Looking at the numbers . . .

[hands11]

Playoff update...

Projected record for the 8th seed: 42-40.

Wizards would need to go 30-5 in their remaining games to reach that record. Based on what they've been doing since Wall returned, it's looking like they'll finish the season with 30-33 wins total.

I'm in the running at 32 I think.

[nate33]

Two pieces up at the blog (so far) today. One is basically this:



Red = team defensive rating (points allowed per 100 possessions)
Green = team offensive rating (points scored per 100 possessions)
Blue = pace (possessions per 48 minutes)

The light blue line shows league average. The yellow/orange line shows Wall's return game.

The other piece is my weekly stat update, in which I open up by hammering Randy Wittman's lineup ill-logic.

When you say "rolling averages" do you mean the season average to date? Or do you mean the average over the last X number of games?

[jivelikenice]

Are there statistical differences in our style of play on the road? It just seems like we play at a slower pace and try to rely on Néne and Okafor moreso when we're on the road. I was curious if the stats back that up.

One thing I did notice, is that Wall has averaged 2 less fg attempts per game on the road the past two years and Néne averages two more per game on the road (at least this year)....I wonder if its a shift in gameplan or motor.

[Zonkerbl]

So... the defense has gotten about three points better, and the offense has gotten three points better?

Wall's defense has some obvious warts one on one but he seems to have a net positive impact defensively. Maybe his team defense is good? Or is it just that Ariza also got healthy at about the same time?

[Nivek]

nate: It's rolling season average after each game. More volatile earlier in the season; stabilizes as the data accumulates. Good way to look at trends, though.

Zonker: I hesitate to say the Wall is having that kind of defensive impact. The more accurate phrasing is that the team defense has been better since Wall returned. That said, when I wrote about Webster being an important figure in the team's turnaround, I had in my notes that the team had a drtg of 97.1 when Wall was on the floor and 103.5 when he sat. Last game, I paid more attention to Wall's defense and I saw a lot of good things -- chasing guys through screens, following their force rules, chopping down on the ball when it went into the paint. The one thing he did poorly was something that got a lot of attention on Twitter during the game: closing out on shooters. Still, I saw enough to make me think that Wall is doing some good things defensively.

jive: Like most teams, the Wizards are much better at home than they are on the road. Here's a table showing the differences --

Code: Select all

STAT    HOME    AWAY
ortg    102.5   93.3
drtg    101.7   102.3
pace    91.8    92.3
efg     .480    .455
defg    .479    .477
orb%    .244    .234
drb%    .744    .737
tov%    .148    .170
dtov%   .156    .145
ftr     .202    .148
dftr    .207    .192


ftr = free throw rate -- FTM/FGA

Pace doesn't change much -- half a possession per 48 minutes is pretty meaningless. What changes is the quality of their play on the offensive end. They shoot worse, commit more turnovers, make fewer trips to the FT line.

[jivelikenice]

^Its evident they're worse, but it just seems like stylistically (don't know if that's the word I'm looking for) they play different. Nene's shots go up, John's go down. The result is he's attacking less and without him applying consistent pressure to an opposing defense, we become that much easier to defend. Then he tries to turn it up after being inactive and forces the issue which leads to turnover. Its like a broken record on the road. I don't know if its on him or the coaches (does Randy want to play closer tothe vest on the road)....Most likely a combination of both....

Seems like Wizards guards have always had issues with taking their success on the road. At one point I believe Gilbert had the biggest vairance between ppg at home versus ppg on the road in the league..

[tontoz]

Looking at Okafor's numbers his rebounding is obviously good, turnovers down, and his defense has been strong.

But he just can't shoot. He is shooting a dismal 54% from the ft line. He shoots 35% on jumpers outside 10 feet which are almost always open shots. His TS% is only 50%, worst since '06. He is taking far more long 2s now than in the past, surely because of our lack of offensive options.

He would be a perfect fit next to a stretch 4 on a good offensive team.

[Nivek]

My latest at the blog looking at Beal's improvement, who's better (and not) when on the floor with Wall, and...umm...some other stuff too, I think.

Beal's PPA since January 1 -- 134. For the season, it's up to 97. Average is 100.

[Ruzious]

My latest at the blog looking at Beal's improvement, who's better (and not) when on the floor with Wall, and...umm...some other stuff too, I think.

Beal's PPA since January 1 -- 134. For the season, it's up to 97. Average is 100.

I'll have whatever Beal's had since Jan 1.

[Nivek]

Latest over at the blog.

Summary: The offense has slipped in March, primarily because Beal has been out. Wall is not the difference-maker on offense. Difference makers are Beal and Webster.

Nene's production is WAY down, and it's worth asking how much that foot and shoulder are bothering him. I pinged Mike Lee on Twitter. Don't know if I'll get an answer. He was putting up All-Star level numbers in Denver (at least according to PPA), and he's sliding back toward average for this season.

It continues to worry me that the team's youngsters are so unproductive.

[tontoz]

Nene has been pretty lame for awhile but since this is now a tank season it doesn't bother me much. His contract is definitely looking more onerous though.

The only youngsters that i worry about are Wall and Seraphin. I have already written off the rest of them.

[JAR69]

Latest over at the blog.

You wrote that Wall and Beal are the only players who could remotely fit into the team's long-term plans. Why not Webster? He is only 26, coming off his best season, finally healthy. He is by no means an all-star, but is the kind of solid role player that allows a team to not worry about a position.

[Nivek]

Latest over at the blog.

You wrote that Wall and Beal are the only players who could remotely fit into the team's long-term plans. Why not Webster? He is only 26, coming off his best season, finally healthy. He is by no means an all-star, but is the kind of solid role player that allows a team to not worry about a position.

You said it yourself right at the end: solid role player. I wouldn't mind keeping Webster around at the right price, but he's not a building block. The Wizards STILL need to go about step 1 of a rebuild, which is acquiring top-shelf NBA talent. Beal looks like he's on his way to that level. Wall could get there, but looks more like he won't. Nene used to be there, but at age 30 probably won't get back to that level. Webster doesn't look like he'll get there -- players usually peak around his age and then maintain to about 30.

Webster is worth keeping around -- at the right price. But you don't win by building around role players.

[JAR69]

You wrote that Wall and Beal are the only players who could remotely fit into the team's long-term plans. Why not Webster? He is only 26, coming off his best season, finally healthy. He is by no means an all-star, but is the kind of solid role player that allows a team to not worry about a position.

You said it yourself right at the end: solid role player. I wouldn't mind keeping Webster around at the right price, but he's not a building block. The Wizards STILL need to go about step 1 of a rebuild, which is acquiring top-shelf NBA talent. Beal looks like he's on his way to that level. Wall could get there, but looks more like he won't. Nene used to be there, but at age 30 probably won't get back to that level. Webster doesn't look like he'll get there -- players usually peak around his age and then maintain to about 30.

Webster is worth keeping around -- at the right price. But you don't win by building around role players.[/quote]

OK - it's a matter of semantics. Agreed, you don't win by building around role players, but you still need them. Webster isn't a building block, but the kind of solid role player that you need to win. The Wizards should keep him, at the right price. And that may be a little higher (but only a little) than they should otherwise pay for a role player providing his level of production, because while solid role players are easier to find than top-shelf stars, the Wizards don't even have a track record of getting those.

[Nivek]

Yeah, JAR -- I can understand your reasoning. I don't view Webster as a "must keep" player. Only guy in that category (for me) is Beal. But, I'd be willing to give Webster a deal similar to what Danny Green got.

[JAR69]

Yeah, JAR -- I can understand your reasoning. I don't view Webster as a "must keep" player. Only guy in that category (for me) is Beal. But, I'd be willing to give Webster a deal similar to what Danny Green got.

That would be nice, but I think (and fear) his price is going to be a bit higher.

[Zonkerbl]

If you're building a championship, you need solid starters that fit into the team concept and don't cost too much. Webster fits those rather nicely. However, I don't think the lineup of Wall/Beal/Webster/Nene/Okafor can win a championship. Need one more piece.

[nate33]

Yeah, JAR -- I can understand your reasoning. I don't view Webster as a "must keep" player. Only guy in that category (for me) is Beal. But, I'd be willing to give Webster a deal similar to what Danny Green got.

That would be nice, but I think (and fear) his price is going to be a bit higher.

Here's a comparison of Webster this year versus Brandon Rush and Danny Green of last year. I picked them because both were sharpshooting 3&D guard/forwards last year who got new contracts last summer.

The numbers are surprisingly similar. The scoring rate and 3-point shooting is practically identical. Rush and Green rebound a bit better, Webster has a slightly higher assist percentage. Rush and Green posted a higher PER than Webster, mostly thanks to better numbers in steals and blocks. Green was definitely notable for being a good defender, I don't recall if Rush was considered to be anything better than an average defender.

Overall, I'd say Rush and Green had better seasons than Webster. Webster may get bonus points for being an inch taller though. Rush was given a 2-year contract worth $4M a year. Green was given a 3-year contract worth $3.75M a year. That's a lot less than what those guys probably would have gotten 2 summers ago under the old CBA. Hopefully, it's an indication of what the market will be like for these types of players going forward.

I'd happily pay Webster a salary in that range. I'd go up to $4.5M a year without concern.

[JAR69]

Here's a comparison of Webster this year versus Brandon Rush and Danny Green of last year. I picked them because both were sharpshooting 3&D guard/forwards last year who got new contracts last summer.

The numbers are surprisingly similar. The scoring rate and 3-point shooting is practically identical. Rush and Green rebound a bit better, Webster has a slightly higher assist percentage. Rush and Green posted a higher PER than Webster, mostly thanks to better numbers in steals and blocks. Green was definitely notable for being a good defender, I don't recall if Rush was considered to be anything better than an average defender.

Overall, I'd say Rush and Green had better seasons than Webster. Webster may get bonus points for being an inch taller though. Rush was given a 2-year contract worth $4M a year. Green was given a 3-year contract worth $3.75M a year. That's a lot less than what those guys probably would have gotten 2 summers ago under the old CBA. Hopefully, it's an indication of what the market will be like for these types of players going forward.

I'd happily pay Webster a salary in that range. I'd go up to $4.5M a year without concern.

Pretty similar, but the difference is Webster plays a more important role on the Wizards than Rush or Green do with their teams. Outside of Beal, there isn't anyone else on the Wizards who can shoot the 3 consistently (Ariza's had a nice run, but I'm not counting on that long term, even if he is on team). That's in part why I think he has more value to the Wizards than many other teams. $4.5 million is about my "no concern" limit, too.

[nate33]

Here's a comparison of Webster this year versus Brandon Rush and Danny Green of last year. I picked them because both were sharpshooting 3&D guard/forwards last year who got new contracts last summer.

The numbers are surprisingly similar. The scoring rate and 3-point shooting is practically identical. Rush and Green rebound a bit better, Webster has a slightly higher assist percentage. Rush and Green posted a higher PER than Webster, mostly thanks to better numbers in steals and blocks. Green was definitely notable for being a good defender, I don't recall if Rush was considered to be anything better than an average defender.

Overall, I'd say Rush and Green had better seasons than Webster. Webster may get bonus points for being an inch taller though. Rush was given a 2-year contract worth $4M a year. Green was given a 3-year contract worth $3.75M a year. That's a lot less than what those guys probably would have gotten 2 summers ago under the old CBA. Hopefully, it's an indication of what the market will be like for these types of players going forward.

I'd happily pay Webster a salary in that range. I'd go up to $4.5M a year without concern.

Pretty similar, but the difference is Webster plays a more important role on the Wizards than Rush or Green do with their teams. Outside of Beal, there isn't anyone else on the Wizards who can shoot the 3 consistently (Ariza's had a nice run, but I'm not counting on that long term, even if he is on team). That's in part why I think he has more value to the Wizards than many other teams. $4.5 million is about my "no concern" limit, too.

I agree that he is pretty valuable for the Wizards. I'm just trying to estimate what the market demand will be for him. Hopefully, the Wizards can bring this type of analysis to Webster's agent and say: "See, this is what he is worth. How does 3-years, $12M sound? That's longer than Rush's deal and higher than Green's."