RealGM

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:19 pm**

Vesely will be more productive if he's playing with guys who can basically do everything for him on the offensive end. But, he won't be a better PLAYER. As nate says, he'd need to be an all-world defender to make up for his skill deficiency on offense.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:34 pm**

http://www.basketball-reference.com/box ... 40WAS.html

Code: Select all

                                                                                  
                  Basic Stats                                                              
Starters            FG FGA  FG% 3P 3PA   3P% FT FTA   FT% TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
Bradley Beal         7  10 .700  1   1 1.000  2   2 1.000   2   2   1   0   2  2  17
A.J. Price           5   9 .556  3   5  .600  5   6  .833   1   6   2   0   1  1  18
Emeka Okafor         8  13 .615  0   0        3   4  .750  11   2   0   1   1  1  19
Martell Webster      2   3 .667  1   2  .500  3   3 1.000   2   3   2   0   2  4   8
Nene Hilario         1   4 .250  0   0        0   0         3   0   0   0   0  1   2

Reserves            FG FGA  FG% 3P 3PA   3P% FT FTA   FT% TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS
Kevin Seraphin       8  15 .533  0   0        2   2 1.000   5   4   0   3   2  5  18
Trevor Ariza         4   7 .571  1   2  .500  0   0         5   2   1   2   1  0   9
Jan Vesely           5   7 .714  0   0        0   2  .000   7   4   1   0   0  5  10
John Wall            3   8 .375  0   0        6   6 1.000   1   6   1   0   2  0  12
Garrett Temple       3   5 .600  1   1 1.000  0   0         4   3   0   0   0  2   7
Chris Singleton      0   1 .000  0   0        0   0         1   0   0   0   0  0   0
Team Totals         46  82 .561  7  11  .636 21  25  .840  42  32   8   6  11 21 120

Code: Select all

   
                   Advanced Stats 
                                
Starters             MP  TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV%  USG%  ORtg DRtg
Bradley Beal      29:42 .781 .750  4.5  3.7  4.0  9.3  1.7  0.0 15.5  20.0   132  103
A.J. Price        28:11 .773 .722  4.7  0.0  2.1 27.3  3.6  0.0  7.9  20.7   155  100
Emeka Okafor      27:25 .644 .615  9.7 35.8 24.1 10.9  0.0  2.5  6.3  26.5   129   94
Martell Webster   19:02 .926 .833  0.0 11.5  6.3 18.5  5.4  0.0 31.6  15.3   132   92
Nene Hilario      15:46 .250 .250  0.0 20.8 11.4  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  11.7    55  101

Reserves             MP  TS% eFG% ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV%  USG%  ORtg DRtg
Kevin Seraphin    28:13 .567 .533  4.7 15.5 10.6 21.0  0.0  7.4 11.2  29.2   112   97
Trevor Ariza      24:38 .643 .643  0.0 22.1 12.2 10.2  2.1  5.6 12.5  15.0   115   92
Jan Vesely        24:36 .635 .714 10.8 22.2 17.1 21.5  2.1  0.0  0.0  14.8   146   96
John Wall         19:49 .564 .375  6.7  0.0  3.0 37.5  2.6  0.0 15.8  29.4   122  102
Garrett Temple    18:18 .700 .700  0.0 23.8 13.1 20.6  0.0  0.0  0.0  12.6   153  100
Chris Singleton    4:20 .000 .000 30.8  0.0 13.8  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  10.7    79  108
Team Totals         240 .645 .604 25.0 75.0 52.5 69.6  8.6  8.5 10.6 100.0 128.3 97.3

This team performance by the Wizards against the Magic was very balanced and efficient both offensively and defensively. If you follow football and note perfect passer rating for a QB, this should grade out similarly perfect for a coach IMO.

Randy Wittman managed to use 10 players between 16 and 30 minutes. (Yeah, I think he is a pretty good coach). Nine of the 10 who played had at least 2 assists. Seraphin and Vesely each had 4 assists and both also scored in double figures. For the team: thirty-two assists and only 11 turnovers. Lockdown defense from Ariza, Webster, Okafor, and even Seraphin. Efficient offense performances were from Price, Vesely, Temple, Beal, Okafor and others. That type offense for this team is even more impressive. For a team that averages 89 points to score 120, a lot of things went well.

This is the type of team effort and good play that will get the best out of Vesely and Seraphin. Balanced scoring and the facilitating of Wall, with a lot of unselfishness and terrific defense. Wall's assist percentage is something no one else on this roster can attain. When there is no pressure on Vesely his game flows. Anytime Kevin doesn't have defenses keying on him, and when he is passing to others who score, that's great for his development.

Orlando is in free fall and so is Atlanta. I am curious about how the Wizards will fare the next few games on the west coast. They look good right now!

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:45 pm**

Nivek wrote:Vesely will be more productive if he's playing with guys who can basically do everything for him on the offensive end. But, he won't be a better PLAYER. As nate says, he'd need to be an all-world defender to make up for his skill deficiency on offense.

I don't know if this is semantics, but I'll say it 1 last time and leave the conversation. If he's a more effective player playing with players of different skills, then he is a better player when he's playing with those players. This is true of every role player including all-time greats like Landry Fields and Steve Kerr. It seems - to me - that saying that's not a correct statement is pointless and a waste of energy, but to each his own. End of message.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:10 pm**

Ruzious wrote:
Nivek wrote:Vesely will be more productive if he's playing with guys who can basically do everything for him on the offensive end. But, he won't be a better PLAYER. As nate says, he'd need to be an all-world defender to make up for his skill deficiency on offense.

I don't know if this is semantics, but I'll say it 1 last time and leave the conversation. If he's a more effective player playing with players of different skills, then he is a better player when he's playing with those players. This is true of every role player including all-time greats like Landry Fields and Steve Kerr. It seems - to me - that saying that's not a correct statement is pointless and a waste of energy, but to each his own. End of message.

Ruzious, I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you. Certainly, I'm not. We are just saying that the fact that Vesely plays better with Wall doesn't mean squat. Nearly any player would play better with Wall. The relevant question is: is Vesely, when playing alongside Wall, a better player than Someone Else playing alongside Wall. I think the answer is generally, no. Therefore, Vesely isn't a keeper. (Not that you are arguing that Vesely is a keeper.)

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:53 pm**

A case can be made that a playmaker like Wall would have a bigger positive impact on Ves than on another player. However i dont think Magic Johnson would make Ves a keeper.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:09 pm**

Seems like you're asking the opposite question. Does Vesely have high value skills that other players don't have but are only apparent when playing with certain players? Vesely is a smart player whose (admittedly non-traditional) skills are maximized when playing with other smart players. Put him on a court full of morons and he disappears.

Not that I'm saying he's worth the #6 pick, I just feel you're being a little unfair to Ves. No he can't shoot or dribble. Yes he's still too undersized to defend the post one on one.

He has better than average passing skills that he hasn't been able to show because he has no one to pass to (and keeps getting in foul trouble). He has good rebounding skills but only when paired against another frontcourt player with muscle, so he can hustle after the garbage. In my mind he has much better than average team defense skills. And he fills the lane better than average on transition, which is more valuable on a team that runs a lot, and this team hardly ran at all before Wall came back. Ves' productivity is particularly sensitive to the teammates he has around him (and their playing style), I would say unusually so, more than other players with more traditional skills. But those skills are there. I see them. Again, not pick #6 level skills, but he's not a total schmuck either.

It is a team sport.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:24 pm**

nate33 wrote:
Ruzious wrote:
Nivek wrote:Vesely will be more productive if he's playing with guys who can basically do everything for him on the offensive end. But, he won't be a better PLAYER. As nate says, he'd need to be an all-world defender to make up for his skill deficiency on offense.

I don't know if this is semantics, but I'll say it 1 last time and leave the conversation. If he's a more effective player playing with players of different skills, then he is a better player when he's playing with those players. This is true of every role player including all-time greats like Landry Fields and Steve Kerr. It seems - to me - that saying that's not a correct statement is pointless and a waste of energy, but to each his own. End of message.

Ruzious, I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you. Certainly, I'm not. We are just saying that the fact that Vesely plays better with Wall doesn't mean squat. Nearly any player would play better with Wall. The relevant question is: is Vesely, when playing alongside Wall, a better player than Someone Else playing alongside Wall. I think the answer is generally, no. Therefore, Vesely isn't a keeper. (Not that you are arguing that Vesely is a keeper.)

My apologies. That's not what I was getting at. My point was about how players are defined by some folks - and goes back to an old discussion where some insisted that a player is what he is - no matter what team he's on. In other words, when evaluating a player, it's irrelevant what team a player is on and who his teammates and coaches are. My point was - whether a player is good or not depends on their effectiveness with their teammates and coaches - and that effectiveness changes if you change the teammates and coaches. A "good player" is not good no matter what team he's on. Anyway, just trying to clarify - not trying to get into a discussion.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:30 pm**

Absolutely agree, Ruz. And that is where statistics fail, as I have said all along. Stats show what happened in the past given a certain set of circumstances, not what could happen if those circumstances change.

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:36 pm**

I would agree with that too.

And I'll go one step further and say that Vesely really seems like a guy who gets boosted by good PG play to a greater degree than an average player. If you compare Vesely to an average PF on a team without good PG play, Vesely looks spectacularly bad. If you compare Vesely to an average PF on a team with good PG play and smart teammates, Vesely might even look like he is comparable to that average PF. The average PF would surely be better at post defense and hitting an 18-foot jumper, but Vesely does some things (like set screens, roll hard to the basket, run the floor, keep the ball moving, scrap for loose balls) better than an average PF.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:59 am**

barelyawake wrote:Absolutely agree, Ruz. And that is where statistics fail, as I have said all along. Stats show what happened in the past given a certain set of circumstances, not what could happen if those circumstances change.

+1

If you look at statistics only, Doc Rivers was fired as Orlando head coach when his record was 1-10. The next season he was hired by Boston. His coaching record his first three seasons in Boston: 45-37, 33-49, and 24-58.

The following season his Cs went 66-16 and won the NBA Championship!

http://www.basketball-reference.com/coa ... do01c.html

Players don't get better but role players certainly gravy train on success when they have stars around them. Rondo and Perkins were on that 24-58 Celtics. So were Delonte West, Tony Allen, Leon Powe, and Al Jefferson. Those guys THEN were on a .293 team (very similar to this Wizards team in win potential NOW). They were young and inexperienced. Every one of the players enjoyed future success with the Celtics or other playoff teams.

Vesely and Seraphin can be good role players under different circumstances. (I would love to see both with Cousins next season on this Wizards team.) We can learn from history if we study closely. Vesely and Seraphin are not throwaway players. They can enjoy future success no matter how their statistics look right now.

Likewise, I say with assurance that Coach Randy Wittman is not much different than his NBA teammate Doc Rivers. Give Wittman talented players and he's going to win games, too.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 3:15 am**

nate33 wrote:
Ruzious wrote:
Nivek wrote:Vesely will be more productive if he's playing with guys who can basically do everything for him on the offensive end. But, he won't be a better PLAYER. As nate says, he'd need to be an all-world defender to make up for his skill deficiency on offense.

I don't know if this is semantics, but I'll say it 1 last time and leave the conversation. If he's a more effective player playing with players of different skills, then he is a better player when he's playing with those players. This is true of every role player including all-time greats like Landry Fields and Steve Kerr. It seems - to me - that saying that's not a correct statement is pointless and a waste of energy, but to each his own. End of message.

Ruzious, I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you. Certainly, I'm not. We are just saying that the fact that Vesely plays better with Wall doesn't mean squat. Nearly any player would play better with Wall. The relevant question is: is Vesely, when playing alongside Wall, a better player than Someone Else playing alongside Wall. I think the answer is generally, no. Therefore, Vesely isn't a keeper. (Not that you are arguing that Vesely is a keeper.)

There is no proof of that.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 3:43 am**

nate33 wrote:...Nearly any player would play better with Wall.

Whoa there... last year, with John Wall averaging 35+ minutes a game, we started the season 14-46. Didn't we? Do I have that right? So... exactly what would make you elevate him in this (to me nonsensical) way?

I keep trying to figure out where claims like this come from.

Wins and losses -- that's the sole measure of a team. Nothing else matters -- or at least it doesn't matter until you get lots of wins and few losses. Wins and losses are determined by numbers. Nothing else.

Contributing to team wins and losses by what you do on the court -- that's the sole measure of an individual player. Nothing else matters. That contribution is measured by numbers. Nothing else. After all, to get the team numbers, the ones that fully determine whether you win or lose, all you have to do is add up the individuals' numbers.

Overall, John Wall's numbers are those of an average nba point guard. Some of them are very good; others are very bad. Really bad. Overall... meh. I hope John Wall turns out to be an outstanding player. To date, he hasn't shown that he can produce consistently at a high level.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 3:48 am**

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTEhFtFhKaQ[/youtube]

Jan is once again playing like an Energizer Bunny. Setting screens, moving off the ball, going back door for lob dunks, cleaning up the glass, scoring garbage points.

What I notice especially is Jan's good rapport with Kevin Seraphin. Kevin bounce passed to Jan and Jan returned the favor with a wraparound pass to Kevin. He later throws a great bounce pass for another dunk. Vesely does a very nice job of catching and kicking out passes to perimeter shooters.

What impresses me is he beat Vucevic for rebounds many times. Vucevic had a 29-rebound game, but he has a hard time keeping up with a swift Vesely. Positional rebounders have to exert energy to box him out because they have to try and beat him to the spot.

I wish this video showed each foul and also his missed FTs. Those are areas where he needs the most improvement.

What I see with Vesely is how much confidence affects his performance, and how much more effective Jan Vesely is in uptempo games. When he is settled down, his screening and passing make him useful even in halfcourt--providing perimeter guys hit shots.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:07 am**

Ruzious wrote:...My point was about how players are defined by some folks - and goes back to an old discussion where some insisted that a player is what he is - no matter what team he's on. In other words, when evaluating a player, it's irrelevant what team a player is on and who his teammates and coaches are. My point was - whether a player is good or not depends on their effectiveness with their teammates and coaches - and that effectiveness changes if you change the teammates and coaches. A "good player" is not good no matter what team he's on. Anyway, just trying to clarify - not trying to get into a discussion.

This is an empirical question. The way you'd answer it is by looking at the numbers players put up as they move from team to team, coach to coach, group of teammates to a different group of teammates.

There is no other way to decide this issue. In particular, watching Jan Vesely have a terrific game in a game John Wall also played in tells you nothing. (In fact, some of the best stuff he did last night was with Price at the point, not Wall. Nor did Wall help him get a lot of rebounds, etc.)

This issue has been studied. Extensively. Read Chapter 8 of Berri's Stumbling on Wins. There's not a lot of evidence that a player's "...effectiveness changes if you change teammates and coaches." In fact, the evidence points in exactly the opposite direction, suggesting that you're wrong in saying "A "good player" is not good no matter what team he's on."

I.e. in fact Chris Paul is good in LA, just as he was in NO. And that sentence can be repeated hundreds of times substituting different names and the initials of different teams. Pretty much, that's the way it is. Good players are good players. Good teams are good because of the good players on the team. That's about it.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:24 am**

payitforward wrote:
nate33 wrote:...Nearly any player would play better with Wall.

Whoa there... last year, with John Wall averaging 35+ minutes a game, we started the season 14-46. Didn't we? Do I have that right? So... exactly what would make you elevate him in this (to me nonsensical) way?

I keep trying to figure out where claims like this come from.

Wins and losses -- that's the sole measure of a team. Nothing else matters -- or at least it doesn't matter until you get lots of wins and few losses. Wins and losses are determined by numbers. Nothing else.

Contributing to team wins and losses by what you do on the court -- that's the sole measure of an individual player. Nothing else matters. That contribution is measured by numbers. Nothing else. After all, to get the team numbers, the ones that fully determine whether you win or lose, all you have to do is add up the individuals' numbers.

Overall, John Wall's numbers are those of an average nba point guard. Some of them are very good; others are very bad. Really bad. Overall... meh. I hope John Wall turns out to be an outstanding player. To date, he hasn't shown that he can produce consistently at a high level.

We would have been worse than 14-46 without him.

I'm not saying Wall is a superstar. I'm merely saying he is a true PG that knows how to make life easier for his teammates. Outside of Wall, nobody else on the roster can do this. Have you been watching the last 3 games. Do you honestly think Vesely would be playing like this if Sheldon Mack was PG?

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:43 am**

payitforward wrote:
nate33 wrote:...Nearly any player would play better with Wall.

Whoa there... last year, with John Wall averaging 35+ minutes a game, we started the season 14-46. Didn't we? Do I have that right? So... exactly what would make you elevate him in this (to me nonsensical) way?

I keep trying to figure out where claims like this come from.

Wins and losses -- that's the sole measure of a team. Nothing else matters -- or at least it doesn't matter until you get lots of wins and few losses. Wins and losses are determined by numbers. Nothing else.

Contributing to team wins and losses by what you do on the court -- that's the sole measure of an individual player. Nothing else matters. That contribution is measured by numbers. Nothing else. After all, to get the team numbers, the ones that fully determine whether you win or lose, all you have to do is add up the individuals' numbers.

Overall, John Wall's numbers are those of an average nba point guard. Some of them are very good; others are very bad. Really bad. Overall... meh. I hope John Wall turns out to be an outstanding player. To date, he hasn't shown that he can produce consistently at a high level.

Read these number then.

120 pts.

2-0 with Wall returned along with a mostly healthy roster.

TS .545 %
9.7 FTA in 36 minutes
AST % 48%

Why they won the last two games is not just Wall. Its has a lot to do with with having viable PG behind him. Its Price. And even Temple behind that. Its also Trevor A returning and his defense. Its Nene starting and how that help Okafor.

But Wall is the little engine that brings it all together. Its his speed. Passing. FTAs. Driving. Handles. Leadership. Personality.

Yes. Those numbers are from only two games. There will be plenty of opportunity to post more of them moving forward. That is what we have right now. Well until his knee blows out his knee and he has major surgery that ends his season.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:03 am**

Wall makes other players better. Vesley is one of them.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 7:28 am**

hands11 wrote:Well until his knee blows out his knee and he has major surgery that ends his season.

What makes you so sure that will happen?

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:20 pm**

nate33 wrote:
payitforward wrote:
nate33 wrote:...Nearly any player would play better with Wall.

Whoa there... last year, with John Wall averaging 35+ minutes a game, we started the season 14-46. Didn't we? Do I have that right? So... exactly what would make you elevate him in this (to me nonsensical) way?

I keep trying to figure out where claims like this come from.

Wins and losses -- that's the sole measure of a team. Nothing else matters -- or at least it doesn't matter until you get lots of wins and few losses. Wins and losses are determined by numbers. Nothing else.

Contributing to team wins and losses by what you do on the court -- that's the sole measure of an individual player. Nothing else matters. That contribution is measured by numbers. Nothing else. After all, to get the team numbers, the ones that fully determine whether you win or lose, all you have to do is add up the individuals' numbers.

Overall, John Wall's numbers are those of an average nba point guard. Some of them are very good; others are very bad. Really bad. Overall... meh. I hope John Wall turns out to be an outstanding player. To date, he hasn't shown that he can produce consistently at a high level.

We would have been worse than 14-46 without him.

I'm not saying Wall is a superstar. I'm merely saying he is a true PG that knows how to make life easier for his teammates. Outside of Wall, nobody else on the roster can do this. Have you been watching the last 3 games. Do you honestly think Vesely would be playing like this if Sheldon Mack was PG?

Except, the offense has been no better when Wall's been on the floor so far this season. In Wall's 41 minutes, Wizards are scoring 97.6 pts per 100 possessions; without him this season: 97.2. Obviously a tiny sample size, and the on/off numbers could be interpreted a number of different ways (for example: the Wizards shot better in Wall's 41 minutes, but their turnovers skyrocketed and their offensive rebounding plummeted).

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2013 2:21 pm**

If his knee blows out, we could give him a new nickname - WallG3.

That's pending Rob Parker's approval.

RealGM

Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust

Re: Jan Vesely Part II: He a Bust