Xatticus wrote:ezzzp wrote:Xatticus wrote: That is some ridiculously bad math.Spoiler:The difference between .340 and .371 on Fournier's volume is 14 additional makes over the course of the entire season. That's a total of 42 extra points for the year or an additional half of a point per game. To give you some perspective on the insignificance of that, the value of a single possession is about 1.1 points.
Per game scoring is primarily a function of field goal attempts. Fournier could score an extra five points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he is any better. He could score five fewer points per game and it wouldn't actually mean he was any worse.
Fournier could easily reach that additional 5.2 points per game if we simply took 4.5 shots per game away from the rest of the team and gave them to Fournier. That would almost certainly do more harm than good though, as he was below the team average in efficiency metrics.
Personally, I see little point in giving a large share of offense to average offensive players that bring little else to the team. An Aaron Gordon shot is significantly more valuable than an Evan Fournier shot because it comes along with the defense and versatility that Gordon brings when he is on the floor.
You're correct, not sure how I did that but I totally botched that math.
But giving a player more shots and role in offense because of defense and versatility makes zero sense to me...are you saying that Tony Allen FGA's are more valuable than Ray Allen FGA's?Spoiler:Gordon is a career .534 TS% /.321 3P%
Fournier is a career .558 TS% / .371 3P%
• Points Per Touch
Gordon: (18-19) .297 PPT / (17-18) .294 PPT / (16-17) .329 PPT / (15-16) .243 PPT / (14-15) .231 PPT
Fournier: (18-19) .348 PPT / (17-18) .426 PPT / (16-17) .367 PPT / (15-16) .317 PPT / (14-15) .317 PPT
• Creation for others (AST%)
Gordon: (Career) 12.0 / (18-19) 16.6 / (17-18) 11.7 / (16-17) 10.5 / (15-16) 10.3 / (14-15) 6.3
Fournier: (Career) 14.2 / (18-19) 17.6 /(17-18) 14.8 / (16-17) 14.8 / (15-16) 12.8 / (14-15) 11.5
• Driving (18-19)
Gordon: 456 drives / 205 FGA at 42.9 FG% / 82 FTA at 70.7 FT% / 10.3 AST% with 10.3 TOV%
Fournier: 706 drives / 311 FGA at 47.6 FG% / 64 FTA at 78.1 FT% / 11.9 AST% with 6.4 TOV%
• Catch and Shoot (eFG%)
Gordon: (18-19) 51.4 / (17-18) 54.5 / (16-17) 46.0 / (15-16) 43.5 / (14-15) 34.3
Fournier: (18-19) 54.0 / (17-18) 58.6 / (16-17) 54.2 / (15-16) 59.4 / (14-15) 55.9
No… of course not. That would be a silly argument. That's using two players that bear absolutely no resemblance to one another at the offensive end in place of two players that had remarkably similar usage and efficiency metrics this past season. Nor would I make an argument that a PJ Tucker shot has more value than a James Harden shot. These are hyperbolic statements that attempt to distort the entire nature of the argument.
The statistics you provided are almost entirely inconsequential because they are either embedded into the efficiency metrics (which tell more) or they simply don't reflect the present. I could cite the disparity in dunks, but it would add nothing to the argument. Why would I care about points per touch?
The goal is to get as much value as you can out of your distribution of minutes and usage. It's negligent not to consider the totality of a player's production when trying to accomplish this task.
Your argument only makes sense whem you must decide which player to give more minutes. When they are both on the court your whole logic crumbles.