Looking at the numbers . . .

[Nivek]

What if this works?

What does that even mean?

"It's" already failed. If the Wizards play .500 ball the rest of the way, they'd finish with 30 wins. If they win 60% of their remaining games (31-21) they'd finish 35-47. They'd need to go 37-15 (.711) to reach .500 this season.

I thought they could win 37 games this season. They'd have to go 33-19 (.634) to reach that "lofty" goal.

[Nivek]

Just to give a sense for the productivity of the Wizards roster, here's where the players rank among the entire league using my stat (PPA) (minimum 180 minutes):

36. Nene
107. Okafor
129. Crawford
137. Ariza
202. Price
206. Booker
207. Webster
262. Martin
268. Beal
302. Livingston
308. Singleton
313. Seraphin
331. Vesely

Through my last stat update (Wednesday, I think), there were 338 players with at least 180 minutes.

Dead last: former Wizard Jared Jeffries. In 198 minutes, his PPA is -49.

[montestewart]

Just to give a sense for the productivity of the Wizards roster, here's where the players rank among the entire league using my stat (PPA) (minimum 180 minutes):

36. Nene
107. Okafor
129. Crawford
137. Ariza
202. Price
206. Booker
207. Webster
262. Martin
268. Beal
302. Livingston
308. Singleton
313. Seraphin
331. Vesely

Through my last stat update (Wednesday, I think), there were 338 players with at least 180 minutes.

Dead last: former Wizard Jared Jeffries. In 198 minutes, his PPA is -49.

On the plus side, these numbers illustrate the stiff competition at the end of the bench.

[Nivek]

My latest numbers update.

Vesely out of negative territory. Beal inching up -- it's going to take a longer stretch of good play to dramatically change his rating because he's played so may minutes.

[hands11]

And per my recent post in the Wall thread, that doesn't take into account that a Wall type PG is exactly what the team is missing so I fully expect players numbers to go up once Wall returns. Look how much better Okafor is already looking just by being able to start with Nene next to him. 4 double doubles in 6 games.

I also think Webster's numbers are going to go up as the back up SF getting open corner 3 looks. And Temple/Price is a decent pair of back up PGs. Price fast to cover quicker players. Temple long for taller players.

And it should help Beal who may already be turning the corner even without Wall.

Healthy, I expect they will look a lot better. Maybe even Ves.

Scary times for the die hard Ted/EG haters. I mean. What if this actually works.

There is scant evidence to suggest that Wall makes his teammates that much better. Two years ago, the team was 1.5 points per 100 possessions worse on offense when Wall was on the floor. Last year, they were 2.5 points per 100 possessions better. And I suspect nearly all of that was thanks to Wall's ability to successfully execute one or two 1-man fast breaks per game.

The team almost surely will improve when Wall returns because Wall is a much better player than Price or Mack, but I have doubts as to whether he will help to dramatically boost the production of his teammates. Or rather, Wall must improve significantly over last year if he expects to boost the production of his teammates.

The one reason I have hope is that last year's team was so poorly constructed to play alongside Wall. None among McGee, Vesely, Blatche, Seraphin or Singleton could hit an outside shot if their lives depended on it, and even Jordan Crawford was pretty terrible as a catch-and-shoot player. The only time the floor was well spaced for Wall was when we went in a small ball configuration with Young or Martin at SF, and even those lineups had question marks with the shooting from our bigs. This year, the team at least appears to be built to play with Wall. Nene and Okafor will set better picks than McGee; Nene, Seraphin and Booker can hit a midrange jumper from the PF spot; Webster is a quality catch-and-shoot player at SF; Ariza is a passable shooter, at least he's better than Singleton; and Crawford is improved as a catch-and-shoot player. We are by no means stocked with good shooters, but we should be better than last year.

It would be nice to have James Singleton back.

We are really close in agreeing on most points except for one thing, I don't think Wall must improve significantly over last year to help. His 5-6 FTA a game along with his assists and one man fast break would do it. All he really needs to do is remember how he learned to change pace and pick when to fast break to limit turnovers. Hopefully all the games he has watch and a year of maturity helps him there.

I think that alone would do it. Now if he can actually shoot better and he learned a post game, which he said he worked on, then I think all the better. That's going to help them close out games because then defenders have to go over picks and that will move the defense and open more lanes for him to pass if needed.

I know it isn't a popular position on this board because a lot of people hate the moves they made and want to blow it up and fire EG, but I can see how this could actually all come together with everyone healthy. The pieces actually kind of compliment each other. Defense everywhere. Runners for Wall. Webster as a corner 3 shooter. Good rebounding and two post options in Nene and Kevin for half court. Now if Beal is going to ball like he has been lately and hit the 3 ball like that. That is the real piece that brings it all together. Wall can just do what he mostly did last year but a little smarter. Beal is the Deal changer. And he is only 19. How sweet is that.

[hands11]

What if this works?

What does that even mean?

"It's" already failed. If the Wizards play .500 ball the rest of the way, they'd finish with 30 wins. If they win 60% of their remaining games (31-21) they'd finish 35-47. They'd need to go 37-15 (.711) to reach .500 this season.

I thought they could win 37 games this season. They'd have to go 33-19 (.634) to reach that "lofty" goal.

Just so I get what you are suggesting. Finishing 31-21 and winning 60% of their remaining games once healthy would be not working ?

[montestewart]

I had low expectations for the Wizards, because all their moves and non-moves said "don't expect much," and they made no other moves, and everyone was looking pretty injured, and my expectation just kept going lower and lower. I think I ended up predicting 30 wins or thereabouts, but it was plummeting number that was frozen in time, capable of going lower with a few more days.

For all those low expectations, the team EG put together is worse than I expected, and they would have to have a likely unprecedented turnaround to reach some of our preseason predictions. If they do that, I'll say "Wow, this teams actually pretty average when everyone's healthy and they're all on top of their games. If they play at a 60% clip, someone's probably about to be suspended for steroids.

[Nivek]

If they play at a 60% clip, someone's probably about to be suspended for steroids.

Indeed. The chances of it happening aren't zero, but they'd be hard to distinguish from zero.

[Nivek]

Just because...

In the 2011 draft, the Wizards selected Jan Vesely, Chris Singleton and Shelvin Mack. The most productive player per minute from those three: Mack. Who they've cut twice.

Both Vesely and Singleton have more total production of course because they played more minutes. Singleton has about 40% more total "credits" in double the playing time. Vesely has about 25% more credits in about 55% more minutes.

Have started running an unadjusted PPA (meaning not adjusting for pace or defense) on former Wizards/Bullets. It's obviously not as precise as the full PPA, but that takes time and I'm only looking for approximate values anyway.

Saddest numbers I ran were for John "Hot Plate" Williams and Pervis Ellison. Both had seasons in Washington where they produced like top 15-20 players in the league. Both had major injuries and never fully recovered.

Taking requests here or on Twitter, for anyone who's interested.

[Nivek]

MikeG over at the APBRmetrics board has a handy way of estimating how many starters a player faces during his minutes on the floor. A low-minute starter would face more starters than a reserve playing the same number of minutes.

The current high is Willie Green who has started every game for the Clippers, but averages just 18.6 mpg. His "starter percentage" (Sta%) is 87%.

On the low end for players with at least 200 minutes is Joel Anthony -- averaging 8.8 minutes, all off the bench -- at 39%.

Full roster:

Code: Select all

PLAYER          GMS     MPG     STA%
Emeka Okafor    33      23.9    82%
Trevor Ariza    16      24.3    77%
Bradley Beal    31      31.3    77%
A.J. Price      18      27.1    76%
Trevor Booker   9       24.1    76%
Garrett Temple  8       31.9    72%
Martell Webster 32      27.1    68%
Jordan Crawford 31      29.8    64%
Nene Hilario    20      23.8    63%
Shelvin Mack    7       20.1    58%
Kevin Seraphin  32      25.3    58%
Chris Singleton 28      17.2    57%
Shaun Livngston 17      18.8    56%
Jan Vesely      26      13.2    50%
Earl Barron     11      11.1    46%
Cartier Martin  23      17.6    45%
Jannero Pargo   7       14.6    43%


League average STA% is about 66%.

[Nivek]

Comprehensive rookie ratings over at the blog.

Drummond is atop the list. Beal ranks 16th -- right at average for this class of rookies (minimum 200 total minutes). Needs to continue his recent improvement.

[AFM]

Interesting. He's 2nd on NBA's rookie ladder. Not sure someone averaging 11 MPG deserves to be on that list.

[nate33]

Comprehensive rookie ratings over at the blog.

Drummond is atop the list. Beal ranks 16th -- right at average for this class of rookies (minimum 200 total minutes). Needs to continue his recent improvement.

I'm a big believer in per-minute numbers, but only up to a point. Guys that are playing 15 minutes per game or fewer really get their numbers skewed because they are so often playing against backups and/or playing only in garbage time. I would pretty much disregard any of these rookies playing 16 minutes or less.

With that in mind, Beal looks considerably better, ranking 8th behind only Drummond, Davis, Kidd-Gilchrist, Lillard, Sullinger, Valanciunas, and Barnes. Beal has been coming on strong lately. If he keeps it up, I'd like to see a new study utilizing only January numbers. My guess is Beal would rank in the top 4 or 5.

From my own, completely unscientific observations, ranking recent play more heavily than play in November and early December, I'd say Beal is somewhere between the 4th and 6th best rookie, behind Lilliard, Drummond and Davis, and somewhere among Kidd Gilchrist, Sullinger and Valanciunas. Given the respective ages and experience of all players mentioned, the only player who I might potentially regret not drafting at #3 is Drummond.

[Nivek]

Interesting. He's 2nd on NBA's rookie ladder. Not sure someone averaging 11 MPG deserves to be on that list.

I've paid very little attention to the NBA Rookie Ladder. Looks absurd to me. Looks to be some combination of per game pts, reb and ast, as well as minutes played.

If I re-sort my rookie rankings using total credits (instead of per minute), the top 10 would look like this:

1. Lillard
2. Drummond
3. MKG
4. Davis
5. Barnes
6. Beal
7. Shved
8. Sullinger
9. Valanciunas
10. Singler

But, at that point the results are pretty overwhelmed by minutes.

[Nivek]

Comprehensive rookie ratings over at the blog.

Drummond is atop the list. Beal ranks 16th -- right at average for this class of rookies (minimum 200 total minutes). Needs to continue his recent improvement.

I'm a big believer in per-minute numbers, but only up to a point. Guys that are playing 15 minutes per game or fewer really get their numbers skewed because they are so often playing against backups and/or playing only in garbage time. I would pretty much disregard any of these rookies playing 16 minutes or less.

Already accounted for in PPA. The numbers include an adjustment based on that Starter% term.