Player of the Day: Andre Roberson

[ThunderBolt]

You guys dont realize how limited Roberson is compared to other teams limited guys offensively.

I would disagree with this statement considering that most of those with the opposing viewpoint are open to using data to support their argument. He sucks offensively. It’s pretty obvious.

Any offensive data regarding Roberson can be thrown in the trash. Nobody is guarded like him, and if people think they are they are either delusional or don't pay attention to other teams. It simply isn't the case.

You know, I’m not a complete analytics guy either. Obviously Presti isn’t or he wouldn’t have drafted Ferguson or traded for Grant. Analytics have their place but so does proper evaluation of player potential. If Abrines can become good enough defensively so that the stats show he’s helping us more than hurting, I’m all for it. I’m hopeful he does replace Roberson.

The problem with your argument is if you disagree with the spreadsheets or advanced metrics, you’ve not done a good job of explaining why those metrics are inaccurate and how we would be better off doing something different. You need to show why the metrics are inaccurate and not just make vague comments about how the flow is hurt when Roberson is unguarded. Quantify it or no one will take you serious.

If you’re not able to do that but you’re right, then be patient because someone who makes more money than both of us with figure it out. Then you can come back and say ‘I told you so’. Until then, you’ll never convince anyone that Grant is a better option than Roberson.

[hardenASG13]

I would disagree with this statement considering that most of those with the opposing viewpoint are open to using data to support their argument. He sucks offensively. It’s pretty obvious.

Any offensive data regarding Roberson can be thrown in the trash. Nobody is guarded like him, and if people think they are they are either delusional or don't pay attention to other teams. It simply isn't the case.

You know, I’m not a complete analytics guy either. Obviously Presti isn’t or he wouldn’t have drafted Ferguson or traded for Grant. Analytics have their place but so does proper evaluation of player potential. If Abrines can become good enough defensively so that the stats show he’s helping us more than hurting, I’m all for it. I’m hopeful he does replace Roberson.

The problem with your argument is if you disagree with the spreadsheets or advanced metrics, you’ve not done a good job of explaining why those metrics are inaccurate and how we would be better off doing something different. You need to show why the metrics are inaccurate and not just make vague comments about how the flow is hurt when Roberson is unguarded. Quantify it or no one will take you serious.

If you’re not able to do that but you’re right, then be patient because someone who makes more money than both of us with figure it out. Then you can come back and say ‘I told you so’. Until then, you’ll never convince anyone that Grant is a better option than Roberson.

I've done this, repeatedly, and the results against elite teams in the playoffs speak for themselves. I love how people rip Donovan all the time, but turn to "I guess an NBA coach making millions isn't as smart as you" comments. Like he hasn't made bonehead personnel decisions with the thunder, or Brooks for that matter (perkins). They butchered an almost surefire dynasty. Enough is enough it's a miracle they are getting a second chance.

[slick_watts]

I've done this, repeatedly, and the results against elite teams in the playoffs speak for themselves.

except you're utterly wrong about this and pretend you're right. you make blatantly untrue claims such as 'the defense against the rockets wasn't effective with andre roberson in' or 'andre roberson was not effective against the warriors, but dion waiters 'woke up''. these kinds of claims out you as someone who is just using a general result (series losses to the rockets and warriors) to support a specific claim (the thunder can't win with andre roberson in his current role).

it's just as reasonable for me to make the claim that the thunder can't win with a point guard who has a 35% usage. correlation does not imply causation. and you need to bring a lot more to the table if you want to prove the relationship between andre roberson's role and the thunder losing both those series.

in these discussions it's been abundantly clear that you cannot do it, and some of the more specific claims you make in order to support your position (i.e. above) can be proven false with five minutes at stats.nba.com.

I love how people rip Donovan all the time, but turn to "I guess an NBA coach making millions isn't as smart as you" comments. Like he hasn't made bonehead personnel decisions with the thunder, or Brooks for that matter (perkins). They butchered an almost surefire dynasty. Enough is enough it's a miracle they are getting a second chance.

as if on cue, the typical straw man argument from you.

[Bergmaniac]

These okc teams have been title contenders for years (aside from last year), it's just mind boggling to me people hide behind the regular season stats, when it's all about the playoffs, particularly late rounds. Can't win a title playing 4 on 5 offensively, particularly when the problem is with a wing player, in the NBA. I want them to win titles, not have a top 5 rated offense or defense.

Why do you keep saying this? Roberson has always been better in the playoffs than in the regular season. He was one of the best OKC players against GSW in 2016. A series which OKC was 2 or 3 missed shots away from winning and would have won if OKC's other SG Dion Waiters didn't have a shocking series offensively (42% Ts% for the series and an incredible 21% TS% in the last 3 games).

[hardenASG13]

These okc teams have been title contenders for years (aside from last year), it's just mind boggling to me people hide behind the regular season stats, when it's all about the playoffs, particularly late rounds. Can't win a title playing 4 on 5 offensively, particularly when the problem is with a wing player, in the NBA. I want them to win titles, not have a top 5 rated offense or defense.

Why do you keep saying this? Roberson has always been better in the playoffs than in the regular season. He was one of the best OKC players against GSW in 2016. A series which OKC was 2 or 3 missed shots away from winning and would have won if OKC's other SG Dion Waiters didn't have a shocking series offensively (42% Ts% for the series and an incredible 21% TS% in the last 3 games).

I never liked dion waiters. If he was given more than 400 minutes with the starters, would they have built better chemistry/would he have fit in better? Well never know, he certainly improved the second he stepped out the door and was given a chance. Miami wouldn't consider trading him for Roberson straight up. I do like abrines more, though. Hopefully they give him the minutes he deserves.

And again, the playoffs magnify everything! Roberson is left even more wide open (embarrasingly so.....it gets to his head too, he looks like hes about to cry if he goes to the ft line) in the playoffs, as teams can more specifically plan for the matchup! As a result, his numbers can go up. The offense also stalls a ton against top teams (think game 6), and forces our stars into lower efficiency in such series as a result. Stars win titles.

[slick_watts]

And again, the playoffs magnify everything! Roberson is left even more wide open (embarrasingly so.....it gets to his head too, he looks like hes about to cry if he goes to the ft line) in the playoffs, as teams can more specifically plan for the matchup! As a result, his numbers can go up.

back peddling? this is a lot different than what you have insisted in the past, that the roberson-waiters lineup success against the warriors was due to waiters 'waking up'. i can find the quote of you saying this if you'd like.

meanwhile, it was clear to anyone who actually watched the series (and certainly clear to anyone who has even a fleeting interest in analytics or the boxscore) that andre roberson was fantastic.

The offense also stalls a ton against top teams (think game 6), and forces our stars into lower efficiency in such series as a result.

lets do an experiment.

game 6 v. the warriors.

andre roberson on: 104pp100 scored, 110pp100 allowed, -6.0pp100
andre roberson off: 113pp100 scored, 123pp100 allowed -10.0pp100

so, even in this one game that you yourself cited as supporting your position on andre roberson-- the results align with the idea that without roberson in the game the offense may improve, but the defense gets far worse. we were worse with roberson out of the game in game 6 of the WCF. because of defense.

[hardenASG13]

I've done this, repeatedly, and the results against elite teams in the playoffs speak for themselves.

except you're utterly wrong about this and pretend you're right. you make blatantly untrue claims such as 'the defense against the rockets wasn't effective with andre roberson in' or 'andre roberson was not effective against the warriors, but dion waiters 'woke up''. these kinds of claims out you as someone who is just using a general result (series losses to the rockets and warriors) to support a specific claim (the thunder can't win with andre roberson in his current role).

it's just as reasonable for me to make the claim that the thunder can't win with a point guard who has a 35% usage. correlation does not imply causation. and you need to bring a lot more to the table if you want to prove the relationship between andre roberson's role and the thunder losing both those series.

in these discussions it's been abundantly clear that you cannot do it, and some of the more specific claims you make in order to support your position (i.e. above) can be proven false with five minutes at stats.nba.com.

I love how people rip Donovan all the time, but turn to "I guess an NBA coach making millions isn't as smart as you" comments. Like he hasn't made bonehead personnel decisions with the thunder, or Brooks for that matter (perkins). They butchered an almost surefire dynasty. Enough is enough it's a miracle they are getting a second chance.

as if on cue, the typical straw man argument from you.

I've told you why your stats are invalid with him for the most part. You don't want to believe it (all stats must be valid!). There is nothing I can do to argue it further, as you will hide behind the all important regular season stats, while I see through them.

You cant give stats to counter existing data. You can only have the ability to think critically about whether the data is valid (will you cut and paste that first line?). This is true in all aspects of life, when it comes to data. Do you believe everything presented to you on CNN as well? You either cant, or dont want acknowledge this, as it is scary to share unpopular opinions. I get it. Particularly on here, as you know you will get argued against hard, going against anything the thunder broadcasters say. The stats with this guy paint an inaccurate picture. To think the defense couldn't get by without 1 wing, if the other players stepped up their effort on that end as they need to, is naive. The stats paint an inaccurate picture with this guy. It happens, basketball has lots of variables.

[hardenASG13]

And again, the playoffs magnify everything! Roberson is left even more wide open (embarrasingly so.....it gets to his head too, he looks like hes about to cry if he goes to the ft line) in the playoffs, as teams can more specifically plan for the matchup! As a result, his numbers can go up. The offense also stalls a ton against top teams (think game 6), and forces our stars into lower efficiency in such series as a result. Stars win titles.

back peddling? this is a lot different than what you have insisted in the past, that the roberson-waiters lineup success against the warriors was due to waiters 'waking up'. i can find the quote of you saying this if you'd like.

meanwhile, it was clear to anyone who actually watched the series (and certainly clear to anyone who has even a fleeting interest in analytics or the boxscore) that andre roberson was fantastic.

Yes, please find the waking up quote. I know I did say the thunder played their best ball that year (they underachieved in the RS) when waiters was playing well in the playoffs. I stand by it. If I said 'woke up', so be it.

Edit: it's also clear to anyone with even a remote ability to understand basketball that his offensive numbers in such a series are throw away numbers (he did do well slashing in that series, as anyone should.....he wasn't being guarded, slash and finish!), and that they come at the expense of the efficiency of the star players who are always driving into a wall. You really can't see that? What NBA player wouldn't put up good numbers in a series if they were not guarded?

[hardenASG13]

And again, the playoffs magnify everything! Roberson is left even more wide open (embarrasingly so.....it gets to his head too, he looks like hes about to cry if he goes to the ft line) in the playoffs, as teams can more specifically plan for the matchup! As a result, his numbers can go up.

back peddling? this is a lot different than what you have insisted in the past, that the roberson-waiters lineup success against the warriors was due to waiters 'waking up'. i can find the quote of you saying this if you'd like.

meanwhile, it was clear to anyone who actually watched the series (and certainly clear to anyone who has even a fleeting interest in analytics or the boxscore) that andre roberson was fantastic.

The offense also stalls a ton against top teams (think game 6), and forces our stars into lower efficiency in such series as a result.

lets do an experiment.

game 6 v. the warriors.

andre roberson on: 104pp100 scored, 110pp100 allowed, -6.0pp100
andre roberson off: 113pp100 scored, 123pp100 allowed -10.0pp100

so, even in this one game that you yourself cited as supporting your position on andre roberson-- the results align with the idea that without roberson in the game the offense may improve, but the defense gets far worse. we were worse with roberson out of the game in game 6 of the WCF. because of defense.

Whoops didn't see your second impressive stats. Do those account for who the other 4 players were when Roberson was on or off? As in, was Roberson playing with the starters, and when he was off were multiple bench players in. So you are saying the starters (who Roberson plays with) did better than when bench players came in? Wow that's amazing!

[slick_watts]

I've told you why your stats are invalid with him for the most part. You don't want to believe it (all stats must be valid!). There is nothing I can do to argue it further, as you will hide behind the all important regular season stats, while I see through them.

having an evidence-based discussion has nothing to do with 'belief'. you can ask me to believe anything. your entire premise in these discussions is a well known logical fallacy called argument from authority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

you have no expertise, no credentials, no position whereby any poster on this board should take your 'belief' as anything more than it is. it's up to you to show why the data is incorrect and you flat out have not done that, no matter how many times you claim you have.

You cant give stats to counter existing data. You can only have the ability to think critically about whether the data is valid (will you cut and paste that first line?). This is true in all aspects of life, when it comes to data. Do you believe everything presented to you on CNN as well? You either cant, or dont want acknowledge this, as it is scary to share unpopular opinions. I get it. Particularly on here, as you know you will get argued against hard, going against anything the thunder broadcasters say. The stats with this guy paint an inaccurate picture. To think the defense couldn't get by without 1 wing, if the other players stepped up their effort on that end as they need to, is naive. The stats paint an inaccurate picture with this guy. It happens, basketball has lots of variables.

[slick_watts]

Whoops didn't see your second impressive stats. Do those account for who the other 4 players were when Roberson was on or off? As in, was Roberson playing with the starters, and when he was off were multiple bench players in. So you are saying the starters (who Roberson plays with) did better than when bench players came in? Wow that's amazing!

i understand that with so much basketball knowledge your memory of such an insignificant game in thunder history may escape you.

most thunder fans remember kevin durant and russell westbrook playing nearly the entire game 6. it may have been important, or something? 26 of roberson's 29 minutes that game were shared with kevin durant and russell westbrook. russell westbrook and kevin durant were in the game for all of the 19 minutes that roberson sat.

what's your next excuse?

[hardenASG13]

Whoops didn't see your second impressive stats. Do those account for who the other 4 players were when Roberson was on or off? As in, was Roberson playing with the starters, and when he was off were multiple bench players in. So you are saying the starters (who Roberson plays with) did better than when bench players came in? Wow that's amazing!

i understand that with so much basketball knowledge your memory of such an insignificant game in thunder history may escape you.

most thunder fans remember kevin durant and russell westbrook playing nearly the entire game 6. it may have been important, or something? 26 of roberson's 29 minutes that game were shared with kevin durant and russell westbrook. russell westbrook and kevin durant were in the game for all of the 19 minutes that roberson sat.

what's your next excuse?

I thought more than 3 guys played at once? Was it possible replacements for ibaka and Adams weren't as productive as them?

[slick_watts]

Whoops didn't see your second impressive stats. Do those account for who the other 4 players were when Roberson was on or off? As in, was Roberson playing with the starters, and when he was off were multiple bench players in. So you are saying the starters (who Roberson plays with) did better than when bench players came in? Wow that's amazing!

i understand that with so much basketball knowledge your memory of such an insignificant game in thunder history may escape you.

most thunder fans remember kevin durant and russell westbrook playing nearly the entire game 6. it may have been important, or something? 26 of roberson's 29 minutes that game were shared with kevin durant and russell westbrook. russell westbrook and kevin durant were in the game for all of the 19 minutes that roberson sat.

what's your next excuse?

I thought more than 3 guys played at once? Was it possible replacements for ibaka and Adams weren't as productive as them?

yeah that might be it. or maybe andre roberson's impact on defense outpaces his impact on offense like the long term data shows? i wonder which it is.

[hardenASG13]

I've told you why your stats are invalid with him for the most part. You don't want to believe it (all stats must be valid!). There is nothing I can do to argue it further, as you will hide behind the all important regular season stats, while I see through them.

having an evidence-based discussion has nothing to do with 'belief'. you can ask me to believe anything. your entire premise in these discussions is a well known logical fallacy called argument from authority.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

you have no expertise, no credentials, no position whereby any poster on this board should take your 'belief' as anything more than it is. it's up to you to show why the data is incorrect and you flat out have not done that, no matter how many times you claim you have.

You cant give stats to counter existing data. You can only have the ability to think critically about whether the data is valid (will you cut and paste that first line?). This is true in all aspects of life, when it comes to data. Do you believe everything presented to you on CNN as well? You either cant, or dont want acknowledge this, as it is scary to share unpopular opinions. I get it. Particularly on here, as you know you will get argued against hard, going against anything the thunder broadcasters say. The stats with this guy paint an inaccurate picture. To think the defense couldn't get by without 1 wing, if the other players stepped up their effort on that end as they need to, is naive. The stats paint an inaccurate picture with this guy. It happens, basketball has lots of variables.

Another emoji....great counter.

You aren't a position of authority either. Stats can be invalid. Really, they can. Are you disputing this? How about having the ability to share an opinion, rather than just post stats, on a basketball discussion board? Clock is ticking till he's benched, Donovan already even hinting at it. Hope he gets traded in December so this team can make a legit title push. His new contact is a great trade piece (not too long or expensive).

[slick_watts]

You aren't a position of authority either.

i certainly am not! which is why i back up any claims i make with evidence when challenged and if it's just my idle opinion i'm sharing then i will clearly remark that is the case.

Stats can be invalid. Really, they can. Are you disputing this?

never invalid. they are what they are and it's more or less clear what is being quantified. interpretation can be 'invalid', i suppose. but i don't see why that's relevant here.

How about having the ability to share an opinion, rather than just post stats, on a basketball discussion board?

your 'opinions' are presented in a way that invites scrutiny. your denouncement of stats and nerds and usage of the 'watch the games' message board trope invites a certain kind of scrutiny.

Clock is ticking till he's benched, Donovan already even hinting at it

people have been saying that for years.

[hardenASG13]

You aren't a position of authority either.

i certainly am not! which is why i back up any claims i make with evidence when challenged and if it's just my idle opinion i'm sharing then i will clearly remark that is the case.

Stats can be invalid. Really, they can. Are you disputing this?

never invalid. they are what they are and it's more or less clear what is being quantified. interpretation can be 'invalid', i suppose. but i don't see why that's relevant here.

How about having the ability to share an opinion, rather than just post stats, on a basketball discussion board?

your 'opinions' are presented in a way that invites scrutiny. your denouncement of stats and nerds and usage of the 'watch the games' message board trope invites a certain kind of scrutiny.

Clock is ticking till he's benched, Donovan already even hinting at it

people have been saying that for years.

Validity is a major factor when dealing with statistics. Some stats are not valid, and in fact misleading, in this case roberson.

Westbrook, for example, can be painted as an inefficient ballhog using stats, where if you watch the guy you know that's not accurate. You can also use stats to show Westbrook as a great player. Either stance could be argued against using stats as well.

[slick_watts]

Westbrook, for example, can be painted as an inefficient ballhog using stats

not really. westbrook scoring efficiency was at or above league average at insane usage. ball hog? well duh of course he is a ball hog. do you not think westbrook is a ball hog?

[sleestak33]

Just stop that nonsense. What passing ? Who did he pass the ball to to say he improved passing ? He is not playing any P&R, nor facilitating anything beside a simple handoffs at the top of flex actions. He had one simple dump off the floor pass to Adams during whole preseason.

The Robes haters, and Robes lovers out here are just an example how terrible someone's fanatical perception can go.

Reality about him is simple. He should play situational. Guard top dog wings in the league. 16-20 mins per game average. If playing against juggernauts like GSW, Cavs, Spurs, Rockets, use his minutes on the floor wisely, considering he'll contribute on the defensive end of the floor, but hurt you massively on offensive end, considering scouting report he brought himself.

I'm just really terribly dissapointed at him, considering his sayings about the time he alledgedly spent during offseason(s). He didn't improve a single thing in his game during his time in last few seasons, beside his toughness. Damnit, I'm watching all that Defensive highlights over youtube in past 2 years, the pest he is, the tough nights he gives to mvp caliber players.
And then I'm in a situation where I have to defend him in convos with some of my friends, who actually know the bussiness, do some scouting for European teams for Balkans.
You just cant have him for starter minutes on the floor if you are competing for championship. There has to be something he can do efficiently on the other end of the floor too. His cutting is great, but we aint the Warriors. We will never have a system like that, you have to have your main personnel to buy into that, and our guys dont want to move so much off the ball so much, to create that much opportunities for Robes cuting abilities ...

He had/has enourmous potential if he could just convert SOME of his wide open shots guys create for him. Its clear that he will never ever be a below average shooter, meaning his lifespan in NBA will be a lot shorter than it could be, when he starts to slow down ...

This is exactly what I've been saying although I think 16-20 minutes is still too much, especially against teams like the Warriors and Rockets who gain way too much of an advantage from not having to guard him and using his defender to double team and just stand by the lane clogging it for everybody else. Roberson's line in the 4 games they played the Warriors last year (only 13 points, 0-10 on 3s, 1-4 on free throws and also defensively allowing KD to average 37 points per game and Thompson got 34 in the last one) was almost incomprehensibly bad and he just didn't belong on the court with all those great players. OKC has absolutely no chance whatsoever of competing with the Warriors starting Roberson and if the ultimate goal of this team is to win a championship (and it better be) then they're going to have to go through them to get there. We just have to hope that Abrines and Ferguson both develop rapidly and show they can consistently knock down shots and play decent defense so that by the time the playoffs start Donovan can finally bench Roberson and we can get a decent two way player out there.

[bbms]

Man I don't get this Andre Roberson debate at all. The dude is what he he is: a terrific defensive player with a fundamental flaw in his game (jumpshooting, free throw shooting) that gets exposed by how our offensive concepts are managed to get him in the worst position possible to hide his flaws.

A player as smart, mobile, strong and good at finishing at the rim as Roberson should never be spotting up threes in the corner of the offense, should rather be involved in off the ball screens, pick and roll screens, and back door cuts.

The issue with him is play design. He is a damn good player, poorly utilized. He should be played as a traditional PF in this offense.

[Bergmaniac]

You beat a 60+ wins team in 2016 (which also had a historically great defense) and had a 73 wins team on the ropes with Roberson playing about 30 MPG, so obviously you can win a title with him playing such minutes. Not if this Warriors team stays as strong as last season, but then again that team will beat anyone in the NBA history, so this doesn't say much.