Is the team better without Lee?

[floppymoose]

If your backup is crap that will make your splits look better. If your backup is better than you then your splits will look poor.

Then again, if you are getting paid 15 mill a year, your backup shouldn't be better than you.

And if you are being paid to be a primo rebounder, you should actually make your team rebound better when you play.

[TaylorMonkey]

If your backup is crap that will make your splits look better. If your backup is better than you then your splits will look poor.

Then again, if you are getting paid 15 mill a year, your backup shouldn't be better than you.

But isn't this also influenced by the quality of opponent backups? Ie, your backup may be a bit worse than you but much better than other backups.

[floppymoose]

The short answer is yes. If the league conspires to send out their best players against Lee and their worst when he sits, then that can affect the results.

What I see with my eyes is that he doesn't help us against the good teams. When I see the data agrees with me, I don't have any mysteries left to solve. Obviously if your eyes don't agree then maybe you want to dig deeper in the data.

This trend, though, is a frequent one for Lee. NY teams often rebounded better with him sitting, and did better in the points for/against with him sitting. At some point the pattern goes on long enough that looking for some other factor that explains it no longer makes sense.

[oaktownwarriors87]

Per 100 possessions vs winning teams (including the playoffs)

Stephen Curry: +5.5
Jarrett Jack: +3.9
Harrison Barnes: -0.4
Festus Ezeli: -0.5
David Lee: -2.8
Klay Thompson: -3.5
Andrew Bogut: -4.2
Carl Landry: -4.3

Code: Select all

With David Lee
Offense: 103.5
Defense: 106.5 
Difference: -3.0

Without David Lee
Offense: 106.9
Defense: 107.1
Difference: -0.2

With Andrew Bogut
Offense: 103.9
Defense: 109.4 
Difference: -5.5

Without Andrew Bogut
Offense: 104.8
Defense: 106.1
Difference: -1.3

With Harrison Barnes
Offense: 104.0
Defense: 105.5 
Difference: -1.5

Without Harrison Barnes
Offense: 107.2
Defense: 108.3
Difference: -1.1

With Klay Thompson
Offense: 104.6
Defense: 107.5 
Difference: -2.9

Without Klay Thompson
Offense: 104.9
Defense: 104.3
Difference: +0.6


With Stephen Curry
Offense: 106.4
Defense: 107.1 
Difference: -0.7

Without Stephen Curry
Offense: 99.5
Defense: 105.7
Difference: -6.2


With Jarrett Jack
Offense: 106.6
Defense: 107.1 
Difference: -0.5

Without Jarrett Jack
Offense: 101.8
Defense: 106.2
Difference: -4.4

With Carl Landry
Offense: 105.7
Defense: 110.0 
Difference: -4.3

Without Carl Landry
Offense: 103.8
Defense: 103.8
Difference: 0.0



With Festus Ezeli
Offense: 104.5
Defense: 106.9 
Difference: -2.4

Without Festus Ezeli
Offense: 104.7
Defense: 106.6
Difference: -1.9




[Jester_]

This year's Andrew Bogut numbers shouldn't be used to come to any conclusiosn for obvious reasons... he really was putrid in a lot of stretches this season. Klay being that low isn't a surprise either, he has a tendency to choke in bigger games (from my anecdotal experience)... but he's also a second year player. Barnes is stone cold under pressure, and Curry shines in the bright lights.

All the data makes it pretty clear, Lee hurts us when it matters most. I also think these numbers should be taken with a grain of salt with guys like Jack and Landry because per 100 posession numbers aren't necessarily indicative of a bench players effectiveness (they're often played in different roles in bigger games than normal).

[floppymoose]

In Bogut's case we actually have big dance numbers themselves. We don't have to go to the regular season when he was limping through games.

Code: Select all

Bogut ON in round 1
111.2   Warriors points per 100 possessions
103.9   Opponent points per 100 possessions
54.7%   Warriors total rebound % against opponent


Code: Select all

Bogut OFF in round 1
109.6   Warriors points per 100 possessions
109.2   Opponent points per 100 possessions
50.1%   Warriors total rebound % against opponent

The bottom line in round 1:

Bogut vs no Bogut:
+1.6 Warriors points per 100 possessions
-5.3 Opponent points per 100 possessions
+4.6 Warriors total rebound % against opponent


Net points per 100 possessions:
Bogut +6.9

Bogut plus Curry was why I picked the Warriors to win 49 games this season. I was high because Bogut was not really ready to play until season end. But Curry was so amazing we came close to that anyway. Also Barnes ended up being a lot better than I expected in his rookie season.

btw, that rebound bump from Bogut is huge. It's very very hard for a player to take your whole team from 50% to almost 55%.

[Onus]

Klay thompson and JJ having such big negatives against winning teams is interesting.

[floppymoose]

JJ is negative because he is on during the bulk of Curry Off time. Since Curry is an all star quality player and the best player on our team, that dooms Jack's numbers somewhat.

Klay is negative because he really does struggle against the good teams, as far as I can tell.

[statsman]

Klay thompson and JJ having such big negatives against winning teams is interesting.

They were in a lot of games during the 4th quarters, in many cases playing catchup. Might explain why Barnes was slightly positive, as he usually sat most of the 4th quarters.

[TaylorMonkey]

Per 100 possessions vs winning teams

Stephen Curry: +5.5
Harrison Barnes: +0.6
Festus Ezeli: -0.5
David Lee: -2.8
Klay Thompson: -3.5
Jarrett Jack: -3.9
Andrew Bogut: -4.2
Carl Landry: -4.3

I think Barnes is supposed to be -0.6 and Jack +3.9 unless I'm not understanding how to subtract off from on.

This is certainly interesting.

Onus, if you say these stats are damning for David Lee, how do they reflect on Klay?

Jack actually looks very good as well.

I agree about Bogut's stats-- which is why I want to reevaluate Lee with this version of Bogut, ie. our original vision of the Bogut/Lee tandem.

[oaktownwarriors87]

Per 100 possessions vs winning teams

Stephen Curry: +5.5
Harrison Barnes: +0.6
Festus Ezeli: -0.5
David Lee: -2.8
Klay Thompson: -3.5
Jarrett Jack: -3.9
Andrew Bogut: -4.2
Carl Landry: -4.3

I think Barnes is supposed to be -0.6 and Jack +3.9 unless I'm not understanding how to subtract off from on.

This is certainly interesting.

Onus, if you say these stats are damning for David Lee, how do they reflect on Klay?

Jack actually looks very good as well.

I agree about Bogut's stats-- which is why I want to reevaluate Lee with this version of Bogut, ie. our original vision of the Bogut/Lee tandem.

You're right.

What's interesting is that Lee had a +/- of -0.5 against winning teams before the playoffs. The teams performance against Denver without Lee has really boosted everyone's numbers (Curry jumped from +2.5 to +5.5).

So the question is, did the Warriors play well against Denver because Lee sat? Was it because we matched up well against them because they didn't have post players or outside shooters? Or was it because Bogut stepped up his game? Some combination of those?

The San Antonio series should help give some more insight.

[MightyReds2020]

Very interesting stats Floppy and it goes against conventional wisdom (at least to casual fans like myself) that Lee's offense helps the Warriors. The -5.7 per-100 poss. is alarming even knowing the context.

I am always leaning toward trading Lee due to his contract but was willing to get him a chance playing next to a healthy Bogut but now I'm not sure anymore.

[statsman]

Per 100 possessions vs winning teams

Stephen Curry: +5.5
Harrison Barnes: +0.6
Festus Ezeli: -0.5
David Lee: -2.8
Klay Thompson: -3.5
Jarrett Jack: -3.9
Andrew Bogut: -4.2
Carl Landry: -4.3

I think Barnes is supposed to be -0.6 and Jack +3.9 unless I'm not understanding how to subtract off from on.

Yeah, looks like Jack should be +3.9. Not sure if Barnes should be -0.6 or -0.4. The Barnes off delta was calculated as -0.9, but 107.2 -108.3 = -1.1. Maybe 107.2 should be 107.3 and 108.3 should be 108.2.

[floppymoose]

Very interesting stats Floppy and it goes against conventional wisdom (at least to casual fans like myself) that Lee's offense helps the Warriors. The -5.7 per-100 poss. is alarming even knowing the context.

Lee juices the offense hugely if you look at ALL opponents:
108 pp100p when he's on court,
101 when he's off.

It's just that it doesn't hold up against the teams I listed. His game just doesn't translate against those types of squads. And since those are the squads we will compete against in the playoffs, that's kind of a big deal.

[Jester_]

Good Grantland article on how we're a better team without Lee: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-trian ... r-all-star

Losing Lee will be particularly helpful in this series because he's an awful pnr defender, and Parker is the best player in the league at running it. Draymond Green on the other hand is exceptional at handling PnR's, so the Spurs best weapon against us disappears without Lee on the floor.

Hopefully Lacob is paying close attention to this series and how Memphis has played without Rudy Gay. To be a good franchise, you need to make bold moves, and we need to dump Lee as soon as possible and get a bruising, tough-guy forward in his stead.

[turk3d]

Even ESPN is jumping on this:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... -david-lee

[TheFix]

You guys really need to trade Lee this offseason - you have the chance to fleece a stupid team if you play your cards right.

Lee's value is high - time to sell.

[Onus]

this is hilarious that the national media is jumping on this ... well this game doesn't say much cuz Splitter didn't play, but it looks promising.

[KevinMcreynolds]

can Lee coach? We need one.

[BW32]

can Lee coach? We need one.

If those who can't do teach then we might have the greatest defensive coach in the history of the league on our hands.