Mack is Back / Update: Nevermind

[nate33]

With today's news, I ran a quick stats update. Using my stat (PPA), where 100 = average; higher is better and 45 = replacement level, Mack has a 70 and Temple a 45.

For the second time this season, the Wizards have released Mack to keep a less productive player.

I think Temple was the better keep given Wall and Price are returning. Temple clearly defend better and he can guard more positions. Given he doesn't even really know the playbook yet, I'm guessing they are looking at it like that. A bench player with a defined skill who can get better with experience.

Heard to write this because I know it falls right into a stereo type move for this organization but...

He has more potential then Mack

Temple still has to fight it out with Price though so he is just a bench guard until he proves he should get the minutes over Crawford and Price.

I agree. Nivek may be right that Mack is a better overall player than Temple, but with Wall and Price back, our need was to have a 5th guard who was a specialist. Mack doesn't do anything that Wall, Price and/or Crawford can't do better, so there really wouldn't ever be a need to have Mack on the floor (barring injury). Temple, on the other hand, has a specific skill that he does better than everybody else in the backcourt. He is a very good defender. There may be situations in the future where Temple gets minutes as a defensive specialist, even though Wall and Price are healthy.

[tontoz]

Temple's numbers are bad primarily because his shooting has been horrid. However i would expect his shooting to get better as he gets more comfortable.

He definitely looks like a better player than Mack even if his production might be worse. With such a small sample size i don't put a lot of weight into the numbers anyway.

[Nivek]

Only scenario I can really see where Temple might play over Wall or Price because of his defense would be a single possession late in a game or a half. I wouldn't exactly call that a "need" for the Wizards. What they need are productive players. That isn't Temple. Maybe by some magic he'll become a competent backup. His career PPA (819 minutes) is below replacement level. This season he's right at replacement level. But perhaps he'll do something for the Wizards that he hasn't done elsewhere.

By the way, recall that I liked the Temple signing when they did it. He was one of the more productive PGs in D-League. He was worth a look. Unfortunately, he's playing similarly in Washington as he has at his other NBA stops.

It's pretty clear they don't want Mack. Given that, it probably would have been better to cut both Mack and Temple and try again with another D-League type.

Like I said before, this isn't a monumental issue. Neither guy is going to change the franchise's fortunes.

[nate33]

FWIW, Temple has very nice on/off numbers. The team's ORtg differential when Temple is on the court is 8.5 points higher than when he is off the court. Sample size is clearly an issue, but perhaps management felt that the team playing better with Temple on the floor was more than just a statistical fluke.

[Nivek]

FWIW, Temple has very nice on/off numbers. The team's ORtg differential when Temple is on the court is 8.5 points higher than when he is off the court. Sample size is clearly an issue, but perhaps management felt that the team playing better with Temple on the floor was more than just a statistical fluke.

It would be nuts to use on/off numbers from 255 total minutes to reach this kind of conclusion, which means this is almost certainly how they made their decision.

[nate33]

FWIW, Temple has very nice on/off numbers. The team's ORtg differential when Temple is on the court is 8.5 points higher than when he is off the court. Sample size is clearly an issue, but perhaps management felt that the team playing better with Temple on the floor was more than just a statistical fluke.

It would be nuts to use on/off numbers from 255 total minutes to reach this kind of conclusion, which means this is almost certainly how they made their decision.

Not trying to be argumentative, but why would making a decision based on 255 minutes of on/off data be bad, but making a decision based on 255 minutes of box score date be acceptable?

[Nivek]

I wouldn't make a decision off either based on only 255 minutes. In this case, Mack has more than 900 career minutes; Temple more than 800. That's enough playing time for the numbers to mean something. Someone at APBRmetrics found awhile back that per minute box score stats were valid with as few as 150 total minutes. I generally use 500 total minutes for full-season analysis.

Plus/minus takes more data for it to mean something. That's not my opinion -- it's an issue heavily discussed by the adjusted plus/minus guys. Most of the time they solve by mixing in data from previous years, sorta like we'd do with box score stats. But, where box score stats mean something in the 150-500 minute range, the on/off stuff takes much more data.

There are a couple solid approaches for using on/off numbers from a single season. Dan Rosenbaum addressed the issue by regressing box score stats on adjusted plus/minus to create a statistical plus/minus. Basically, Dan could estimate what a player's plus/minus SHOULD be based on his box score stats. The coefficients are available online, I think. I know his work has been replicated by some other folks, and I suspect their coefficients are available online.

Another approach is Regularized Adjusted Plus Minus (RAPM). Jeremias Engelmann has this site, which he hasn't updated in a few days. Note that Temple is at 140 minutes right now on Jeremias' site, but has played 255 total minutes this season. RAPM does a better job than APM at predicting future games through a process called ridge regression.

I do think on/off numbers are worthwhile. And, I am carrying a little knowledge of how the Wizards front office approaches statistical data. They narrow slice to the point of absurdity -- placing heavier emphasis on 3-5 game snapshots. It's worth keeping an eye on performance trends, but not the way they do it. As I think I've related, a few years back I approached them with 42 games of defensive tracking data. Instead of looking at that data, they asked for a report based on the next 5 games. Which was nuts.

[DCZards]

Stats aside (I know, I know that's blasphemy ), I'd take Temple's superior size, athleticism, and aggressiveness on both ends of the court over Mack. Mack could never had played the kind of D on Westbrook that Temple played last night. Neither Mack nor Temple have distinguished themselves statistically so the "eye test" might be useful here.

BTW, I really like the way Temple and Beal get after opposing guards defensively when they're out there together.

[Nivek]

I like all those same things about Temple. I did enjoy the way he defended last night. The thing about superior size, athleticism and aggressiveness -- those things will all show up in the numbers somewhere, to the extent that they make a difference.

[dobrojim]

was money a factor is choosing btw Mack and Temple?

I was initially thinking the whole reason for the dump was to save money.
Wouldn't be surprised to see Mack back again but there is probably a cooling
off period during which the Wiz can't sign him. We'll see if another team jumps
in ahead of us (assuming we have a place for him later this season).

[hands11]

Stats aside (I know, I know that's blasphemy ), I'd take Temple's superior size, athleticism, and aggressiveness on both ends of the court over Mack. Mack could never had played the kind of D on Westbrook that Temple played last night. Neither Mack nor Temple have distinguished themselves statistically so the "eye test" might be useful here.

BTW, I really like the way Temple and Beal get after opposing guards defensively when they're out there together.

I think the eye test tells the story way better then any numbers might. And it not just the eye test, it's the whole package. 6-6 and a good defender. Willing to take the shot when needed and he can go strong for the big momentum changing dunks. I like what I have seen of Temple so far... excluding some less then good shooting. He has been to a few organizations. He went down to DL, then back then down then back a few time and he still keeps working on it. I like his focused personality. Not saying Mack has a bad personality just that Temple does have a good one.

This team was built to be a top level defensive team when healthy. Adding Temple to the mix only make them deeper defensively then before because he can guard two or three positons. I think Temple and Price make for a nice pair of back up PGs. Temple is taller, Price is quicker. Add in that Crawford can play the PG some when needed and this is the deepest the Wizards have been at PG that I can think of. Specially defensively.

So in less then half a season they have gone from

Price, who wasn't ready to start, & Pargo, to Livingston/Crawford to Crawford/Livingston to Mack/Temple to Temple/Mack to Temple/Price

But shortly they will have Wall, Price or Temple and Crawford. Thats a lot more options.

[hands11]

was money a factor is choosing btw Mack and Temple?

I was initially thinking the whole reason for the dump was to save money.
Wouldn't be surprised to see Mack back again but there is probably a cooling
off period during which the Wiz can't sign him. We'll see if another team jumps
in ahead of us (assuming we have a place for him later this season).

I don't see a place.

Wall/Temple/Price
Beal/Crawford/Price/Martin

Beal is going to be getting 30 plus minutes a game. Specially if he is balling like he has recently.
There is hardly spare minutes for the remaining guards as it is. Heck, once Wall returns, they could even deal with one of Temple or Price getting injured and still not need Mack.

Things have all the sudden gotten a lot more crowded at guard once Wall returns.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/22 ... With_76ers

Shelvin Mack Signs 10-Day Contract With 76ers

Jan 17, 2013 2:22 PM EST

The Philadelphia 76ers have announced the signing of Shelvin Mack to a 10-day contract.

In 14 games for the Maine Red Claws of the D-League this season, Mack averaged 20.5 points, 8.0 assists, 4.9 rebounds and 1.43 steals while shooting 46.2% from the floor, 41.8% from 3-point range and 89.6% from the line.

I will be surprised if Shelvin doesn't stick with the 76ers. I am glad he got another NBA gig.

REMIX in 3 - 2 - 1

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/markmorr ... emack.html

[Chorus 2:]
Return of the mack,
Once again,
Return of the mack,
Top of the world,
Return of the mack,
Watch my flow,
You know that I'll be back,
Here I go.

So, I'm back up in the game,
(Running things like my swing),
Lettin' all the people know,
That I'm back to run the show,
Cause what they didn't know was wrong,
And all the nasty things you've done,
So, baby, listen carefully,
While I sing my comeback song.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/6454/shelvin-mack

Mack signed with the Hawks on Wednesday for the rest of the season, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Spin: In nine games with Atlanta, Mack has helped spell an occasional-injured backcourt, averaging 2.6 points (on 40.9 percent shooting) and 1.2 dimes in 6.7 minutes. With Devin Harris currently dealing with a foot concern, Mack could repeat his 10 points in 19 minutes from Monday in the short-term. However, Mack isn't much of a fantasy option outside of very deep formats.

I thought the Wizards never evaluated Mack objectively and fairly. I predicted he would catch on with another team. Shelvin has had ten day contracts with Philly and Atlanta and will end up finishing the season with the Hawks. I am glad to see Mack scratching out a career. He's got a chance to play in the playoffs, too.