ImageImageImageImageImage

Looking at the numbers . . .

Moderators: WizStorm, miller31time, LyricalRico, pineappleheadindc, nate33

dobrojim
RealGM
Posts: 12,029
And1: 365
Joined: Sep 16, 2004

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#91 » by dobrojim » Wed Dec 5, 2012 6:44 pm

I don't know how important this is but I will simply note that early
on as a Frosh last year Beal also struggled. Then he got better.
Which is the bigger jump, HS -> NCAA div 1 or NCAA div 1 -> NBA.
I think the latter.

Do I have concerns that his shooting has not been good? Sure.
Let's see how he shoots after the all star break.
A lot of what we call 'thought' is just mental activity
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 41,679
And1: 2,259
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#92 » by nate33 » Wed Dec 5, 2012 7:13 pm


Interesting. I never would have guessed that he compares so unfavorably in rebounds.
User avatar
nate33
Forum Mod - Wizards
Forum Mod - Wizards
Posts: 41,679
And1: 2,259
Joined: Oct 28, 2002

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#93 » by nate33 » Wed Dec 5, 2012 7:23 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:DeShawn played in the finals and has a ring. Caron played in the playoffs with the Clippers and is still starting. He DeShawn and Brendan are NBA Champions, even if they were along for the ride. All are useful players who could help this Wizards team. Jamison played worse in Cleveland and was so bad he's with the Lakers. Miller was worse with the Heat due to injuries, until he hit six threes in a deciding NBA Championship game. He is better off. Young played worse with the Clippers and might not be any better at all with Philly but still has the support of Doug Collins. McGee was a guy I predicted was going to be playing in the playoffs when Denver appeared to be mailing in their season. He has more playoff appearances than Okafor, already.

CCJ, it drives me crazy when you do this. You cherrypick anecdotal evidence to back up your assertions, when any unbiased observation using real stats say just the opposite. Just because Miller hit 6 threes in one game does not mean he was a better player after he left. Just because Jamison has found himself on the Lakers, does not mean he played better. Just because DeShawn got a ring while playing 16 minutes a game doesn't mean he played better after leaving.

It's obviously true that these players left a bad team and joined a contending team and therefore probably enjoyed their new position better. But the whole reason this argument started was because you implied that the Wizards are somehow fundamentally deficient in getting the best out of their players. That's simply not the case. Their deficiency is in acquiring good players in the first place. The ones that they get play within their career norms when they're here.
User avatar
tontoz
RealGM
Posts: 14,261
And1: 900
Joined: Apr 11, 2005

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#94 » by tontoz » Wed Dec 5, 2012 9:02 pm

The Wizards are currently 15th in defensive efficiency and 12th in defensive rebounding rate. The latter number comes as a bit of a shock.
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#95 » by Nivek » Wed Dec 5, 2012 9:32 pm

Wiz are not awful on defense although I think they'll miss Ariza on that end. They might welcome his absence on the offensive end, however.
"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
Chocolate City Jordanaire
RealGM
Posts: 35,595
And1: 1,428
Joined: Aug 05, 2001
Location: Ft. Washington, MD/Mililani, HI

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#96 » by Chocolate City Jordanaire » Wed Dec 5, 2012 10:26 pm

nate33 wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:DeShawn played in the finals and has a ring. Caron played in the playoffs with the Clippers and is still starting. He DeShawn and Brendan are NBA Champions, even if they were along for the ride. All are useful players who could help this Wizards team. Jamison played worse in Cleveland and was so bad he's with the Lakers. Miller was worse with the Heat due to injuries, until he hit six threes in a deciding NBA Championship game. He is better off. Young played worse with the Clippers and might not be any better at all with Philly but still has the support of Doug Collins. McGee was a guy I predicted was going to be playing in the playoffs when Denver appeared to be mailing in their season. He has more playoff appearances than Okafor, already.

CCJ, it drives me crazy when you do this. You cherrypick anecdotal evidence to back up your assertions, when any unbiased observation using real stats say just the opposite. Just because Miller hit 6 threes in one game does not mean he was a better player after he left. Just because Jamison has found himself on the Lakers, does not mean he played better. Just because DeShawn got a ring while playing 16 minutes a game doesn't mean he played better after leaving.

It's obviously true that these players left a bad team and joined a contending team and therefore probably enjoyed their new position better. But the whole reason this argument started was because you implied that the Wizards are somehow fundamentally deficient in getting the best out of their players. That's simply not the case. Their deficiency is in acquiring good players in the first place. The ones that they get play within their career norms when they're here.


McGee is playing his best right now. Blatche is playing his best right now. The Wizards could have gotten this Blatche with Seraphin and Nene, without signing Okafor. They did not get the best out of McGee or Blatche.

I would be the last to argue they don't get the best talent. I suggest year after year the talented players they do not draft.

nate, I don't even remember what the initial point was but the stats I posted show none of the players that played key roles for teams better than the Wizards dropped off in production. I read posts that imply they basically fizzled out and failed elsewhere. My point is they virtually always have better careers post-Wizards. Guys the Wizard cannot wait to get rid of are useful elsewhere.

What I believe is they are the same players in a better situation.

I think the Wizards organization lost a lot more games due to poor rosters, poor management decisions, injuries, and at times lousy coaching. None of that really matters to me, however.

Right now I am interested in this team, this season. I think Wittman is a good coach and that some things are bound to get better soon.
Kelly Oubre has definitely gotten my attention. I truly wanted Portis and I like Looney a bunch, too.
mhd
Head Coach
Posts: 7,395
And1: 302
Joined: Mar 25, 2004

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#97 » by mhd » Wed Dec 5, 2012 10:28 pm

Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:
nate33 wrote:
Chocolate City Jordanaire wrote:DeShawn played in the finals and has a ring. Caron played in the playoffs with the Clippers and is still starting. He DeShawn and Brendan are NBA Champions, even if they were along for the ride. All are useful players who could help this Wizards team. Jamison played worse in Cleveland and was so bad he's with the Lakers. Miller was worse with the Heat due to injuries, until he hit six threes in a deciding NBA Championship game. He is better off. Young played worse with the Clippers and might not be any better at all with Philly but still has the support of Doug Collins. McGee was a guy I predicted was going to be playing in the playoffs when Denver appeared to be mailing in their season. He has more playoff appearances than Okafor, already.

CCJ, it drives me crazy when you do this. You cherrypick anecdotal evidence to back up your assertions, when any unbiased observation using real stats say just the opposite. Just because Miller hit 6 threes in one game does not mean he was a better player after he left. Just because Jamison has found himself on the Lakers, does not mean he played better. Just because DeShawn got a ring while playing 16 minutes a game doesn't mean he played better after leaving.

It's obviously true that these players left a bad team and joined a contending team and therefore probably enjoyed their new position better. But the whole reason this argument started was because you implied that the Wizards are somehow fundamentally deficient in getting the best out of their players. That's simply not the case. Their deficiency is in acquiring good players in the first place. The ones that they get play within their career norms when they're here.


McGee is playing his best right now. Blatche is playing his best right now. The Wizards could have gotten this Blatche with Seraphin and Nene, without signing Okafor. They did not get the best out of McGee or Blatche.

I would be the last to argue they don't get the best talent. I suggest year after year the talented players they do not draft.

nate, I don't even remember what the initial point was but the stats I posted show none of the players that played key roles for teams better than the Wizards dropped off in production. I read posts that imply they basically fizzled out and failed elsewhere. My point is they virtually always have better careers post-Wizards. Guys the Wizard cannot wait to get rid of are useful elsewhere.

What I believe is they are the same players in a better situation.

I think the Wizards organization lost a lot more games due to poor rosters, poor management decisions, injuries, and at times lousy coaching. None of that really matters to me, however.

Right now I am interested in this team, this season. I think Wittman is a good coach and that some things are bound to get better soon.



CCJ, Blatche has been out of shape for 2 years. It took him being amnestied before he got in shape.
User avatar
dandridge 10
Starter
Posts: 2,344
And1: 322
Joined: Feb 16, 2005

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#98 » by dandridge 10 » Wed Dec 5, 2012 10:29 pm



Thank you for this. I will still have concerns until Beal starts knocking down open jumpers, but this makes me feel better. :D
hands11
Banned User
Posts: 31,171
And1: 2,441
Joined: May 16, 2005

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#99 » by hands11 » Thu Dec 6, 2012 12:25 am

CCJ. My man. Brother. Let it go. Really. Just let it go.

How about focusing on ... by the number, how do you line the Wizards up best you can. None of those players are here anymore. Turn the page.
Zonkerbl
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 4,034
And1: 360
Joined: Mar 24, 2010
       

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#100 » by Zonkerbl » Thu Dec 6, 2012 2:59 pm

Wow, Jordan Crawford with a 74. He looks like he's doing really well and then you look at his actual production and...
Comparing Rose to Wall is like asking which is a more impressive cat: A cheetah or a wolf? Dude, Wall ain’t no damn cat!
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#101 » by Nivek » Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:12 pm

This week's numbers are up at the blog, PLUS information from my ongoing investigation into The Curse of Les Boulez (adapted from my post in the curse thread CCJ started).

Improvers this week: Cartier Martin, Jordan Crawford (to ABOVE AVERAGE), Bradley Beal and Seraphin. Seraphin's improvement still leaves him below replacement level. I'd love to see Crawford at least maintain what he's been able to do thus far. He's ALMOST at league average offensive efficiency. He needs to improve defensively, but he's making progress.

On the other side: Nene and Webster. Webster got into the starting lineup and did next to nothing.

Hoping to get a look at Crawford's historical comps sometime this 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
GhostsOfGil
General Manager
Posts: 8,500
And1: 895
Joined: Jul 06, 2006

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#102 » by GhostsOfGil » Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:41 pm

Nivek wrote:This week's numbers are up at the blog, PLUS information from my ongoing investigation into The Curse of Les Boulez (adapted from my post in the curse thread CCJ started).

Improvers this week: Cartier Martin, Jordan Crawford (to ABOVE AVERAGE), Bradley Beal and Seraphin. Seraphin's improvement still leaves him below replacement level. I'd love to see Crawford at least maintain what he's been able to do thus far. He's ALMOST at league average offensive efficiency. He needs to improve defensively, but he's making progress.

On the other side: Nene and Webster. Webster got into the starting lineup and did next to nothing.

Hoping to get a look at Crawford's historical comps sometime this week.


Kev, can you explain how Emeka Okafor is rated so highly in your system?
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#103 » by Nivek » Mon Dec 10, 2012 7:48 pm

GhostsOfGil wrote:
Nivek wrote:This week's numbers are up at the blog, PLUS information from my ongoing investigation into The Curse of Les Boulez (adapted from my post in the curse thread CCJ started).

Improvers this week: Cartier Martin, Jordan Crawford (to ABOVE AVERAGE), Bradley Beal and Seraphin. Seraphin's improvement still leaves him below replacement level. I'd love to see Crawford at least maintain what he's been able to do thus far. He's ALMOST at league average offensive efficiency. He needs to improve defensively, but he's making progress.

On the other side: Nene and Webster. Webster got into the starting lineup and did next to nothing.

Hoping to get a look at Crawford's historical comps sometime this week.


Kev, can you explain how Emeka Okafor is rated so highly in your system?


No.











j/k

Okafor doesn't offer much on offense, but his usage is lower than average and his efficiency is at a point where he's still adding some value offensively. Where he gets most of his rating is from 3 categories where he's average or above average this season: rebounding (especially offensive rebounding), steals and blocks.
"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
Head Coach
Posts: 7,050
And1: 205
Joined: Jul 27, 2003
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#104 » by pancakes3 » Mon Dec 10, 2012 8:53 pm

I think it's funny how bad OkaRiza have fared on the wizards it really does look like a curse. Okafor hasn't shot sub-50% since 2006. Playing with CP3 did help but CP3 wasn't with him in Charlotte for 3 of those seasons. Ariza was never good. Always flirting with .400 shooting (except for the salad days in LA) but this season he dropped 5 full percentage points down to 35% shooting.

It's almost like players who have had experience on good teams come here and they're dumbfounded at the way ball is being played here. Then when players who were here are liberated they're shocked to see how good competent teams have it.
Bullets -> Wizards
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#105 » by Nivek » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:12 pm

Updated my power rankings. Wizards still rank 30th.
"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
GhostsOfGil
General Manager
Posts: 8,500
And1: 895
Joined: Jul 06, 2006

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#106 » by GhostsOfGil » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:21 pm

Nivek wrote:[url=http://broomonthewarpath.sportsblog.com/post/63/2012_13_nba_power_rankings.htmlUpdated my power rankings.[/url] Wizards still rank 30th.

I read your post and thought; No way Tyson can sustain that level of shooting efficiency... then found that he shot nearly 70% last year well. :o
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#107 » by Nivek » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:33 pm

Remember when Oklahoma City rejected a trade for Chandler because of his toe?
"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: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#108 » by Nivek » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:41 pm

Chandler appears to be a guy who has figured out what he does well in the NBA and has made himself content doing that and nothing else. So far this season, he has attempted exactly 10 shots from outside of 3 feet. Just 3 shots from beyond 15 feet. He shoots when he's around the rim and that's about it. And, he makes those shots. 72.8% or better in each of the past 3 seasons. Better than 63% every year since 2009. He's over 72% on at-rim attempts in 5 of the 7 years in which we have that data available.

A lot of players could be more effective if they'd focus on doing what they're good at doing instead of trying to be The Man. Paradoxically, Chandler is becoming The Man by limiting his game to what he does well.
"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
GhostsOfGil
General Manager
Posts: 8,500
And1: 895
Joined: Jul 06, 2006

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#109 » by GhostsOfGil » Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:41 pm

Nivek wrote:Remember when Oklahoma City rejected a trade for Chandler because of his toe?


Luckily for OKC, Chris Wilcox and Joe Smith turned out to be very valuable assets. :lol:
User avatar
Nivek
Head Coach
Posts: 7,406
And1: 956
Joined: Sep 29, 2010
Contact:
         

Re: Looking at the numbers . . . 

Post#110 » by Nivek » Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:50 pm

Don't remember which thread it was in, but the question was about whether bigs actually do develop slower than guards. I pinged the guys at APBRmetrics and got a couple responses. Best one was from Crow, who did a "brief, small, rough and simple inquiry."

His findings that at least among players in the 2007-08 rookie class, shorter players were slower to develop (using Win Shares per 48 minutes as the productivity measure).

This is a pretty limited look, and results might not be typical. Still pretty interesting, though.
"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.

Return to Washington Wizards