Doctor MJ wrote:Let's be clear: I'm not attributing everything in Atlanta to Korver's improvement. What I"m saying is that there's a synergistic effect going on that makes it very difficult to assign credit based on individual stats, and the stats we have without such issues favor Korver.
I think anyone with even peripheral knowledge of Atlanta realizes that having Korver is better than not having Korver, yes.
I'm then saying that this doesn't seem utterly crazy to me, because the team is certainly relying on Korver as part of their offensive scheme, and the "shape" of Korver as a player - and hence the hole you have to fill when he's gone - is basically unique. Does not make Korver an impactor like this in general, but if a team finds great success with a set of players that no one sees as individually that talented, a major factor might be the most unusual player in the mix.
They certainly leverage him for a given set of possessions over the length of starter's minutes to enable the rest of their offense, yes. This isn't new. Going back to 09-10, this is now the 3rd season where he's leading the league in 3P%, second consecutive (assuming he keeps it up through the remainder of the season) and hasn't shot under 41.5% in that time. He's been basically the best 3pt specialist in league history, really, and his 3P% has actually risen with his increasing volume, which is also somewhat crazy. Keep in mind, this is a guy who took 6.8 3PA/g back in 04-05 (his 2nd NBA season) and shot 40.5%, which is Ray-Ray/Reggie type territory. His insane 3pt shooting has been true of him since his first season, and is only growing more so as his career progresses. Since joining the Hawks in 12-13, he's been 2nd, 1st and now 1st again (so far) in 3P%.
Now, having established that, and knowing that his volume isn't that different from the past two seasons, and that he's been a high-end outlier ITO 3P% anyway, it looks like you're overplaying his efficacy. There were two years of comparable offensive performance with Korver still shooting 45.7 and 47.2% from 3 on 5.6 and 5.5 3PA/g (compared to 53.7 on 5.8 this year).
Their tactics haven't changed all that much compared to the previous two seasons. He's actually shooting less frequently by 1.4 FGA100 than his first season, and 0.4 less than last year. He took 9.5 3PA100 in his first season, then 8.3 and now 9.0.
So again, we're running into some basic markers of the Hawks using him in a fairly similar fashion for two-plus years now. Yes, his specific efficacy is now higher than it's ever been, but his usage has been very steady (14.5, 14.2, 14.4%), his shot distribution very much the same. His AST% rose in his second season, but his current rate is lower than that. Turnover rate is higher than either previous season. His TS% is roughly 9% higher and his ORTG is 9 points higher. So we're seeing similar tactics, similar overall possession results in terms of volume and passing, worse turnovers but that efficiency gap is massive.
Now you watch Atlanta and you see him doing the same things, only he's just murdering it at an historic level. But in tandem with the bounce-back of Millsap, Horford's health and a career season from Teague, and given the proportion of offense which Korver represents, I think you're over-representing the reliance upon Korver.
Reliance is a very strong word. They don't rely specifically on Korver. This is clear. His usage is too low and the team is still staffed with players who are playing at a very high level offensively in terms of their on/off picture. Not quite as high as he, but we're seeing the results of small possession usage projected out over a volume of possessions used. 115 ORTG is really nice until you realize that he's using something like 10.2 possessions per game using a rough formula (FGA +.475 FTA -ORB + TOV, divided by 47 GP). There are 15 minutes per game or so where he's not on the court, and in that time, the team's offensive rating is tanked according to raw on/off, a difference of nearly +15 ORTG in his favor...
But keep in mind which lineups those are. The top lineups without Korver by minutes-played are:
Teague/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Antic (50.2 MP)
Schroder/Mack/Sefo/Scott/Horford (39.8 MP)
Schroder/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Horford (38.6 MP)
Teague/Bazemore/Carroll/Millsap/Antic (26.2 MP)
Teague/Sefo/Carroll/Millsap/Brand (22.8 MP)
Teague/Bazemore/Carroll/Millsap/Horford (21.1 MP)
Schroder-Mack-Sefolosha-Scott-Antic (20.1 MP)
Schroder-Sefolosha-Carroll-Scott-Horford (18.1 MP)
Schroder-Mack-Carroll-Scott-Horford (17.2 MP)
So now we have an idea of what's going on when Korver's not on the floor, yes? You can see how often Schroder is at the point instead of 113 ORTG Jeff Teague. Obviously, the 82games.com is a game or so behind, but by around a game.
In any case, you see the following:
Schroder: 49 GP in the NBA prior to this season. No 3pt range, 99 ORTG, 18.1% TOV, 51.7% TS...
Basically, he's crap. And a good chunk of Atlanta's minutes without Korver have him on the floor. Many of them include Shelvin Mack and Thabo Sefolosha, with a brief appearance from Kent Bazemore.
So...
Bazmore: Couple of < 70 GP seasons behind him, shooting almost 39% from 3 on 1.1 3PA/g. 49.9% TS, 90 ORTG. 17.2% TOV
Another guy no one is writing home about. He has the range, but he represents with Schroder a backcourt that is wholly ineffectual at this time in terms of producing anywhere near even an average ORTG. That, and the sample size, are contributing a chunk to this outlier on/off you've referenced.
But let's look at Korver's more common replacements, Mack and Sefo.
Mack: 3 years behind him, not hitting the 3 effectively (< 31%), 99 ORTG, 46.6% TS
Sefo: 29.2% 3P, 107 ORTG, 50.8% TS
Not the greatest scorer, but he's got around an average ORTG (actually +1.3).
Now, having noted these things and in conjunction with the aforementioned impact of Millsap's rebound, Horford's health and Teague's career season, it starts to look a lot more like the huge gap is at least somewhat mollified by crap reserves and those other contextual factors I mentioned. Korver is very good, but there is so much situational evidence which suggests that there's a LOT more to Atlanta's offensive success than his presence.
Just going back into history, before I joined RealGM as a Nash proponent my initial reaction to Phoenix' success was skepticism toward Nash. I said things like, "Sure, Nash is a great passer, and he can shoot well, but we've seen the impact he has with that, and it's nothing close to what can be explained in Phoenix. Amare on the other hand is an ultra-dominant 1st option scorer who many thought had superstar potential who now seems to be making it happen."
This is something that has been retroactively proven false as far as healthy Amare without Nash and then of course with the sustained offensive excellence of the Suns without Amare (and even Marion). And of course, while Nash was also a minutes-limited guy, his possession usage and actual time-with-ball was very, very different than Korver.
What I'm saying is that when a team has far more success than anyone anticipated,
Yes, and their defensive improvement is actually the most notable difference between this and any previous season under the current regime. They've had Korver before. They had him last year at over 47% from 3 on similar volume, and it didn't produce the same results... though there were other contextual factors holding them back. It doesn't seem the logical extension that his play is responsible for a significant portion of what's going on this year... without a new coach, but with all of these other things going on and the situation as I described above.
We're more than halfway through the year now, and Korver has a big lead on this front compared to his teammates.
2 points per 100 possessions of raw ON/OFF ORTG, yes. And raw on/off isn't accounting for the obvious dearth of quality beneath him.
Right now, Atlanta's offense is better than its defense for the first time since '09-10 based on where it stands in efficiency relative to the league, and they have the #2 TS% in the entire league behind the utterly loaded Golden State. I have no problem saying that their success is pretty balanced being good on both sides, but the shocking part of their success right now is certainly the offense more than the defense.
I'm inclined to disagree, because the level of offensive production they have right now isn't all that alarming in its efficacy compared to the league environment or to the last decade of NBA basketball.
Second, I mentioned ORtg, and then you mentioned ORtg, but i was using team ORtg and you were using individual ORtg. I need to be clear that these aren't the same things for the sake of others following along here:
I'm mixing both, depending on which component I'm discussing, yes.
I really don't take individual ORtg very seriously
Right, but it's reflective of on-court action just as much as is on/off data... with many of the same stipulations. Controlling for minutes and volume of possessions, for example.
I don't really get why we're still circling over this. Teague's having a career year, Horford's healthy, Millsap's returned to his standard level of performance. These factors alone are enough to justify significant improvement over the previous season... which is something we're seeing. Budenholzer's in his second season, so the team has had time to adjust to him a little more.
We're seeing a radical improvement in their defensive markers compared to basically the same team last season under the same coach. Say what you will of DRTG, but there is a -4.4 difference, and their position relative to league average went from -0.3 to -3.7. Now examine the components.
A year ago, the Hawks' opponent eFG% was 19th in the league, they were 17th in DRB%. Flash forward a year and, ignoring DRTG to focus on these things, they're 10th in opp eFG%, and 6th in opp 3P% (20th last year). They even got better relative to league average in terms of generating turnovers.
So this defensive improvement can't be handwaved away either, because it's coming in tangible areas that don't require you to buy into DRTG as an illustrative statistic.
They play at a pace of 93.8 this year compared to 94.6 last year. Less than a possession per game of difference. Their opp PPG has gone from 101.5 (15th) to 96.1 (2nd). They are currently scoring 103.4 ppg compared to 101.0.
So regardless of your feelings towards DRTG, it's evident that they have improved defensively by basically any available angle of statistical measure. This cannot be ignored; it is a significant component of their team success. You can't look at a team moving from average defense to top-tier defense and ignore that as a component of their change in W/L success.
Yes, the offense has been a lot better, but there are more voluminous reasons for that than a change in 3P% from Korver, who is otherwise identical in his on-court behavior compared to last year. He's giving you a way higher pay off per possession than even last year, but he also uses a very limited number of possessions per game and his impact on the D really isn't that different compared to last season. At 47% on nearly 6 attempts per game while moving off-ball and being able to pop it effectively from 16-23 feet and showcasing more than capable passing, there's a productive limit to what the defense does. They try to stay on him. That's no different from last year. It warps the D, certainly, but the effect is comparable.
Naturally, I'm not arguing that he has a positive impact: I think it's long-since passed that we both realize that each of us values Korver at a borderline AS level, which has its own set of baseline implications about the player. I do feel, though, that either you don't understand my position (which I doubt strongly), that you're overvaluing Korver or that we're basically saying the same thing and are tripping up on semantics. I'm inclined to believe it's one of the latter two, but not sure which at this stage.
He's effecting an impact beyond a conventional spot-up specialist because he's the best in the league at what he does, that much is clear. You can't just pull the usual routines on him as a defense. You mostly sit tight, and fight HARD when he goes around screens, or you're screwed. It's true that the team is better with him on than with him off, that's a given.
That said, this whole conversation began with you saying that you thought that if anyone on the Hawks should be discussed, it should be Korver. I take great issue with that, because he's very clearly not the core of their attack on either end of the floor. He has nothing to do with their defensive improvement, which is a demonstrable truth of their team performance this season... and since you don't believe he's worth a +5 ORTG improvement by your own earlier admission (unless I misread), then it's very clear that the core is much more relevant to their team success.
In fact, you said:
Let's be clear: I'm not attributing everything in Atlanta to Korver's improvement. What I"m saying is that there's a synergistic effect going on that makes it very difficult to assign credit based on individual stats, and the stats we have without such issues favor Korver.
This, of course, makes a very basic kind of sense given the contextual factors I'm thrashing like a dead horse, because of their obvious significance.
Then you said this:
team is certainly relying on Korver as part of their offensive scheme, and the "shape" of Korver as a player - and hence the hole you have to fill when he's gone - is basically unique
With this, I passionately disagree. The level of effect is unique, certainly, but the shape of it is an off-ball shooter... which is basically the oldest style of player in this sport... and we've seen something like 35 years of 3pt shooting now, so we've seen guys moving for that kind of shot as well. We've seen specialists and even stars who base their offense around the same, so there's really not a ton different in root concept about what Korver does. The hole you have to fill when he's gone is a high-efficiency catch-and-shoot guy who can play the 2 and the 3.
The efficiency is ridiculously high, of course, and that's a gap no one else in the league is going to fill, that's true. But to say that they "rely" on him is not really accurate. They rely on spacing, dribble penetration and the PnR. Atlanta's PnX play is facilitated by Teague and their very effective bigs, Millsap and Horford. There is a baseline level of efficacy on offense as it stands, and Korver is far more replaceable than those guys, most especially given Teague's current level of performance. That action is the baseline of their performance.
Budenholzer has employed Korver precisely as he should, of course. He's maximizing the effectiveness by using him as a decoy, using him to stretch the floor, and otherwise milking his efficacy from 3 without asking him to do more than he should.
Maybe I'm taking issue with your semantics. Words like "rely" resonate with me, since he's clearly not the platform upon which they build their basic strategy, but rather a component thereof. Now, if you twist that to mean "to reach this specific level of offensive efficacy," it gets a little more accurate, but even then, it's still not wholly accurate given all that has changed over the past two seasons and the minimal number of possessions that Korver actually uses.
See where I'm coming from? At this point, I'm trying to sort out where the conceptual gap is. You don't believe he's a huge impactor, but you're dismissing the other guys in favor of Korver in terms of discussion, which to me is dissonant with the way the team actually plays the game. And then the portion of your post I've now quoted twice now, where you say you don't attribute the whole of their success to Korver. I'm wondering how much of that success you do attribute to him.
Korver shouldn't be mentioned here either, but of the Hawks ensemble cast, when we write about them, the one to be writing about is Korver.
And this right here is what I'm talking about.
This doesn't seem to make sense in my mind. His impact can only be extended so far, particularly given volume of possessions and the actual tactics the Hawks employ. Yes, they use Korver in off-ball situations to draw D, expend energy, have them chase him around screens, and for him to provide basically the best single-possession pay out it the league when he does bother to get involved in a recordable possession. But he's a complement to the system, a component there of, not its foundation. They don't build everything they do off of Kyle Korver. They do that with their PG-PF/C dynamic. Shooters are the thing which they use to enable that dynamic.
