RealGM

I've checked the +- stats for the Thunder's first 4 games and came up with the following:

I added up the +- numbers for each Thunder player individually:


Westbrook +1
Thabo -9
Perk -8
Durant +14
Ibaka -15
Harden +33
Collision +27
Nazr +19
Maynor +13
Cook +11

I did than break it down to the minutes they played in total and made a +- stats per 48 minutes played:

Westbrook +0.4
Thabo -5.2
Perk -3.5
Durant +4.3
Ibaka -7.1
Harden +12.5
Collision +16.2
Nazr +16.6
Maynor +10.4
Cook +10.4

Now we always talk about Nick Collison being the +- champ, which has some truth to it, but it doesnt really tell the whole story.

What you can see clearly from these stats, is that the bench is performing way better than the starting unit. We kinda knew that already, plus you also have to consider that they are usually playing against the other team's second unit.

Still, the only game our starters have had better +- ratio was against the TWolves. Other than that, our bench players were WAY better in the other 3 games.

Slick, can you maybe show us a statistic like that for the last 1 or 2 seasons?
I would have to look them up one by one, but Im sure you know an easier way

I definitely think we NEED to change our starting five.
Either put in Harden or Maynor instead of Thabo and look what will happen.
With Maynor at 1, we could play Westbrook at 2 and still have Harden coming from the bench to play 30+ minutes.

What do you all think?

Thanks for the amount of effort you put into this.
The first thing that jumped out at me was Harden. The eye test told me the same thing but its good to see it quantified.
Also Nazr? WTF? THAT does not pass teh eye test.

Well, the starting unit has not been our best unit for some time.

http://basketballvalue.com/amofunit.php ... 14-847-253

Through four games the starters are -1 per 100 possessions. The defense has been good but again like last season, the starters cannot put points on the board, only putting up 92 points per 100 possessions which is very poor.

http://basketballvalue.com/amofunit.php ... =2010-2011

What's a little troubling is that last season this lineup was way more positive, almost +6 per 100 possessions. Much better offensively. It seems the playoff woes for the starters is bleeding into the regular season.

When the team brings in the first subs usually it's Collison and Harden who are both way stronger offensively than the players that are leaving the floor. So it's no surprise that they are both so strong on +/- since they are having the effect of balancing the floor. It's hard to envision a scenario where the Thunder do not realize their starting unit has been ineffective since last March, but if they do realize it they are ignoring it. Starting either Harden or Cook would probably help, and make the starters look a little bit better on the +/- thing.

slick_watts wrote:Well, the starting unit has not been our best unit for some time.

http://basketballvalue.com/amofunit.php ... 14-847-253

Through four games the starters are -1 per 100 possessions. The defense has been good but again like last season, the starters cannot put points on the board, only putting up 92 points per 100 possessions which is very poor.

http://basketballvalue.com/amofunit.php ... =2010-2011

What's a little troubling is that last season this lineup was way more positive, almost +6 per 100 possessions. Much better offensively. It seems the playoff woes for the starters is bleeding into the regular season.

When the team brings in the first subs usually it's Collison and Harden who are both way stronger offensively than the players that are leaving the floor. So it's no surprise that they are both so strong on +/- since they are having the effect of balancing the floor. It's hard to envision a scenario where the Thunder do not realize their starting unit has been ineffective since last March, but if they do realize it they are ignoring it. Starting either Harden or Cook would probably help, and make the starters look a little bit better on the +/- thing.

the reason Slick is Westbrooks early troubles.