ImageImageImageImageImage

Looking at the numbers . . .

Moderators: nate33, montestewart, LyricalRico

Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,187
And1: 4,154
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#21 » by Zonkerbl » Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:49 pm

So, you should be able to use these numbers to define what's the minimum production needed to reach the playoffs. Of the #8 seeds in recent history, what was the average score of their starting five?

Or to get really tricky, you could weight the scores of every player on the roster by minutes played.

Calculate a similar number for the zards, and then calculate how good Nene and Wall have to be to make this team a playoff contender.
I've been taught all my life to value service to the weak and powerless.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 28,315
And1: 8,586
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#22 » by penbeast0 » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:31 pm

Oddly enough, Nivek's updated numbers say the best thing about the Wiz is the much derided Okariza deal; the rest of the squad is below average to below replacement (except for Jordan Crawford who is 1 point above average). Singleton looks awful to my surprise!
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Mr. Grundle
Sophomore
Posts: 182
And1: 2
Joined: Jan 18, 2007

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#23 » by Mr. Grundle » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:36 pm

Nivek wrote:So far this season, 23% of Wizards field goal attempts have been at-rim -- lowest proportion in the league. 59% of their FGA have been long jumpers (shots from beyond 16 feet) -- highest proportion in the league.


Awesome stat. Good thing Ernie rebuilt the team with players that fit into the jump-shot system he opted for when he hired the coach, or else we might not have won a game yet...

Seriously, WTF?
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#24 » by Nivek » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:37 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:So, you should be able to use these numbers to define what's the minimum production needed to reach the playoffs. Of the #8 seeds in recent history, what was the average score of their starting five?

Or to get really tricky, you could weight the scores of every player on the roster by minutes played.

Calculate a similar number for the zards, and then calculate how good Nene and Wall have to be to make this team a playoff contender.


This is a really good idea. I don't think we need to go back and look at other teams -- I think I can just estimate how good Nene and Wall need to be for the Wiz to reach the playoffs, assuming everyone else plays at the same level.

Very doable.

Just need some time. Maybe later in the week.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#25 » by Nivek » Mon Nov 19, 2012 8:47 pm

Mr. Grundle wrote:
Nivek wrote:So far this season, 23% of Wizards field goal attempts have been at-rim -- lowest proportion in the league. 59% of their FGA have been long jumpers (shots from beyond 16 feet) -- highest proportion in the league.


Awesome stat. Good thing Ernie rebuilt the team with players that fit into the jump-shot system he opted for when he hired the coach, or else we might not have won a game yet...

Seriously, WTF?


It's kinda funny -- when I saw your post, I immediately thought of how I hadn't updated this number since last week. And Wittman has been griping about how the team don't get no respeck from the refs even though they're taking the ball to the hoop. So, I updated. And found that their number of at-rim attempts FELL slightly from 23% of FGA to 22%. League average: 32%. Next closest to the Wizards: Atlanta -- at 27%.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
WizarDynasty
Veteran
Posts: 2,535
And1: 192
Joined: Oct 23, 2003

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#26 » by WizarDynasty » Mon Nov 19, 2012 11:06 pm

The most important job now is the sign livingston to a longterm contract as the backup point guard and allow Livingston to be a foundational player for years to come. if we can get livingston to sign a longterm backup contract it will encourage him to develop walls basketball iq and improve the basketball iq of our athletic low basketball iq players just as he didn't te last time he was here.
Leonsis has the realize that Grunfeld failed to sign lviningston longterm the last time he was here and Leonsis should gambe that Grunfeld will repeat the same mistake he made last time with livingston. Livingston's value is that he has genius Jason Kidd like point guard mind and has the aptitude, intelligence, and leadership to design plays in the film room against opposing defenses nightly. Livingston's instincts, diagnostics, skills and passing ability are almost Jason Kidd like rating 9.5 out of 10. Wall will never come to close to Livingston has far has basketball iq and is more a tony parker clone. Tony parker only became successful because Pop forced kept him on a tight leash and turned him into a system point guard. Parker still isn't a high BBIQ player he just knows POPs system very well and he doesn't have the leadership and play designing skills of Jason Kidd. Liviningston actually has the intangibles of Jason kidd at the point guard position mentally. Wall rates as 4 at best 5 in term of his mental aptitude for play designing and people that will never improve. Having Wall with outstanding physical gifts put poor to average mental play designing ability and pairing him with a genius mentally in livingston who doesn't have the physical attributes of wall is the most important move that Leonsis can make this year in terms of changing the wizards culture for years to come.
Having Liviningston and Wall develop a longterm point guard relationship which is invested in the wizards longterm is the only way to build a strong foundation that will allow the wizards to address on a nightly basis the intellectual demands of adjusting to opposing defenses and adapting offenses.
the wizards have a unique situation that is perfect for wall/livingston. there are less than 3 teams in the league who have dynamic point guard with great personality traits but who only lacks point guard basketball iq. Wall wants to be great but he will never be gifted mentally. Livingston may want to be a starter but he will never be a starter physically because one wrong move and his knee may go out. Both of these players if attached to each other longterm have a multiplier effect. Livingston is probably the highest basketball iq player of his generation and has already demonstrated his last stint hear of dramatically improving player values. The problem last time was that he wanted to be a starter, if Leonsis can use his business skills to commit livingston longterm, he instantly transforms wall into a hall of famer.

It's that simple people. Grunfeld can't be trusted to sign livingston longterm before Livingston's value skyrocketed with the wizards. Leonsis must do all in his power to sign livingston longterm before his value skyrockets. Livingston true value is the leadership and basketball iq he brings to the organization and livingston is the type of player you want retiring as wizard and becoming a coach one day.

Leonsis, you have the power now build a long term winner. Don't follow Grunfeld and let the market price dictate what you pay livingston. Pay him to keep him here as a wizard now becomes the quicker Livingston feels he is longterm piece the wizards, the quicker he grants the organization his genius point guard aptitude and the fans begin to enjoy high iq basketball once again. LEONSIS, its all up to you.
Build your team with five shooters using Paul Pierce Form deeply bent hips and lower back arch at same time. before rising into shot. Elbow not pointing to the ground! } Avdija=young Paul Pierce
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#27 » by Nivek » Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:09 pm

WizarDynasty wrote:The most important job now is the sign livingston to a longterm contract as the backup point guard and allow Livingston to be a foundational player for years to come. if we can get livingston to sign a longterm backup contract it will encourage him to develop walls basketball iq and improve the basketball iq of our athletic low basketball iq players just as he didn't te last time he was here.
Leonsis has the realize that Grunfeld failed to sign lviningston longterm the last time he was here and Leonsis should gambe that Grunfeld will repeat the same mistake he made last time with livingston. Livingston's value is that he has genius Jason Kidd like point guard mind and has the aptitude, intelligence, and leadership to design plays in the film room against opposing defenses nightly. Livingston's instincts, diagnostics, skills and passing ability are almost Jason Kidd like rating 9.5 out of 10. Wall will never come to close to Livingston has far has basketball iq and is more a tony parker clone. Tony parker only became successful because Pop forced kept him on a tight leash and turned him into a system point guard. Parker still isn't a high BBIQ player he just knows POPs system very well and he doesn't have the leadership and play designing skills of Jason Kidd. Liviningston actually has the intangibles of Jason kidd at the point guard position mentally. Wall rates as 4 at best 5 in term of his mental aptitude for play designing and people that will never improve. Having Wall with outstanding physical gifts put poor to average mental play designing ability and pairing him with a genius mentally in livingston who doesn't have the physical attributes of wall is the most important move that Leonsis can make this year in terms of changing the wizards culture for years to come.
Having Liviningston and Wall develop a longterm point guard relationship which is invested in the wizards longterm is the only way to build a strong foundation that will allow the wizards to address on a nightly basis the intellectual demands of adjusting to opposing defenses and adapting offenses.
the wizards have a unique situation that is perfect for wall/livingston. there are less than 3 teams in the league who have dynamic point guard with great personality traits but who only lacks point guard basketball iq. Wall wants to be great but he will never be gifted mentally. Livingston may want to be a starter but he will never be a starter physically because one wrong move and his knee may go out. Both of these players if attached to each other longterm have a multiplier effect. Livingston is probably the highest basketball iq player of his generation and has already demonstrated his last stint hear of dramatically improving player values. The problem last time was that he wanted to be a starter, if Leonsis can use his business skills to commit livingston longterm, he instantly transforms wall into a hall of famer.

It's that simple people. Grunfeld can't be trusted to sign livingston longterm before Livingston's value skyrocketed with the wizards. Leonsis must do all in his power to sign livingston longterm before his value skyrockets. Livingston true value is the leadership and basketball iq he brings to the organization and livingston is the type of player you want retiring as wizard and becoming a coach one day.

Leonsis, you have the power now build a long term winner. Don't follow Grunfeld and let the market price dictate what you pay livingston. Pay him to keep him here as a wizard now becomes the quicker Livingston feels he is longterm piece the wizards, the quicker he grants the organization his genius point guard aptitude and the fans begin to enjoy high iq basketball once again. LEONSIS, its all up to you.


Always good to get some basketball education, Dynasty Style.

I'm glad to learn about Livingston's incredibly high hoops IQ. It's a shame the Wizards burned their cap money on Okafor and Ariza. Hopefully they won't get outbid for his services in the offseason by all the other teams that have missed on this basketball...dare I say it?...GENIUS (yeah, I dare).
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#28 » by Nivek » Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:01 pm

Updated the numbers over at the blog. http://broomonthewarpath.sportsblog.com ... ecord.html

Summary: It's ugly.

Only "rotation" players rating above average are Webster and Okafor -- and Okafor declined. Ariza and Crawford continue their slides. Vesely somehow got even worse (-3 to -16 -- recall that AVERAGE is 100).

In his playing time decisions, Wittman is stuck choosing between bad and worse. He could make "better" choices, but "better" in this context means marginally less bad. This team sucks.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
Zonkerbl
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 8,187
And1: 4,154
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#29 » by Zonkerbl » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:01 pm

Now calculate how good Wall and Nene have to be for this to be a playoff team!

With only two average players on the roster, I imagine it's mathematically impossible.
I've been taught all my life to value service to the weak and powerless.
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#30 » by Nivek » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:08 pm

Still have that on my list, but haven't gotten time to do it. I'll get there. Pinky promise.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,783
And1: 19,069
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#31 » by nate33 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:28 pm

Nivek wrote:Updated the numbers over at the blog. http://broomonthewarpath.sportsblog.com ... ecord.html

Summary: It's ugly.

Only "rotation" players rating above average are Webster and Okafor -- and Okafor declined. Ariza and Crawford continue their slides. Vesely somehow got even worse (-3 to -16 -- recall that AVERAGE is 100).

In his playing time decisions, Wittman is stuck choosing between bad and worse. He could make "better" choices, but "better" in this context means marginally less bad. This team sucks.

I looks to me like one truly obvious move is to play Webster a lot more. There is no reason he shouldn't be starting and playing 34+ minutes a game. The other obvious no-brainer is to park Vesely all the way at the end of the bench. He shouldn't play a minute unless it's garbage time. I also agree with playing Martin some more, but I think it should come at the expense of Beal, not Crawford. As much as I hate Crawford, his ability to bail out the offense is more desperately needed now because we don't appear to have any offensive options other than Nene. It might mean that Beal gets benched for a while but I think he's a bit rattled anyhow. It might help him to watch the game from the sidelines for a little while.

So go like this:

PG Price/Livingston
SG Martin/Crawford
SF Webster/Ariza
PF Nene/Singleton
C Okafor/Seraphin

Our PF play is terrible.
dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 15,576
And1: 3,302
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#32 » by dobrojim » Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:36 pm

I like your lineup and agree with your take on the roster and rotations
but if we actually had Nene to play PF on a regular ongoing basis, that
would in fact be our strongest position I would think.

Webster should be playing a bunch more.
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity

When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression

Those who are convinced of absurdities, can be convinced to commit atrocities
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 18,365
And1: 3,825
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#33 » by tontoz » Wed Nov 28, 2012 7:35 pm

Webster's TS% of 63.9% is actually 3rd in the NBA among 3s. But we know Ariza will keep starting because he is the $7 million dollar man.
"bulky agile perimeter bone crunch pick setting draymond green" WizD
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#34 » by Nivek » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:44 pm

The problem, of course, is that Webster is pretty well established as a below-average player at this point in his career. Maybe he's a late bloomer or something, but odds are that inserting him into the lineup for 34 minutes a night will have him revert right back to previous performance levels. I'm not saying they shouldn't even give it a try, rather I'm just predicting what the outcome will be.

The guard play on this team is a joke. I'd rather keep playing Beal rather than Crawford because Beal still has upside. Crawford doesn't bail out the offense -- he's just more willing to fling the ball at the basket regardless of the result than some of his teammates. That said, I'd be willing to give Beal something of a break.

Odds are that shuffling the lineup to get more burn for Webster and Martin will simply expose their well-established flaws.

Also worth mentioning what I mentioned in another thread...that Ariza is far more likely to start shooting better than to continue shooting as bad as he has this season. He's never shot the bad for a season.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,783
And1: 19,069
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#35 » by nate33 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:03 pm

I think there's a chance that Webster might be a special case. His career has been below average because he started off very young, and then battled injuries right around the time that he matured as a basketball player. We haven't yet seen a Webster who was both mature and injury free until now.

I agree that there is bound to be some regression to the mean. He won't maintain a TS% of 63% forever. But I'm holding out some hope that he might regress far less than his career averages suggest. He might actually be a legit starting-caliber player in this league. His per-minute averages this year are not all that much better than his averages in his last healthy season 3 years ago, except that he is getting to the free throw line a lot more (and passing better). That's an improvement that might be attributable to an improvement in his understanding of the game (and therefore sustainable), rather than just a flukey quirk in shooting percentages.
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#36 » by Nivek » Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:14 pm

You might be right, and I'd be completely open to trying it out. It's not like the results could be worse.
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 9,123
And1: 2,604
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#37 » by pancakes3 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 10:26 pm

Gosh I hope not. Is there a level of losing beneath what we're doing? Superlosing?
Bullets -> Wizards
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 959
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#38 » by Nivek » Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:00 pm

Getting beat by a lot?
"A lot of what we call talent is the desire to practice."
-- Malcolm Gladwell

Check out my blog about the Wizards, movies, writing, music, TV, sports, and whatever else comes to mind.
User avatar
pancakes3
General Manager
Posts: 9,123
And1: 2,604
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#39 » by pancakes3 » Wed Nov 28, 2012 11:15 pm

Sorry, the answer we were looking for is loosing.
Bullets -> Wizards
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 66,783
And1: 19,069
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#40 » by nate33 » Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:03 pm

And from the small sample size department:

In games Nene has played, we have a -0.33 point differential. And it's actually +.66 if you only count regulation minutes. Basically, we are a .500 team when Nene plays.

Return to Washington Wizards