big men stats.

Yup. WP/48 is heavily dependent on rebounds. With just a quick look at the leaders in WS/48, you can see that it doesn't pass the sniff test. Tyson Chandler is the 5th best player in the league. Blake Griffin, Marc Gasol and David freaking West are better than Kobe Bryant and Carmelo Anthony. JJ freaking Hickson is better than Kyrie Irving. George Hill of Indiana is the 12th best player in the league.

I think PER is way better than WS/48. I agree with Nivek's criticism of PER in that it awards low-percentage chuckers too much, but overall, it's still better than most of the other summary stats out there.

[DCsOwn]

http://www.monumentalnetwork.com/videos/?tag=Washington%20Wizards&tagId=0000013b-206c-db26-af3b-edec17ed0000

Beal is just so solid and mature.

More supporting evidence:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/2/27/4 ... ile-rookie

[DCZards]

More supporting evidence:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/2/27/4 ... ile-rookie[/quote]


Thanks for posting this article. A lot of great stuff in it: The stuff about Beal's family; his relationship with Wall; Cassell's role in Beal's development; Webster's comments; Beal's emergence as a leader,etc.

This paragraph captures Double B's talents best, IMO.

"Beal is only 19 years old, but you wouldn't know it. There's nothing 19 about how he carries himself. On the floor he rarely forces anything -- he's smooth, smart, steady. In the half-court, you'll almost never see him take more than three dribbles. Listed at 6'3 and 207 pounds, he's sneaky with his speed, strength and athleticism. Explosive fastbreak dunks, reverse layups and rebounds in traffic shouldn't look so easy."

[payitforward]

Unfortunately, stat guys are now feeding into it with all these permutations of "clutch" stats. Bill James was on the right track when he wrote that every at-bat in Major League Baseball is "clutch."

About the only semi-persuasive argument I've heard about end-of-game plays being more important was that in a close game, plays can force a greater swing in expected winning percentage than plays earlier in the game. A three in the 1st quarter might increase the odds of winning only a little at that point in the game, but a three at the buzzer can swing a 75% chance of losing to a 100% win.

But, make a few more plays earlier in the game, and maybe you don't even get to a point where you need a "clutch" play to win it late.

Bingo. You have to change the sample set for late-game makes to suddenly become "more important."

I might also mention what Kobe has said: "I've missed a lot of 'game-winning' shots."

"Clutch" is one of the most persistent myths in sports. It won't go away. Those who believe in it won't be swayed by facts.

One more way to look at it: basketball is two things -- it's competition to win the game and it's also entertainment. In the first, competition, late makes mean no more than early ones. But, from the perspective of entertainment, there's no question that they do. It's in that sense that they are "more important."

[payitforward]

He shoots a lot of 3s. Wall doesnt shoot 3s. It makes sense that his fg% is lower.

Same with Harkless--for a guy who doesnt shoot 3s or get to the line, is 46% efficient? He's played well and does other things, but i question any statistical method that puts him above Beal, MKG, Waiters or Lillard. It seems to be weighted too heavily towards big men stats.

It's weighted towards the stats that win games. Or, put differently, it weights stats using statistical software to run regressions that reveal what wins games. That said, outstanding play from big men overall has more of an influence on game outcomes than outstanding play by back-court players.

You win games by a) shooting a higher TS% than your opponent and b) taking more shots than your opponent. If you do both in a game, think about it, there's really no way to lose -- it's impossible. Bigs shoot a higher TS% than smalls, and they rebound more too (i.e. giving their team more "extra" shots).

That's just the way it is. Doesn't mean there are no exceptions. And, sure, like any way of looking at anything in the world, there are cases where it can give the wrong impression.

[payitforward]

He shoots a lot of 3s. Wall doesnt shoot 3s. It makes sense that his fg% is lower.

Same with Harkless--for a guy who doesnt shoot 3s or get to the line, is 46% efficient? He's played well and does other things, but i question any statistical method that puts him above Beal, MKG, Waiters or Lillard. It seems to be weighted too heavily towards big men stats.

Yup. WP/48 is heavily dependent on rebounds. With just a quick look at the leaders in WS/48, you can see that it doesn't pass the sniff test. Tyson Chandler is the 5th best player in the league. Blake Griffin, Marc Gasol and David freaking West are better than Kobe Bryant and Carmelo Anthony. JJ freaking Hickson is better than Kyrie Irving. George Hill of Indiana is the 12th best player in the league.

I think PER is way better than WS/48. I agree with Nivek's criticism of PER in that it awards low-percentage chuckers too much, but overall, it's still better than most of the other summary stats out there.

But Nate, WS/48 is *not* the same as WP/48. WP48 adjusts for position. I.e. WS48 is *input*.

As to "doesn't pass the sniff test," would you say correlation to wins and losses is an important sniff test? Add up all the PERs of every player on each team (adjusting for minutes played of course), and list the teams from highest total to lowest total.

Now do exactly the same with WP48.

Which of the two lists will be closest to a list of all teams in order of their win-loss records, do you think? And would you say that the one closer to the win-loss list is the better metric for quality basketball?

I would. Do I need to tell you that WP48 is closer than any other metric; way better than PER? That's a fact. It's not just a fact -- it was a design goal in creating WP48 !!

[DCZards]

I don't think being "clutch" is a myth or a totally useless concept. There's is something to be said for the person who can step up and make a play or basket when the game is on the line. Stress and emotions are realities for all of us, and there's a lot more pressure and stress associated with taking a shot with 5 seconds left in the game and your team down by 1 (when the stakes are high) than it is taking a shot in the middle of the first quarter and your team down by 1.

[tontoz]

http://www.monumentalnetwork.com/videos/?tag=Washington%20Wizards&tagId=0000013b-206c-db26-af3b-edec17ed0000

Beal is just so solid and mature.

More supporting evidence:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2013/2/27/4 ... ile-rookie

Nice article. Kinda funny that his mom watches film and critiques his shot all the time.