Image ImageImage Image

Rumor: Lauri wants out.

Moderators: HomoSapien, dougthonus, kulaz3000, fleet, RedBulls23, Ice Man, Tommy Udo 6 , AshyLarrysDiaper, GimmeDat, DASMACKDOWN, Payt10

User avatar
Showtime23
Veteran
Posts: 2,962
And1: 912
Joined: Oct 12, 2018

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#201 » by Showtime23 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:28 pm

samwana wrote:Interesting though, because it could be the cap goes way down. It's going to be a gamble for both sides. Maybe you think you get a real bargain at 10-12m a year and it becomes an albatross contract because of changes in the cap and Lauri not developing.
I don't think there are much early extensions signed because who knows what's going to happen.

Sent from my POT-LX1 using RealGM mobile app


Why would you try to force him to haggling if you think he will regress every yr? Its better off dealing him and get a player you think will be a star. Either sign him at 15 per yr or deal him. If he signs for 10, hes not going to take basketball seriously. I wouldnt.
nitetrain8603
RealGM
Posts: 23,203
And1: 1,313
Joined: May 30, 2003
         

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#202 » by nitetrain8603 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:55 pm

I don't think you can sign Lauri to an extension unless you get rid of the horrible contracts the Bulls have. I'm talking about guys like Otto Porter who were given questionable contracts when the cap was up. With it going down, you're going to need to attach a pick or a player to get someone to take him.
Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,032
And1: 3,617
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
 

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#203 » by Little Nathan » Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:04 pm

nitetrain8603 wrote:I don't think you can sign Lauri to an extension unless you get rid of the horrible contracts the Bulls have. I'm talking about guys like Otto Porter who were given questionable contracts when the cap was up. With it going down, you're going to need to attach a pick or a player to get someone to take him.

Any Lauri extension would kick in after the Deals of Porter, Felicio and others expire next season.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,578
And1: 6,799
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#204 » by dougthonus » Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:12 pm

Little Nathan wrote:
nitetrain8603 wrote:I don't think you can sign Lauri to an extension unless you get rid of the horrible contracts the Bulls have. I'm talking about guys like Otto Porter who were given questionable contracts when the cap was up. With it going down, you're going to need to attach a pick or a player to get someone to take him.

Any Lauri extension would kick in after the Deals of Porter, Felicio and others expire next season.


Lauri extension prevents you from getting cap room. It doesn't put you in any danger. That said, there's really no reason an extension this year makes sense for either side. Lauri would need to give up a lot of potential money for the Bulls to want to commit early, and there's probably not a lot of reason to do that. The Bulls shouldn't pay him what his market value could be a year early because there's no reason to take on the additional risk to lock in a guy that doesn't project into a max player.

Not sure where meeting in the middle is on this topic, but if I'm the Bulls, it's hard to see why I'd go over 4/60 on an extension, and If I'm Lauri, it's hard to see why that buys me much, because I'd feel confident I'd get that if I wait as a floor and could get much more if I have a good season.
Little Nathan
Head Coach
Posts: 6,032
And1: 3,617
Joined: Mar 11, 2013
Location: Germany
 

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#205 » by Little Nathan » Mon Jun 29, 2020 6:30 pm

dougthonus wrote:Lauri extension prevents you from getting cap room. It doesn't put you in any danger. That said, there's really no reason an extension this year makes sense for either side.


Agreed, I wouldn't be interested in extending him at all right now. Just wanted to clarify that the bad deals we have don't really play a role in this.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,779
And1: 3,754
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#206 » by sco » Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:00 pm

If the Bulls signed him for a deal like 4/$60, I could see both sides getting enough of what they want. That said, I think both sides are better off waiting.
:clap:
Jiipee84
Senior
Posts: 507
And1: 108
Joined: Feb 08, 2019
     

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#207 » by Jiipee84 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:59 pm

I have strong feeling of that Lauri's extension is heavily depend on that will Boylen get fired or not.
If Karnisovas fires Jimbo Lauri signs new contract with bulls
but if Boylen stays head coach ( Reinsdorfs and Paxson like Boylen ) Lauri probably demands a trade.

Other thing which will affect Lauri's extension
is that how much salary-cap and cap-space goes down for seasons 2020-2021 and 2021-2022.

Then there's that qualifying offer chance but nobody can't know will Lauri do the same for Bulls what Porzingis did to Knicks.
I can see Lauri taking qualifying offer if Bulls can't extend him for a contract which satisfies Bulls and Lauri's camp.
But that is another story.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,779
And1: 3,754
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#208 » by sco » Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:45 pm

Jiipee84 wrote:I have strong feeling of that Lauri's extension is heavily depend on that will Boylen get fired or not.
If Karnisovas fires Jimbo Lauri signs new contract with bulls
but if Boylen stays head coach ( Reinsdorfs and Paxson like Boylen ) Lauri probably demands a trade.

Other thing which will affect Lauri's extension
is that how much salary-cap and cap-space goes down for seasons 2020-2021 and 2021-2022.

Then there's that qualifying offer chance but nobody can't know will Lauri do the same for Bulls what Porzingis did to Knicks.
I can see Lauri taking qualifying offer if Bulls can't extend him for a contract which satisfies Bulls and Lauri's camp.
But that is another story.

Clearly Lauri is not a big Kingpin fan. I see the similarity with KP and Phil/Knicks. That said, I think AK will build a good enough rapport with Lauri and his people where the only consideration about staying vs. leaving will be $. As a Bulls fan, I would love Lauri to channel his inner Jimmy Butler and bet on himself...I'd be happier if the Bulls had a guy who earned $25M per year and pay him what he's worth, than signing a guy to $15M/year who has played like a $10/M/year guy on the hopes he becomes a $25M/year guy in the future.
:clap:
Jiipee84
Senior
Posts: 507
And1: 108
Joined: Feb 08, 2019
     

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#209 » by Jiipee84 » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:39 pm

sco wrote:
Jiipee84 wrote:I have strong feeling of that Lauri's extension is heavily depend on that will Boylen get fired or not.
If Karnisovas fires Jimbo Lauri signs new contract with bulls
but if Boylen stays head coach ( Reinsdorfs and Paxson like Boylen ) Lauri probably demands a trade.

Other thing which will affect Lauri's extension
is that how much salary-cap and cap-space goes down for seasons 2020-2021 and 2021-2022.

Then there's that qualifying offer chance but nobody can't know will Lauri do the same for Bulls what Porzingis did to Knicks.
I can see Lauri taking qualifying offer if Bulls can't extend him for a contract which satisfies Bulls and Lauri's camp.
But that is another story.

Clearly Lauri is not a big Kingpin fan. I see the similarity with KP and Phil/Knicks. That said, I think AK will build a good enough rapport with Lauri and his people where the only consideration about staying vs. leaving will be $. As a Bulls fan, I would love Lauri to channel his inner Jimmy Butler and bet on himself...I'd be happier if the Bulls had a guy who earned $25M per year and pay him what he's worth, than signing a guy to $15M/year who has played like a $10/M/year guy on the hopes he becomes a $25M/year guy in the future.



You're right.
Maybe change of scenery would be best for Lauri but when it could be possible.

Right now nobody can't even know that is there NBA season 2020-2021 at all
if this corona pandemic stays as worse what it is now or is it getting worse before autumn 2020.

If Reinsdorfs goal really is keep Boylen as a head coach
then why they decided fire Gar Forman and put John Paxson advisory role.
And then they go hire new VP of basketball operations in Karnisovas and Karnisovas hires Eversley to GM.

These front office changes really doesn't make sense at all in bigger picture
if Reinsdorfs are ready to use their veto right ( if they have that ) in head coach hiring
and if it really happens Reinsdorfs won't allow AK to fire Boylen then it's better AK re-signs himself and goes back to Denver.

And being honest I don't see any reason to continue this rebuild farce
if owners are ready stay forever of this mediocrity where Bulls have been for years.

As a Finn i have still high hopes on Lauri and if he can't blossom to Bulls then it is better for him to go somewhere else in NBA.
I don't know what Lauri and his agent have decided to do if Boylen really stays in Bulls.

But if i should guess i would go with that Lauri demands a trade but if there isn't trade which is good for Bulls and Lauri
Then that qualifying offer comes realistic but lets see what Karnisovas and Eversley decide to do when time is right.
Dez
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,742
And1: 5,140
Joined: Jul 23, 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#210 » by Dez » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:39 am

There is not a hope in hell that Lauri takes the QO.
User avatar
Swuul
Sophomore
Posts: 116
And1: 91
Joined: Oct 26, 2017
   

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#211 » by Swuul » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:23 pm

Dez wrote:There is not a hope in hell that Lauri takes the QO.

Wanna bet?

If Lauri isn't traded (either before whatever is the latest trade date next winter, or as a sign&trade deal next summer), he *will* take the QO.
There are three kinds of people: Those who can count, and those who can't.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,779
And1: 3,754
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#212 » by sco » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:34 pm

Swuul wrote:
Dez wrote:There is not a hope in hell that Lauri takes the QO.

Wanna bet?

If Lauri isn't traded (either before whatever is the latest trade date next winter, or as a sign&trade deal next summer), he *will* take the QO.

I think the only way Lauri doesn't get a decent contract offer from Bull after next season is if he plays like he did this season (i.e. injured/marginal starter). If he ups his game under a new coach to that of a top 15 PF, they'll find common ground in the $15-$20M per range (or higher if he shows all-star performance levels).

One thing that I think the Euro players come to realize is the NBA has a bunch of teams in cities that you wouldn't want your family to have to live in (which is in Chicago's favor). I won't name the cities, but we know which ones they are.
:clap:
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,676
And1: 3,539
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#213 » by PaKii94 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:34 pm

dougthonus wrote:...


I've been away from a computer for the last few days. Let me address your post:


This seems like you have taken really small sample sizes to try and extract positive movement.


The overall trends I discussed in his shooting is from his overall season numbers. I did narrow it down to show you the differences between the sets but when I compare 2018 to 2019 to 2020, those are overall numbers. That's the data set we have.


Overall, he shot below the league average from the three point line this year. You remove data you don't like by saying it doesn't count because he's hurt and then extrapolate out the positive data. Given he's below league average overall, it seems pretty likely going through the same exercise of finding reasons to exclude negative data on other players would also raise their averages considerably.

It's been three years in the league, it's hard for me to ignore: 36.2%, 36.1%, 34.4% as his numbers from the three point line and pretend he's improving. If you want to say the injuries caused him to lower his percentages, sure, probably by about 2%.


Okay, again we come back to analyzing timeseries data. Using overall averages is flawed. You keep going back to overall numbers but again it is more nuanced than that. You can get the same overall numbers with radically different performances.

A simple (and current) example of this is the stock market. When looking at trends, you don't just put out the average and call it a day. You do this with the stock market and you'll lose a lot of money. The current average for nasdaq composite is 8,92.47. Does that number tell you about the record highs at the beginning of the year? Does it tell you anything about the covid influenced dip (analogous to an injury performance dip)? Does it tell you about the recovery in recent weeks to back to what it was before? No. it doesn't. All it tells is a jumping off point.

As for the bolded, I am not "removing the data". It's called organizing it into subsets which happens when a set of data has significantly different subsets. I am not picking and choosing negative games to remove. I am detrending the data. That's how you approach data analysis. The "injured" subset is still valid data. The point of it is a branching point. You can ask the question "Is Lauri injured?" If he is, he falls into the injured subset (which is trash performance) and if he isn't he falls into the healthy subset (which is usually good to great performance)

I've said this before: It's perfectly valid to be on the pessimistic side and say "Lauri is always injured so we can only expect 11 ppg on 30% 3pt shooting from him". I choose to take the optimistic take and say "If only Lauri can remain healthy, he could be at 20 ppg at 40% 3pt shooting". <- those become points of opinion, and everyone has their own. It's just disingenuous to label him at 35% and call it a day.

As for applying the same strategy to other players, I want to! If you can remove the injured subset from all the players, it would give a more accurate view of "true shooting" ability. It's the same reason why we discount Lavine's 2017-2018 poor shooting display, it was injury recovery from an ACL. It doesn't get lumped with his last two years. Zach isn't a 36% 3 point shooter (average of 34 during 2018 and 38% last year) He is a 38% shooter when healthy and 34% when coming back from injury. (I think Zach's true shooting ability is much higher easily 40%+ but he takes too many tough ass shots...that's a different discussion though)

Another player that I did apply this to was Jimmy. 2013-2014 he played through the turf toe injury. Many people wrote him off because he shot 29% from 3 that year. But it was pretty obvious the influence of the turf toe. Same thing is happening for Lauri. Except this time around, we didn't find out about Lauri's injury until after the fact (after the team was already imploding) which locked in people's opinion of him as "regression".

The only problem with this method is there isn't an easily managed dataset to sort through. I can do this for the bulls because I try to closely watch all 82 bulls games. I promise you analytics departments look at the data they have in the same way also instead of overall averages.


The other thing is his three point shot type:
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628374/shots-dash/

95.6% of his 3s are catch and shoot, assisted, 0 dribbles, which shows very little versatility. An elite three point shooter can shoot threes off the dribble and shoot in tight spaces.

56% of his attempts are considered wide open
38% of his attempt are considered open
6% of his attempts are considered tight
0% of his attempts are considered very tight


As far as "An elite three point shooter can shoot threes off the dribble and shoot in tight spaces." That is true. I guess if that's your qualifications for an elite 3pt shooter, then yeah Lauri is a bit off from that. However, there are only like 10 players (if that many) who qualify for that (and only 1 big man in KAT). Those kind of shots are tough to take and make. Most teams don't condone shots like that (we need Lavine to reduce those shots).

My qualifications for an elite 3pt shooter is more of the traditional sense a la Korver/Ray Allen/Klay. These guys wouldn't qualify with your "elite shooting" criteria. Compared to the traditional guys, I do think Lauri is "almost there".

For the shot distribution, you see that as a negative, I see it as a positive. Wouldn't you want your player to take open shots and avoid hard/contested shots? Do you want to see Lauri start chucking instead of passing it to the open man?

What you SHOULD have listed is his shooting percentages on open vs tight shots. Lauri regressed on open shots (overall) and I agree. It was disappointing. That's when you dig into the numbers more and see the injury trend.

Compared to a couple other big men 3 point shooters:
Townes 25% of his shots are not catch and shoot, only 45% of his attempts are considered wide open
Porzingis 11% of his shots are not catch and shoot, only 44% of his attempts are considered wide open

The one thing I think you can say is there just aren't many pure big men shooters out there who are any good though. Here's a list of Forward/Centers that have over 200 attempts and most are pretty awful percentage wise.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&per_poss_base=100&season_start=1&season_end=-1&lg_id=NBA&age_min=0&age_max=99&is_playoffs=N&height_min=0&height_max=99&year_min=2020&birth_country_is=Y&as_comp=gt&as_val=0&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&c1stat=fg3a&c1comp=gt&c1val=200&order_by=ws

Lauri is 3rd in percentage on that list as there really just aren't many big men shooting a lot of threes. In this sense, he's still more unique than we'd credit. There shooting revolution really hasn't hit big men that much. It's just that teams are going smaller much more frequently. Gets into a different discussion of course.


This is a different discussion as you state. I think it is disingenuous to compare him to KAT because KAT just had the best shooting season for a big man ever. He is the gold standard to get to...not the average. I do think Lauri can match it if he was the focal point that KAT is on his team but let's let Lauri get back to 15 fga per game before we start discussing best seasons ever. But already, your link shows even with shooting troubles/injuries/whatever excuse you want to make, Lauri is still top 3 in percentages for big men (and true shooting ability is a lot higher when healthy).

Anyway, back to the assisted vs unassisted rate. You need to break that down into 2 point shots vs 3 point shots. Lauri took a lot more 3s compared to KAT (shot distribution wise) so his assisted rate will automatically be a lot higher:

2 point assisted -- unassisted:
KAT: 50.5 -- 49.5
KP: 69.5 -- 30.5
Lauri: 53.5 -- 46.5
Dirk: 59 -- 41 (2011 championship year)
Bosh: 64 -- 36 (2012 championship year)

3 point assisted -- unassisted:
KAT: 81.6 -- 18.4
KP: 96.8 -- 3.2
Lauri: 99.1 -- 0.9
Dirk: 97 -- 3 (2011 championship year)
Bosh: 100 -- 0 (2012 championship year)

I think you are unfairly holding Lauri to a much higher standard than he should be held at. Like I said above, KAT is a gold standard but we shouldn't look down at Lauri if he can't match his shot creation abilities. Lauri is actually closer to KAT with his shot creation vs KP.

His assisted rates compare pretty favorably to other big men. It's his USAGE which was wayyy down. Which again, the reason it was down was due to injury. That's why I split the shot charts up between november and december to show a little bit more nuance.

You don't want to give a hurt/soft/passive Lauri who is finishing at 41% at the rim more shots. That's understandable. But when a dude is at 70% finishing at the rim, he should be utilized more. You can't say that's just a hot/cold streak. This was a clear distinction. And players don't have a 30% difference in finishing at the rim during hot/cold streaks.

Outside of actually shooting much better, the most useful thing Lauri could do would be to become a solid defensive center, he'd then provide a huge competitive advantage with his shooting. At PF, I'm not sure he really provides any competitive advantage vs starting a guy like Otto Porter at PF.


I strongly disagree with this. Playing Lauri at C is setting him up to fail. He has the defensive fundementals to play good defense but he doesn't have the strength for the thic bois or the length for the long bois. A "healthy" Lauri who isn't stiff hobbling around the court can play positive defense at the PF position.

His most value will come from consistent shooting (pray for health) and his bread and butter is pick and pop drives (which Bulls went away from this season). On those drives, he can bully smaller players and outrun faster players. He won't be a traditional post up threat (but that is extinct anyway).

But again, if history repeats itself, and Lauri gets injured and relegated into a spacer role (during which he will shoot poorly due to injury) then yeah, Lauri is not worth it at all.

---

Finally one last chart to illustrate my point of "I think he got better as a shooter this year":

This is overall data including injury data from all his seasons. You don't have the excuse of "taking out negative data".

Image

CT on this graph is corners + top of key 3pt attempts. year to year he improved his efficiency on those attempts. His next steps are to improve the wings. The left wing seems stable but do you see the outlier on the right wing? Do you expect him to continue to shoot 25% from there?

Then you can break it down further and compare healthy Lauri vs injured Lauri trends year to year.
Healthy Lauri went roughly 36 - 38 - 40 -> a consistent trend upwards including his troubles with the wing
Injured Lauri was consistent...consistently bad... roughly 30-34%. That's also a pretty clear trend.
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,578
And1: 6,799
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#214 » by dougthonus » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:09 pm

PaKii94 wrote:The overall trends I discussed in his shooting is from his overall season numbers. I did narrow it down to show you the differences between the sets but when I compare 2018 to 2019 to 2020, those are overall numbers. That's the data set we have.


When you break the sets into smaller subgroups instead of using the larger data set, the sample size becomes less relevant and meaningful.

Okay, again we come back to analyzing timeseries data. Using overall averages is flawed. You keep going back to overall numbers but again it is more nuanced than that. You can get the same overall numbers with radically different performances.


:dontknow:

I'm not convinced that timeseries data, in this instance, is more useful than the averages. I agree that generally you weight more recent data, but in this case, the data is consistent across a three year period. The variations in what he has done are not what I would expect to be out of bounds for normal variations of guys getting on hot and cold streaks.

As for the bolded, I am not "removing the data". It's called organizing it into subsets which happens when a set of data has significantly different subsets. I am not picking and choosing negative games to remove. I am detrending the data. That's how you approach data analysis. The "injured" subset is still valid data. The point of it is a branching point. You can ask the question "Is Lauri injured?" If he is, he falls into the injured subset (which is trash performance) and if he isn't he falls into the healthy subset (which is usually good to great performance)


How have you determined his injury dates to see what data falls into what branch? It would appear that you started with the assumption he has healthy and unhealthy data sets, and lumped the data into those sets based on performance rather than coming up with dates he was healthy and unhealthy and then creating the data sets based on that. This means by default, your data is absolutely destined to support your opinion, because it was segmented to back your opinion not based on knowledge of when he was actually hurt.

This is a different discussion as you state. I think it is disingenuous to compare him to KAT because KAT just had the best shooting season for a big man ever. He is the gold standard to get to...not the average. I do think Lauri can match it if he was the focal point that KAT is on his team but let's let Lauri get back to 15 fga per game before we start discussing best seasons ever. But already, your link shows even with shooting troubles/injuries/whatever excuse you want to make, Lauri is still top 3 in percentages for big men (and true shooting ability is a lot higher when healthy).


I think what it says is to me actually is that big men shooters (at least last year) weren't very valuable or were pretty rare. I think teams have largely transitioned to just going smaller.

Anyway, back to the assisted vs unassisted rate. You need to break that down into 2 point shots vs 3 point shots. Lauri took a lot more 3s compared to KAT (shot distribution wise) so his assisted rate will automatically be a lot higher:


I think this is a different discussion. We were starting with the premise of whether he was an elite shooter. An elite shooter is going to take more unassisted threes and more threes with less space. It's valuable, absolutely, in looking at the player's overall offensive abilities of course, just separate from their ability as a shooter IMO.

I strongly disagree with this. Playing Lauri at C is setting him up to fail. He has the defensive fundementals to play good defense but he doesn't have the strength for the thic bois or the length for the long bois. A "healthy" Lauri who isn't stiff hobbling around the court can play positive defense at the PF position.


I agree he shouldn't play center and probably can't.

This is overall data including injury data from all his seasons. You don't have the excuse of "taking out negative data".

Image

CT on this graph is corners + top of key 3pt attempts. year to year he improved his efficiency on those attempts. His next steps are to improve the wings. The left wing seems stable but do you see the outlier on the right wing? Do you expect him to continue to shoot 25% from there?


Why expect only the part that was bad to get better, but the part that was good to not decline rather than both parts to regress towards the mean?

Then you can break it down further and compare healthy Lauri vs injured Lauri trends year to year.
Healthy Lauri went roughly 36 - 38 - 40 -> a consistent trend upwards including his troubles with the wing
Injured Lauri was consistent...consistently bad... roughly 30-34%. That's also a pretty clear trend.


I am not sure I trust the way you determined healthy vs unhealthy. It feels like you let the data decide when he was healthy instead of finding when he was healthy and looking at the data. This means the data will automatically match your conclusion, because it was constructed to determine his health based on the results rather than determining his health based on his health. At least, it appears that way to me, but maybe I am incorrect on this point, and you have better ways of tracking when he was fully healthy vs not than I understand.
User avatar
PaKii94
Head Coach
Posts: 6,676
And1: 3,539
Joined: Aug 22, 2013
     

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#215 » by PaKii94 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:48 pm

dougthonus wrote:...


When you break the sets into smaller subgroups instead of using the larger data set, the sample size becomes less relevant and meaningful.


Agreed. But that's why you start with the largest dataset and THEN chunk it down to build up a story of how it was formed. You don't start with the smaller set.

:dontknow:

I'm not convinced that timeseries data, in this instance, is more useful than the averages. I agree that generally you weight more recent data, but in this case, the data is consistent across a three year period.


I, as a data scientist by profession, am trying to tell you that analyzing timeseries data as a timeseries IS more useful than the averages. The data IS consistent with an injury trend over a three year period (and for other players too).

The variations in what he has done are not what I would expect to be out of bounds for normal variations of guys getting on hot and cold streaks.


But your expectations are flawed then! I literally generated graphs for you showing you what the difference between normal variations and statistically significant trends are! I asked you for an example of a player that you thought was similar (Niko) and then provided data to show it's a different situation (and even that player had an injury trend) but you still don't believe it. I truly don't know how to explain it otherways.

How have you determined his injury dates to see what data falls into what branch? It would appear that you started with the assumption he has healthy and unhealthy data sets, and lumped the data into those sets based on performance rather than coming up with dates he was healthy and unhealthy and then creating the data sets based on that. This means by default, your data is absolutely destined to support your opinion, because it was segmented to back your opinion not based on knowledge of when he was actually hurt.


I am slightly offended that you think I would approach it like this. I determined the cutoff by the dates reported of the injury/when it was seen during the game. If a player misses some games that they say are due to a physical ailment, that's probably an injury right? If he is attempting to play through something, his game is expected to dip before recovery. Go back and my read post it has the injury dates:
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1947141&p=82217073#p82217073

Read on Twitter
?s=20

^ That's the oblique injury.

According to my amateur level doctor research, a grade 1 oblique strain (the mildest classification) takes on average about a month of recovery (without setbacks). Source: http://m.mlb.com/glossary/injuries/oblique-strain


^It literally took 1 month of recovery, of Lauri playing passive/soft/taking it easy/playing the perimeter role, as not to reinjure it and lines up with him giving a f*ck the next month and what do you see? 21ppg @ 64TS%.

He was trending up during the hot month, not down (which is what you would expect to see with normal hot streaks as players cool off). He was at 25 ppg @ 65TS%.

When does his play fall off again? Right when he rolls his ankle pretty severely (compounded with WCJ going down and him having to play C) here:
Read on Twitter
?s=20

See how he's speculating he might miss a few weeks? Lauri ended up continuing to play (but passively/soft/recovery mode Lauri).

^All of the above lines up with the eye test also. I am rewatching the games again and just finished Nov 3rd Pacers game. The difference in play/energy/competitiveness flipped like a switch. It wasn't any "cold" streak. It was a deliberate move. The other players weren't looking for him and he wasn't looking for the ball.

A player doesn't go from one month of 45TS% to one month of 65TS% as a cold/hot streak.

-----

I think what it says is to me actually is that big men shooters (at least last year) weren't very valuable or were pretty rare. I think teams have largely transitioned to just going smaller.


True but then you have to remember those smaller players are then classified as PF/C also and are also included in the dataset. Also, if you expand that list to include SF-PF hybrids, it's still a very small list.


I think this is a different discussion. We were starting with the premise of whether he was an elite shooter. An elite shooter is going to take more unassisted threes and more threes with less space. It's valuable, absolutely, in looking at the player's overall offensive abilities of course, just separate from their ability as a shooter IMO.


Sure I agree with that. but like I said, there are maybe a handful right now who can do that (and maybe 1 big). I classify those as generational/HOF shooters. I consider Korver/Ray allen/Klay to be elite shooters but they wouldn't be elite by your definition.

Could Lauri create a few more 3s himself? Yes. I don't really expect that from him before he improves all the other aspects of his game. Also he does need the opportunity/volume/usage to do it. He takes smart shots. If he's only taking 10, he's not going to take contested pull up 3s like lavine.

Finally, unassisted 3s ARE a small subset. Lauri would only need to make 1 unassisted 3 more every 10 games to be on a competitive level compared to other F/Cs

Why expect only the part that was bad to get better, but the part that was good to not decline rather than both parts to regress towards the mean?


These numbers can't regress to the means because they are the overall means! I expect his numbers to regress towards his healthy numbers. This year was pretty even distribution of healthy vs unhealthy games (roughly 50-50).

Then you can break it down further and compare healthy Lauri vs injured Lauri trends year to year.
Healthy Lauri went roughly 36 - 38 - 40 -> a consistent trend upwards including his troubles with the wing
Injured Lauri was consistent...consistently bad... roughly 30-34%. That's also a pretty clear trend.


I am not sure I trust the way you determined healthy vs unhealthy. It feels like you let the data decide when he was healthy instead of finding when he was healthy and looking at the data. This means the data will automatically match your conclusion, because it was constructed to determine his health based on the results rather than determining his health based on his health. At least, it appears that way to me, but maybe I am incorrect on this point, and you have better ways of tracking when he was fully healthy vs not than I understand.


I covered that above. These subsets are from the reported dates of injury. But again, I am slightly offended. I wouldn't gerrymander the data to fit my narrative. My hope is to see Bulls win. I don't prop up/bash players depending if I like them or not. I am a Lauri fan because I know he is a good player. I don't think he's a good player just because I am Lauri fan
Dez
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,742
And1: 5,140
Joined: Jul 23, 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
 

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#216 » by Dez » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:52 pm

Swuul wrote:
Dez wrote:There is not a hope in hell that Lauri takes the QO.

Wanna bet?

If Lauri isn't traded (either before whatever is the latest trade date next winter, or as a sign&trade deal next summer), he *will* take the QO.


So what you're saying is Lauri is stupid?

There is no way unless he is in fact stupid that a player who has missed as many games and has injury issues like Lauri takes the QO.
sco
RealGM
Posts: 14,779
And1: 3,754
Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Location: Virtually Everywhere!

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#217 » by sco » Wed Jul 1, 2020 12:33 am

Dez wrote:
So what you're saying is Lauri is stupid?

There is no way unless he is in fact stupid that a player who has missed as many games and has injury issues like Lauri takes the QO.

I think there are a number of Finns who don't like Lauri on the Bulls and want him to go elsewhere. Nothing wrong with that. Lauri hasn't been the star that many had hoped for here and many Bulls fans are down on him. If I were a Lauri fan first, I might feel the same.
:clap:
User avatar
ImSlower
Analyst
Posts: 3,476
And1: 3,161
Joined: Jan 06, 2011
Location: STL
   

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#218 » by ImSlower » Wed Jul 1, 2020 1:10 am

Hey, just wanted to say, as a casual poster here, how much I love reading posts like Pakii's up there, Doug's, etc. Thank you guys for thorough analysis. In the absence of live ball, reading forum discussions like this is captivating. I'm a lurker to some degree in many random corners of the internet, and this forum has been fascinating and enlightening for more than a decade (heck 20 year anniversaries coming for you OGs). Thanks guys and gals, keep it up, go Bulls, and damnit update this thread title :D
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 46,578
And1: 6,799
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#219 » by dougthonus » Wed Jul 1, 2020 1:30 am

PaKii94 wrote:A player doesn't go from one month of 45TS% to one month of 65TS% as a cold/hot streak.


Actually, I think this is exactly what happens. Over a 1 month period, I think these types of variance aren't that unusual. Granted, I haven't looked that closely, so maybe they are less normal than I expect.

True but then you have to remember those smaller players are then classified as PF/C also and are also included in the dataset. Also, if you expand that list to include SF-PF hybrids, it's still a very small list.


Not in the dataset I used to grab the players from the list I had which was just PF, C, and PF/C on basketball reference, most of these guys would be F or SF/PF or SF even if they were playing a lot at PF.

Sure I agree with that. but like I said, there are maybe a handful right now who can do that (and maybe 1 big). I classify those as generational/HOF shooters. I consider Korver/Ray allen/Klay to be elite shooters but they wouldn't be elite by your definition.


I would classify them as elite shooters too, and both do things that Lauri does not do. They run like mad and hit turn around 3s coming off screens on catch and shoots off of picks. Lauri doesn't do that. Lauri takes set shot, largely open and wide open three point shots. They create tremendous havok on the opposing defense, forcing guys to move and chase them and switch off the ball to not give up an open three. No one treats Lauri like that, nor does Lauri likely have the endurance to play like that, and that's okay, I don't think we'd expect a PF to play like that. However, one might expect Lauri to just shoot over guys like Dirk or Durant would utilize their height to score even in coverage and create pressure, but he doesn't.

Could Lauri create a few more 3s himself? Yes. I don't really expect that from him before he improves all the other aspects of his game. Also he does need the opportunity/volume/usage to do it. He takes smart shots. If he's only taking 10, he's not going to take contested pull up 3s like lavine.


I don't expect it from him necessarily either, but I would expect that from an elite shooter, which was the discussion we started at, but maybe there's no need to get hung up on those semantics though.

Finally, unassisted 3s ARE a small subset. Lauri would only need to make 1 unassisted 3 more every 10 games to be on a competitive level compared to other F/Cs


Being competitive with other F/Cs which also don't shoot these types of shots doesn't make him an elite shooter. He's a good big man shooter. I just think he's not elite or on the road to elite right now. I harp on that because an elite shooter is someone the defense would have to account for heavily at all times and play heavily off the ball and create mismatches just by moving and being on the court. That would be very valuable. Lauri isn't that guy yet, and I'm not confident he ever will be.

I covered that above. These subsets are from the reported dates of injury. But again, I am slightly offended. I wouldn't gerrymander the data to fit my narrative. My hope is to see Bulls win. I don't prop up/bash players depending if I like them or not. I am a Lauri fan because I know he is a good player. I don't think he's a good player just because I am Lauri fan


I hope your view on Lauri is correct and that healthy Lauri is a thing and that he can actually stay healthy.
User avatar
Axolotl
Starter
Posts: 2,021
And1: 1,794
Joined: Feb 05, 2018
Location: The Vasty Deep
   

Re: Rumor: Lauri wants out. 

Post#220 » by Axolotl » Wed Jul 1, 2020 4:01 pm

Nowadays I mainly come here occasionally to check if Boylen has been fired and for the speculations on his successor, but now I was rewarded with this high quality content from dougthonus and PaKii94. Kudos to you both!
"Now we're going to start playing winning basketball" - Bulls coach Jim Boylen 15. Dec. 2018
"They are going to learn to play winning basketball" - Bulls coach Jim Boylen 5. Nov. 2019

Return to Chicago Bulls