Nick Young

[verbal8]

Interesting theory, nate. I think you might have something, but I also see the logic in Kev's point about quality of players on the floor during the "on" time. I think the key might be finding a way to weight the formula to account for both minutes and level of competition. Is that even possible?

I think I saw somewhere on here that someone had a stat on starters faced. I don't know if there is a way to combine them into one measure, but looking at them together could give you an idea of what the numbers mean.

[LyricalRico]

Interesting theory, nate. I think you might have something, but I also see the logic in Kev's point about quality of players on the floor during the "on" time. I think the key might be finding a way to weight the formula to account for both minutes and level of competition. Is that even possible?

I think I saw somewhere on here that someone had a stat on starters faced. I don't know if there is a way to combine them into one measure, but looking at them together could give you an idea of what the numbers mean.

Yeah, I did see that. So I guess my next question is how do we figure out how to re-calculate the on/off numbers, accounting for the % of minutes played against starters and played against reserves? And then how do we average that to make one overall number?

And then how to we weight that overall number based on minutes played?

[TheSecretWeapon]

What we're talking about now is getting into the realm of adjusted +/-. There's surely a way to adjust these numbers for quality of opponent -- I don't have time to do it, though.

I'm not saying that Young's on/off number should be ignored, I'm saying they should be viewed skeptically. The adjusted +/- guys love to say that +/- data is "noisy," meaning that there's fluky information in there. There's randomness and odd results that take a lot of minutes to even out. Most of the APM (adjusted +/-) guys are now incorporating data from multiple seasons in an effort to get more reliable estimates of value. With Young, we're talking about excellent results from this year -- a season in which he played just 46% of the team's minutes. But, if you do what APMers typically do (incorporate data from the previous season), and his on/off goes back down. Maybe the 08-09 number indicates serious improvement on the defensive end. But maybe it's just a fluke.

Which is why that on/off number has to be combined with other considerations like opposition quality; like the eyeball test. So, we look at the quality of opponent calculation (51% starters -- league average is 66%) and then look at the counterpart PER (for example). The SG counterpart number doesn't look bad -- 15.8 where 15.0 is average.

Leaving aside the problems inherent in the counterpart data, is 15.8 actually a good number when at least half the time he's going against a reserve? I don't have time at the moment to parse the data for similar players -- maybe tomorrow.

I don't know what the average PER is for a starter vs. a reserve, but I think it's safe to say that in general starters are better (more productive) than reserves. Maybe nate has PER in a spreadsheet?

One point I didn't make earlier that's still worth making -- one reason to discount the big on/off number is that Nick isn't a center. The most important defenders are bigs -- they're the last line of defense, they're the ones who change a team's defense. There are some exceptions, of course, but then we go back to the eyeball test -- and Nick just wasn't that kind of defender.

Finally, if we're going to rest so much of the analysis on Nick's defense on the on/off number, don't we need to do the same with others? Tied for 12th best in the league in defensive on/off were Jarvis Hayes and Darius Songaila. Amare ranked 24th. Flip Murray ranked high too. Iverson had a strong defensive on/off in Detroit. This all leads back to the convserations we had several years ago about Haywood's robust defensive on/off number. That led me to hand track defensive data, which showed (at least in my eyes) definitively why the team was better when Haywood was on the floor. Obviously there's no similar data for Nick. But based on watching him play defense, I think it's far more likely that last year's on/off number was a fluke. I'm not saying he's a bad defender or that he won't be a good defender. I'm saying that there's good reason to be skeptical of his on/off data this past season.

[TheSecretWeapon]

Man my posts are too frigging long.

[fishercob]

Man my posts are too frigging long.

But they're good.

My frustrating takeaway is that there still seems to be a huge gulf between the reliabilities of individual offensive and defensive stats.

[nate33]

A couple of counterpoints:

Young's counterpart PER is 15.8. The league average is 15. However, it's worth noting that SG's in general post a higher PER than an average player. A quick glance at 82games.com team by team positional PER numbers shows that the median PER allowed at the SG position is 15.85. The average allowed is 15.73. So Nick looks to be about average going by counterpart PER alone. And that's on a team with a scheme that was truly horrible at stopping SG's. The Wizards as a team allowed opposing SG's a PER of 18.8, far and away the worst in the league. Nick managed to hold opponents to average production while playing in a horrible scheme, and he simultaneously posted the best defensive on/off differential on the team (which suggest that he didn't single-mindedly stick with his man to the detriment of the team's defensive scheme). And he did so with no defensive presence in the paint to back him up.

Also, if Nick Young faces starters 51% of the time, and the average NBA player faces starters 66% of the time, the difference isn't that big. Nick had a +6.9 defensive on/off differential. With an addition 15% of his time devoted to guarding starters, would we really expect that on/off differential to plummet all the way to sub-zero?

I readily cede that the sample size is small and Nick's outstanding defensive on/off numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. One can easily argue that the numbers aren't enough to make a convincing case that he is a good defender. I just fail to see how one can argue that he's a below average defender when every bit of (admittedly incomplete) data suggests he isn't.

Nick has a ways to go defensively. He needs to put on some muscle; he needs to get better at understanding the schemes; and he needs to work on his fundamentals and positioning. But that doesn't change the fact that he is very athletic, ridiculously long, and this year, he really seemed to try on D. Length, athleticism, and effort can take you a long way in this league.

[TheSecretWeapon]

My frustrating takeaway is that there still seems to be a huge gulf between the reliabilities of individual offensive and defensive stats.

Yep. There's some stuff out there that might help with defensive stats in the future. The NBA is doing something with extra cameras mounted around the court that are supposed to help. But, ultimately, the best defensive data comes from tracking. And that's labor-intensive (at least so far), which means it won't be free to the public anytime soon. I don't think I could overstate how much I learned by tracking defense.

[ZonkertheBrainless]

Are defensive and offensive PER figures equally variable? The average PER on offense is 16 or so, right, but Arenas' is 24. Is anyone giving up a 24 counterpart PER and seeing consistent minutes? Or is giving up an 18 PER the equivalent of an offensive 24? Does that make sense?

What is the lowest counterpart PER? What does whatsisname on the Spurs get?

Are PER's skewed? So on offense, there are lots of starters with 13 and above but hardly anyone below that, so the average is 15.5?

[TheSecretWeapon]

A couple of counterpoints:

Young's counterpart PER is 15.8. The league average is 15. However, it's worth noting that SG's in general post a higher PER than an average player. A quick glance at 82games.com team by team positional PER numbers shows that the median PER allowed at the SG position is 15.85. The average allowed is 15.73. So Nick looks to be about average going by counterpart PER alone. And that's on a team with a scheme that was truly horrible at stopping SG's. The Wizards as a team allowed opposing SG's a PER of 18.8, far and away the worst in the league. Nick managed to hold opponents to average production while playing in a horrible scheme, and he simultaneously posted the best defensive on/off differential on the team (which suggest that he didn't single-mindedly stick with his man to the detriment of the team's defensive scheme). And he did so with no defensive presence in the paint to back him up.

Not nitpicking, but the counterpart data doesn't say that Nick held opposing SGs to a PER of 15.8. The data actually says that while Nick was on the floor and designated by 82games to be the SG, the player on the other team designated by 82games posted an average PER of 15.8. This is an important distinction because the matchup system is automated. No accounting for crossmatching, help, zones, trapping, schemes -- none of that. This is one reason I don't put much stock in counterpart data -- there are too many variables. And a single matchup error automatically means 40% of the information is wrong.

Plus, the whole counterpart thing doesn't really describe how defense is played. Defense is about teamwork. The counterpart data pretends that teamworkr doesn't exist.

Also, if Nick Young faces starters 51% of the time, and the average NBA player faces starters 66% of the time, the difference isn't that big. Nick had a +6.9 defensive on/off differential. With an addition 15% of his time devoted to guarding starters, would we really expect that on/off differential to plummet all the way to sub-zero?

Nick is a full standard deviation from average. That's significant.

I readily cede that the sample size is small and Nick's outstanding defensive on/off numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. One can easily argue that the numbers aren't enough to make a convincing case that he is a good defender. I just fail to see how one can argue that he's a below average defender when every bit of (admittedly incomplete) data suggests he isn't.

My point is that the numbers aren't reliable enough to make the claims being made about the quality of his defense. His on/off number says he makes a serious impact on the defensive end. His counterpart PER (which is a dubious stat to start with) says he's average (ignoring concerns about quality of opponent). In watching him, I did not see an impact defender. I saw a guy with the strenths you describe (except for consistent effort), but one who also didn't follow the team's defensive force rules and who lost focus at times.

I'm going to try and get an on/off game log for him. That should be interesting. If he's making a defensive impact, I'd anticipate seeing a pattern improvement in the team's defense. If his season on/off numbers are fluky, I'd expect to see an extreme positive result at some point in the season without a corresponding extreme negative result.

[nate33]

I'm really slow at work so I was fooling around at basketballvalue.com.

When the on/off differential is statistically adjusted to account for teammates and opponents on the floor, Nick Young still comes out looking good. His adjusted on/off defensive differential is -6.49, which ranks him as the 13th best defensive player in the league.

The names at the top of the list pass the "smell test" for the most part. Of course, I can't help but notice that Songaila ranks 18th and Blatche ranks 19th. No other Wizard shows up in the top 50.

[Paydro70]

One quick note on PER... 82games, Hollinger, and basketball-reference all use slightly tweaked formulas, so they're not consistent (and not all set to a 15 average). Difference isn't enormous, but it explains some of the inconsistencies.

[TheSecretWeapon]

I have been (and remain) ambivalent about adjusted +/- (APM). I think it's interesting research and I'm glad there are smart people working on it. But I haven't reached the point of trusting the assumptions APMers are making as they do their adjustments.

And there are some odd results. Skimming down the list, I see that Amare Stoudemire has one of the 30 best defensive adjusted on/off scores. I see that Philly has 4 of the top 40 defensive APMers, that each of those 4 played more than 2,000 minutes, but that Philly had only a league average defense. I see Jarvis Hayes highly rated. Millsap? Iverson in the top 50? Go back to 2007-08, and Jamison shows up with one of the 50 best defensive APMs. (Interestingly, Songaila and Korver made the list in both years.)

I hope nate's right and that I'm wrong. My real point here is that there's a looooooooooooong way to go when it comes to using stats to evaluate defense. The best data comes from tracking individual D, but we don't have that available. I'm not persuaded that the various measures we have available actually support the claim that Nick is even slightly above average defensively. I'd like to be wrong, though.

[closg00]

After an inconsistent season with the Wizards, Young, along with most of the team’s young reserves, took another tour of duty in the Summer League to mesh with his teammates. Reaching a critical point in his development, Young has shown the tools to be a major offensive threat on the NBA level. Unfortunately, he has a hard time consistently stringing together good quarters of basketball, let alone good games. The four games Young played in the Summer League were a microcosm of that issue, as he once again wavered between utter dominance and inefficient productivity against lesser competition. As one of the only NBA players here that averaged more than 10 points per game last season, Young didn’t surprise anyone with his big game ability.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/NBA ... One--3295/


That's what we've been sayin. Hopefully in a reserve role, we will see the dominant Young during games.

[doclinkin]

I'm not persuaded that the various measures we have available actually support the claim that Nick is even slightly above average defensively. I'd like to be wrong, though.

Just to chime in.

Observationally, whether backed up by stats or no, my perception of Nick's defense last year was that his cluelessness may have actually helped him defend better, at times. That is, team Defensive philosophy seemed to support the idea that perimeter players should sag into the paint to help out the bigs. But Nick never really did it, never seemed to remember that as part of his role, never seemed to react. Consequently his guy was less likely to be wide open on the perimeter, less likely to receive the ball when it popped back out on the kick. He was better able to stick his man when that's what was required.

Nick tunes up his game by playing pick-up ball and going one on one against z-level talent. And when he's not sure what else to do, those habits are what he relies on. You can learn some useful mano-a-mano defensive skills this way, but still hurt your team defense. Gambling for steals, going for the block every time, etc. will tend to leave you predictably out of position. He's also stated that if guy is trying to dunk on you the smart move is to get yourself out of the vicinity so you won't get clowned on. Get out of the poster. And without refs you won't learn the small nasty tricks that make an effective defender. In defense, if if you're a nice guy, you have to be willing to make enemies and hurt feelings. That's not Nick.

But his length and body control suggest that even while semi-clueless he can still effect the game if he keeps a few simple habits active. I'm not terribly worried that he's our primary defensive liability. And I'm pretty confident that the coaching staff can find a role for him so long as he can score and play off-the-ball in that Rip Hamilton role they scripted for him. Coming off the bench especially he should have the energy to really run opponents ragged. What he needs more than anything is one more solid screener on court, other than Brendan Haywood.

[rockymac52]

After an inconsistent season with the Wizards, Young, along with most of the team’s young reserves, took another tour of duty in the Summer League to mesh with his teammates. Reaching a critical point in his development, Young has shown the tools to be a major offensive threat on the NBA level. Unfortunately, he has a hard time consistently stringing together good quarters of basketball, let alone good games. The four games Young played in the Summer League were a microcosm of that issue, as he once again wavered between utter dominance and inefficient productivity against lesser competition. As one of the only NBA players here that averaged more than 10 points per game last season, Young didn’t surprise anyone with his big game ability.

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/NBA ... One--3295/


That's what we've been sayin. Hopefully in a reserve role, we will see the dominant Young during games.

great article. really does echo a lot of the things we've been saying about young and blatche. it got me thinking though...

Clearly Young and Blatche are expected to be role players off the bench this coming season. It's possible Young will start, but regardless, he's going to play a decent amount of minutes, but not quite starter minutes (I'd assume). We seem to agree that Young has the potential and skills to be a real dominant scorer in the NBA. But at the same time, he brings just about nothing else to the table (I agree with Nate, he's at least an average defender, with the measurements and potential to get better). This says to me that if he was placed on a really bad team with no other stars, he could be the high volume scorer he seems like wants to be. But that's obviously not going to happen anytime soon, and as long as he's on the wizards he's not even close to the first option. I think the Wizards coaching staff is attempting to round out Young's game and make him fit in on this team, IN HIS ROLE, better. That's obvious really, it's the coaches job to put the best team on the floor. They're trying to get Nick to see himself as a role player with the potential to become a starter, as opposed to the kid on the bench who wants to be a superstar so he jacks up crazy shots when he gets on the court. Young can take those crazy shots, and make a decent percentage of them, so we've let it slide. But our new coaching staff seems like they won't be okay with that, because it hurts the team as a whole. They'd rather Young feel comfortable on the court, feel like he belongs and has a long term place on this team, and learn to only shoot the good open looks so that he makes a much higher percentage of his shots, and in turn will likely score just as much if not more. So anyways, my broad question is, do the Wizards coaching staff and front office view Nick Young as a role player long term, or do they still want him to develop into a big time player? On the flipside, is Nick Young accepting that he is going to be a role player for life, does he still think he's a superstar in the waiting, or is he buying into the coaching staff's strategy of using him as a role player in the mean time, and slowly integrating him more and more into the offense as he proves he can succeed? That last part wasn't worded that well, so if you don't quite get what I'm saying let me know and I'll try to word it a different way. The same general questions exist for Blatche, except maybe he's not destined to be such a big scorer anymore, but it wasn't too long ago that a lot of us loved to compare Blatche to KG.

I feel that Blatche and the Wizards have just about accepted that he will be a good player off the bench, and may be good enough to be a solid starter down the line, but nothing more. I'm clueless as to what Nick Young and the Wizards see with his situation, however.

[no D in Hibachi]

Bump, I'm officially disappointed in N1. I've always held out hope for him to channel his athletic ability and become a productive player. In fact, I bought the hype around him all training camp and figured this would be the year he steps up and becomes the starting 2 guard. I've been duped! He hasn't changed his game at all! He's still amazingly unproductive at everything, but he has all the athletic ability in the world to be at least an above average 2 guard. He's got the length, the height, the leaping ability, a smooth stroke, and the ability to get to the hole, but he provides nothing. He's the Jason Campbell of NBA. He absolutely looks the part, but just can't get it done. I know this is not much more than a rant, but I had to get it off my chest.

[closg00]

Bump, I'm officially disappointed in N1. I've always held out hope for him to channel his athletic ability and become a productive player. In fact, I bought the hype around him all training camp and figured this would be the year he steps up and becomes the starting 2 guard. I've been duped! He hasn't changed his game at all! He's still amazingly unproductive at everything, but he has all the athletic ability in the world to be at least an above average 2 guard. He's got the length, the height, the leaping ability, a smooth stroke, and the ability to get to the hole, but he provides nothing. He's the Jason Campbell of NBA. He absolutely looks the part, but just can't get it done. I know this is not much more than a rant, but I had to get it off my chest.

He's a street-baller, that's the conclusion I come to. I'm still holding out hope that he will improve once the team has gelled.

[dlts20]

Bump, I'm officially disappointed in N1. I've always held out hope for him to channel his athletic ability and become a productive player. In fact, I bought the hype around him all training camp and figured this would be the year he steps up and becomes the starting 2 guard. I've been duped! He hasn't changed his game at all! He's still amazingly unproductive at everything, but he has all the athletic ability in the world to be at least an above average 2 guard. He's got the length, the height, the leaping ability, a smooth stroke, and the ability to get to the hole, but he provides nothing. He's the Jason Campbell of NBA. He absolutely looks the part, but just can't get it done. I know this is not much more than a rant, but I had to get it off my chest.

To be fair, he only started the 1st game and was solid in it. After that he's been on the bench in limited minutes and playing beside Foye & James who some say have been horrible at the point. If you start him with Gil then I think he looks night & day but I doubt that will happened

[WizarDynasty]

i think we are missing that Young doesn't have a perimeter veteran on the team that has a high defensive basketball IQ.
I think we have that person now in Mike Miller.

[doclinkin]

To be fair, he only started the 1st game and was solid in it. After that he's been on the bench in limited minutes and playing beside Foye & James who some say have been horrible at the point. If you start him with Gil then I think he looks night & day but I doubt that will happened

And that's the real concern with this team, that after Gil we have no real option for the back-up Point. Randy Foye is showing the scorers tunnel vision, he'd be a nice fit with the system we used to run here, but not so much in an engine that relies on a single ballhandler to regulate the team and make smart decisions.

We're deep at Nick's position; we're shallow at 1 and 5. Nick is beat out by players with more versatility, better defense/rebounding/passing. His strengths (scoring and scoring, also scoring) are distributed elsewhere -- with players who have earned all-star positions with versatile games. Nick serves as bench depth, or a sub for nights when no one else can get hot. But DS2 is maligned enough to be underrated, so overrated then berated he's become underrated, or something. He's one of the few who does whatever it takes to win within his ability. DeShawn frankly can't get much better, nor work harder, nor endure more pain. Nick by contrast, has the entire futre ahead of him and room to improve, so long as he ain't complacent.

I'm more disappointed that Randy Foye hasn't yet looked at all comfortable running the show under Flip, and that Mike James has become our next best option for back-up. I'm banking on Critt healing quick and taking that 3rd year leap under the tutelage of both Flip and Sammy. If he learns the midrange game and distributes the ball, adds a pressure defense, watches opponent tendencies, he's got a chance to be something solid. And even to allow Gil to play off the ball and run savage. Run rings around opponents.

But until then, its waiting on health again... oh well. Nothing new there.