Otto Porter Part 2

[DCZards]

Is Otto Porter a top 10 SF?

I think he's the most underrated Wizard, among the most underrated NBA players currently. His contributions across the traditional and advanced stat lines are impressive. For our eye-test acolytes, the guy is always in the right place at the right time. Given his age, I would rank Otto as our #2 asset behind John Wall.

Otto Porter is a top 10 SF. Thoughts?

I would lean towards no although I love the way Otto is playing right now. Here are the small forwards I would say are better although you could convince me that Porter is better than Barnes.

Jae Crowder
Batum
LeBron
Paul George
Kevin Durant
Harrison Barnes
Andre Iguodala
Trevor Ariza
Andrew Wiggins
Carmelo Anthony
Kevin Durant
Kawai Leonard
Gordon Hayward

This list shows how good the SF position is. There are 4 guys (Lebron, Durant and Leonard) on it who are among the top 6-7 players in the NBA. And another two (George and Carmelo) who are probably top 15. Otto has a chance of being as good as anyone else on the list (with the possible exception of Wiggins) and he his younger and less experienced than anyone on the list (with the exception of Wiggins).

[tontoz]

His 3 pt shooting is trending up. I would like to see more rebounds though.

[dckingsfan]

Nice trend and my predictions...

Code: Select all

Season   Age   MP     PER    TS%     ORB%  DRB%   TRB%   AST%   STL%   BLK%   TOV%   VORP
2013-14   20   319    6.0    0.405   7.5   13.3   10.4    4.6   1.3    0.3    12.7   -0.4
2014-15   21   1432   11.6   0.523   5.6   11.6    8.7    6.8   1.6    1.7    10.9    0.6
2015-16   22   1814   14.3   0.552   4.5   14.6    9.4    8.6   2.5    1.1     9.0    1.7
2016-17   23   ??     17.0   0.582   4.5   15.2   10.4   11.0    2.5   1.2    10.0    2.3


Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

[TheSecretWeapon]

Nice trend and my predictions...

Code: Select all

Season   Age   MP     PER    TS%     ORB%  DRB%   TRB%   AST%   STL%   BLK%   TOV%   VORP
2013-14   20   319    6.0    0.405   7.5   13.3   10.4    4.6   1.3    0.3    12.7   -0.4
2014-15   21   1432   11.6   0.523   5.6   11.6    8.7    6.8   1.6    1.7    10.9    0.6
2015-16   22   1814   14.3   0.552   4.5   14.6    9.4    8.6   2.5    1.1     9.0    1.7
2016-17   23   ??     17.0   0.582   4.5   15.2   10.4   11.0    2.5   1.2    10.0    2.3


Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

[nate33]

Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

TSW, I've been thinking about your PPA metric and have a suggestion that you might want to consider.

You mentioned recently that Porter ranks higher than Melo. While I understand why this is the case (due to Melo's low efficiency), I fear that it doesn't really pass the "smell test". As I understand it, your system rates Porter higher because he shoots infrequently at a very efficient rate, which helps a team more than shooting very frequently at an average or slightly-below-average rate. A guy that shoots 8 times a game at a .590 TS% is more valuable than a guy that shoots 20 times a game at a .535 TS%.

I'm not so sure that this is a fair way to look at it.

The way I see it, nearly every player in the league could post a really high TS% if they selectively took only 3 or 4 shots - the shots that they are most likely to make. In each game, there are a certain number of fast breaks, offensive putbacks, missed defensive rotations, etc. that result in really easy looks. NBA players make those shots most of the time. The league wide TS% of shots of that nature is probably in the 70% range, if not higher. That means the rest of the shots - shots taken in the half court in the face of good defensive pressure, must have a much lower TS% than the league average of .541.

Does your system account for this phenomenon? Does it assume that 3 or 4 easiest shot attempts per game for each player should actually have a very high TS%, with each additional shot attempt likely to have a lower TS%?

[dckingsfan]

Hey Nate - that is a really good point. Anthony can create his own shot. And your point about differential on the offensive end makes sense when weighting in against the number of shots. Just a note that Carmelo hasn't shot well from 3 point land so he isn't spreading the floor for his teammates that well - just a nit.

But on the defensive end, it doesn't seem to be close (but that is the "eye test" - been watching the games since my wife is a fan - smh). Porter is highly disruptive and Anthony isn't moving well - he goes for rebounds but that is the extent of what I am seeing on the defensive end of the court.

So, if I was choosing - right now, for this season - I would choose Porter. Maybe Carmelo would be playing with more effort if he thought he was going to the playoffs, so there is that.

[dckingsfan]

Nice trend and my predictions...

Code: Select all

Season   Age   MP     PER    TS%     ORB%  DRB%   TRB%   AST%   STL%   BLK%   TOV%   VORP
2013-14   20   319    6.0    0.405   7.5   13.3   10.4    4.6   1.3    0.3    12.7   -0.4
2014-15   21   1432   11.6   0.523   5.6   11.6    8.7    6.8   1.6    1.7    10.9    0.6
2015-16   22   1814   14.3   0.552   4.5   14.6    9.4    8.6   2.5    1.1     9.0    1.7
2016-17   23   ??     17.0   0.582   4.5   15.2   10.4   11.0    2.5   1.2    10.0    2.3


Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

Okay, making my prediction - 175 next year.

[AFM]

Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

TSW, I've been thinking about your PPA metric and have a suggestion that you might want to consider.

You mentioned recently that Porter ranks higher than Melo. While I understand why this is the case (due to Melo's low efficiency), I fear that it doesn't really pass the "smell test". As I understand it, your system rates Porter higher because he shoots infrequently at a very efficient rate, which helps a team more than shooting very frequently at an average or slightly-below-average rate. A guy that shoots 8 times a game at a .590 TS% is more valuable than a guy that shoots 20 times a game at a .535 TS%.

I'm not so sure that this is a fair way to look at it.

The way I see it, nearly every player in the league could post a really high TS% if they selectively took only 3 or 4 shots - the shots that they are most likely to make. In each game, there are a certain number of fast breaks, offensive putbacks, missed defensive rotations, etc. that result in really easy looks. NBA players make those shots most of the time. The league wide TS% of shots of that nature is probably in the 70% range, if not higher. That means the rest of the shots - shots taken in the half court in the face of good defensive pressure, must have a much lower TS% than the league average of .541.

Does your system account for this phenomenon? Does it assume that 3 or 4 easiest shot attempts per game for each player should actually have a very high TS%, with each additional shot attempt likely to have a lower TS%?

Man, you really put something that I've been thinking about very elegantly. This ties in with the Gortat vs Cousins discussion. Gortat gets most of his looks at the rim on nice assists from Wall (he's a great finisher, not taking anything away from him, but these shots will always be converted at a higher percentage than any other shots from the floor).
I wonder if this is why PER favors players who shoot more.

[dobrojim]

Nice trend and my predictions...

Code: Select all

Season   Age   MP     PER    TS%     ORB%  DRB%   TRB%   AST%   STL%   BLK%   TOV%   VORP
2013-14   20   319    6.0    0.405   7.5   13.3   10.4    4.6   1.3    0.3    12.7   -0.4
2014-15   21   1432   11.6   0.523   5.6   11.6    8.7    6.8   1.6    1.7    10.9    0.6
2015-16   22   1814   14.3   0.552   4.5   14.6    9.4    8.6   2.5    1.1     9.0    1.7
2016-17   23   ??     17.0   0.582   4.5   15.2   10.4   11.0    2.5   1.2    10.0    2.3


2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

Okay, making my prediction - 175 next year.

That would be nice. A higher PPA than say Paul George (currently 149).
But I'm not holding my breath. That would be a pretty significant jump.
Can happen though, best or one of the more extreme examples being Draymond Green.

[dckingsfan]

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

Okay, making my prediction - 175 next year.

That would be nice. A higher PPA than say Paul George (currently 149).
But I'm not holding my breath. That would be a pretty significant jump.
Can happen though, best or one of the more extreme examples being Draymond Green.

Yep, a wildly optimistic homer prediction - I did predict that his WS48 would cross 110 this year... so, factor that in

[TheSecretWeapon]

Could you give us his PPA for the last 3 years?

2013-14 -- 15
2014-15 -- 74
2015-16 -- 126

TSW, I've been thinking about your PPA metric and have a suggestion that you might want to consider.

You mentioned recently that Porter ranks higher than Melo. While I understand why this is the case (due to Melo's low efficiency), I fear that it doesn't really pass the "smell test". As I understand it, your system rates Porter higher because he shoots infrequently at a very efficient rate, which helps a team more than shooting very frequently at an average or slightly-below-average rate. A guy that shoots 8 times a game at a .590 TS% is more valuable than a guy that shoots 20 times a game at a .535 TS%.

I'm not so sure that this is a fair way to look at it.

The way I see it, nearly every player in the league could post a really high TS% if they selectively took only 3 or 4 shots - the shots that they are most likely to make. In each game, there are a certain number of fast breaks, offensive putbacks, missed defensive rotations, etc. that result in really easy looks. NBA players make those shots most of the time. The league wide TS% of shots of that nature is probably in the 70% range, if not higher. That means the rest of the shots - shots taken in the half court in the face of good defensive pressure, must have a much lower TS% than the league average of .541.

Does your system account for this phenomenon? Does it assume that 3 or 4 easiest shot attempts per game for each player should actually have a very high TS%, with each additional shot attempt likely to have a lower TS%?

Yes, it's accounted for in PPA. There's a "break even" point on shooting efficiency. And, it's a per-possession rating. What a guy does per team possession is compared to what everyone else in the league does per possession.

Also worth mentioning is that performance fluctuates. In my last update, Porter had fallen into a tie for 10th (with Hayward) among the players b-r identifies as SF. They have Paul George at PF this season; if you want to count him at SF then Porter is T-11. Carmelo is up to 6th.

[TheSecretWeapon]

Hey Nate - that is a really good point. Anthony can create his own shot. And your point about differential on the offensive end makes sense when weighting in against the number of shots. Just a note that Carmelo hasn't shot well from 3 point land so he isn't spreading the floor for his teammates that well - just a nit.

But on the defensive end, it doesn't seem to be close (but that is the "eye test" - been watching the games since my wife is a fan - smh). Porter is highly disruptive and Anthony isn't moving well - he goes for rebounds but that is the extent of what I am seeing on the defensive end of the court.

So, if I was choosing - right now, for this season - I would choose Porter. Maybe Carmelo would be playing with more effort if he thought he was going to the playoffs, so there is that.

There's no inherent value in a missed shot. If Anthony, for example, took five fewer shots, it's not like the Knicks would suddenly have five fewer shots taken. Someone else would get those shots. Maybe they'd be better shots; maybe not. Anyone can "create" shots -- just fling the ball at the basket. Jordan Crawford comes to mind. The great players weren't necessarily shot "creators" they were/are shot MAKERS.

[TheSecretWeapon]

Man, you really put something that I've been thinking about very elegantly. This ties in with the Gortat vs Cousins discussion. Gortat gets most of his looks at the rim on nice assists from Wall (he's a great finisher, not taking anything away from him, but these shots will always be converted at a higher percentage than any other shots from the floor).
I wonder if this is why PER favors players who shoot more.

Gortat is no different than really any other big man. They're all dependent on guards because they don't bring the ball up the floor or initiate the team's offensive set. If a team wants to have a big man on the floor, he's going to have to work with teammates to score. Almost nobody is running post-ups and asking bigs to "create" shots because the numbers have been crunched and those are inefficient possessions -- and were inefficient for most bigs.

Now, Wall is a good guy to work with. Draws defensive attention, excellent court awareness and vision, excellent passer. But, Gortat is doing work too -- setting a solid screen (which Wall often uses poorly -- an observation I've made since his rookie year), making a well-timed cut to the right place, catching the ball in traffic, finishing against contesting defenders. The nature of

Thought experiment: replace Gortat with Kwame Brown. Kwame did a decent job setting screens. Did he roll to the basket effectively? Not often. Did he catch the ball when he got there? Sometimes, but most of the time nah. Did he finish well in traffic (or even when undefended)? Not really.

Not saying Gortat's irreplaceable. But, not just "anyone" could do what he does -- which also applies to Wall. They're both good players and they work well together. Gortat's efficiency and production this season is pretty normal for him. His career ortg is 113; this season it's 112. Career FG% is .550; this season it's .552. His at-rim percentage is down a little -- his career average is 72% and he's at 69% so far (had a rough start to the season, but it's been climbing throughout the year).

As to Cousins, with a green light to shoot and turn the ball over as much as Cousins does, I suspect a lot of guys could post similar offensive numbers. Not so for his rebounding, though. Flinging the ball at the basket isn't inherently valuable.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Instead of blowing this year's first; Washington should have offered that first, Nene, and Beal for Cousins. Throw in the 2018 first, as well if needed.

Gortat WITH Cousins is the way to go to make this a CHAMPIONSHIP CONTENDING team.

Demarcus is a darned good three point shooter who can very effectively play PF or C.

A lineup of Wall, Temple, Porter, Cousins, and Gortat would kick arse.

TSW, I think you're flat wrong about Cousins and turnover and effective field goal percentage. As a Wizard DC would stand for Demarcus Cousins. He's BETTER than Wall. He's NASTY and potentially A SUPERSTAR IN PLAYOFF BASKETBALL.

Forgive my hands11 channeled thoughts. I'm just stoked by the NCAAs and some positivity in my life.

[Ruzious]

Has Sacramento benefited by moving the most gifted offensive center to a plodding jump shooting PF? No. If I have Cousins playing with Wall, I have Cousins strictly playing center - even though he has become proficient at shooting 3's. And Gortat is strictly a center.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Has Sacramento benefited by moving the most gifted offensive center to a plodding jump shooting PF? No. If I have Cousins playing with Wall, I have Cousins strictly playing center - even though he has become proficient at shooting 3's. And Gortat is strictly a center.

If Okafor and Nene could play together, and Nene and Gortat could destroy the Bulls in the playoffs; Cousins could play quite effectively with Gortat.

Every team isn't Golden State. Stretch four is NOT the only way to win.

Cousins doesn't need to strictly play 5.

[Ruzious]

Has Sacramento benefited by moving the most gifted offensive center to a plodding jump shooting PF? No. If I have Cousins playing with Wall, I have Cousins strictly playing center - even though he has become proficient at shooting 3's. And Gortat is strictly a center.

If Okafor and Nene could play together, and Nene and Gortat could destroy the Bulls in the playoffs; Cousins could play quite effectively with Gortat.

Every team isn't Golden State. Stretch four is NOT the only way to win.

Cousins doesn't need to strictly play 5.

Okafor & Nene and Nene & Gortat didn't achieve very much. Good players but ordinary achievements. But those pairings were very good defensively (if not offensively) because Nene was outstanding at defending PF's. I think he was maybe the best defensive PF in the NBA for a few seasons.

Btw, Go Terps!

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

If a Gortat/Beal for Cousins deal went down I would want Nene back, even to play virtually half a season. Nene is a very good defender. I agree.

Yup, go Terps!!!

[dckingsfan]

Otto Porter putting together a nice 5 game stretch - 36 min per game adjustment

Code: Select all

PTs    REBs   ASTs   STLs   BLKs      FG%    3P%
16.5   5.3    1.8    2.2     0.9     .509   .579


[tontoz]

Before the AS break Porter shot 32% from 3. After the break he is shooting 44.6%.