Player of the Day: Andre Roberson

[ThunderBolt]

You guys crack me up. 20 points, 16 rebounds and 4 assists in only 31 minutes is an absolutely phenomenal game, especially considering it came against Cleveland and you still stick to your guns that Kanter is somehow a negative for the team because he has defensive deficiencies. You're like the band on the Titanic continuing to play while the ship is sinking into the icy cold Atlantic. But yeah, keep posting that plus/minus stat because that's really convincing everybody it's legit. LMAO

The part of the illustration you miss is who represents the sinking ship. It’s the other four starters who play alongside Kanter. Regardless of the stats Kanter puts up, the opposing team always outscore the team Kanter plays on when he’s out on the court. His offense is not so good that the other four starters can cover his deficiencies. Years of data isn’t a mere coincidence. It’s an established fact.

Kanter is in the knicks most used lineup by far. That lineup has a positive net rating, and drops significantly when he's replaced with O Quinn.

If you want to go here, can we use multiple years of data with OKC to determine kanters value?

[hardenASG13]

The part of the illustration you miss is who represents the sinking ship. It’s the other four starters who play alongside Kanter. Regardless of the stats Kanter puts up, the opposing team always outscore the team Kanter plays on when he’s out on the court. His offense is not so good that the other four starters can cover his deficiencies. Years of data isn’t a mere coincidence. It’s an established fact.

Kanter is in the knicks most used lineup by far. That lineup has a positive net rating, and drops significantly when he's replaced with O Quinn.

If you want to go here, can we use multiple years of data with OKC to determine kanters value?

I don't want to go there. Just pointing out there are good and bad lineups with him. He's not always a negative as some here claim. It's a little extreme.

[sleestak33]

The part of the illustration you miss is who represents the sinking ship. It’s the other four starters who play alongside Kanter. Regardless of the stats Kanter puts up, the opposing team always outscore the team Kanter plays on when he’s out on the court. His offense is not so good that the other four starters can cover his deficiencies. Years of data isn’t a mere coincidence. It’s an established fact.

Kanter is in the knicks most used lineup by far. That lineup has a positive net rating, and drops significantly when he's replaced with O Quinn.

If you want to go here, can we use multiple years of data with OKC to determine kanters value?

You can pull up whatever stats or metric that you want but it comes down to one simple question that for some reason a lot of you don't get on this message board...does Kanter account for more points in an average game than he gives up defensively? The obvious answer to that is clearly yes and the more players you get like that on your team the more games you win because at the end of the day POINTS WIN GAMES. Kanter last year averaged 14 points in 21 minutes per game and also gave the team extra possessions with his offensive rebounds which also resulted in points and while not much he also averaged an assist per game. So in a given game last year Kanter was accounting for probably 18 points in the 21 minutes he played. Yes he gave up some points defensively in pick and rolls and some games he was a net negative but to act as if he is giving up more than 18 points per game is just beyond ludicrous and that's how much he would have to give up to be considered a negative for the team. Winning basketball is about getting more players on your team that can account for more points than the guys they match up with on the opposing team. It's really not that complicated.

[bondom34]

Actually Kanter does give up more than he scores which is the problem.

[slick_watts]

is this dude seriously just counting kanter's points and arbitrarily making up point value for offensive rebounds? lol

sleestak there's a very easy way to show that kanter's offense doesn't make up for his defense- teams are worse when he plays.

[RalphSampsonJr]

is this dude seriously just counting kanter's points and arbitrarily making up point value for offensive rebounds? lol

sleestak there's a very easy way to show that kanter's offense doesn't make up for his defense- teams are worse when he plays.

This is exactly why i am shocked people are still taking time out of their day to try communicate with this guy..

5 years of stats shows all we need to know about Kanter (Even though this WAS originally about Roberson).

[RalphSampsonJr]

Kanter is in the knicks most used lineup by far. That lineup has a positive net rating, and drops significantly when he's replaced with O Quinn.

If you want to go here, can we use multiple years of data with OKC to determine kanters value?

I don't want to go there. Just pointing out there are good and bad lineups with him. He's not always a negative as some here claim. It's a little extreme.

Its not extreme. 7 out of 8 years he has been. this year though he currently isnt!

[sleestak33]

Actually Kanter does give up more than he scores which is the problem.

That's absolutely laughable. So you're trying to tell me that last year Kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in only 21 minutes per game? Now let me ask you this question...does Roberson give up more points than he scores? You just said "that's a problem".

[slick_watts]

Actually Kanter does give up more than he scores which is the problem.

That's absolutely laughable. So you're trying to tell me that last year Kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in only 21 minutes per game? Now let me ask you this question...does Roberson give up more points than he scores? You just said "that's a problem".

for the millionth time: it's very simple to gauge kanter's value on offense relative to his value on defense by comparing lineup performance over enough time. and as it's been pointed out to you on numerous occasions, the uptick in offense is almost always overshadowed by the hit the defense takes. and it's happening in new york now too.

you can't just say 'kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in 21 minutes'. that's such a reductive, banal way of looking at how a basketball game works.

as an aside, last season there was one player who when put on the court with kanter kept the defense from going from 'poor' to 'downright terrible'. you know that player was? andre roberson. ironic, huh.

anyway the point is it's not about how many points a player scores when they are on the court it's how the team does when they are on the court, and how they do when someone else is.

[bondom34]

Actually Kanter does give up more than he scores which is the problem.

That's absolutely laughable. So you're trying to tell me that last year Kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in only 21 minutes per game? Now let me ask you this question...does Roberson give up more points than he scores? You just said "that's a problem".

Yes, and no. Because every point you score isn't something only you can do. If you give the ball to Hasheem Thabeet a foot below the basket he can scoop it in for 2 points. So can Enes. That doesn't make them equal offensive players nor equally valuable. Counting point scored isn't actually measuring how well a player impacts a team offense.

[sleestak33]

Actually Kanter does give up more than he scores which is the problem.

That's absolutely laughable. So you're trying to tell me that last year Kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in only 21 minutes per game? Now let me ask you this question...does Roberson give up more points than he scores? You just said "that's a problem".

for the millionth time: it's very simple to gauge kanter's value on offense relative to his value on defense by comparing lineup performance over enough time. and as it's been pointed out to you on numerous occasions, the uptick in offense is almost always overshadowed by the hit the defense takes. and it's happening in new york now too.

you can't just say 'kanter gave up more than 18 points defensively in 21 minutes'. that's such a reductive, banal way of looking at how a basketball game works.

as an aside, last season there was one player who when put on the court with kanter kept the defense from going from 'poor' to 'downright terrible'. you know that player was? andre roberson. ironic, huh.

anyway the point is it's not about how many points a player scores when they are on the court it's how the team does when they are on the court, and how they do when someone else is.

There's nothing "reductive or banal" about it...that's basketball in a nutshell. If Kanter plays in a game and scores 14 points, throws 2 assists which lead to another 4 points and grabs 3 offensive rebounds that lead to another 4 points he accounted for 20 points in let's say 22 minutes. That's an average game for him. Let's say defensively he gives up 12 in that time frame (which would be a ton)...even though he played poor defensively he still put the team 8 points in the plus. The more players you have on your team that can account for more points than they guys they're matched up against, the more games you win. You can pull up any stat, metric, intangible, etc. or whatever the hell you want but at the end of the day this is what wins basketball games. The idea that Kanter ever was a negative for the team is just beyond preposterous and the idea that Roberson somehow is a positive when he is routinely giving up double digit points more than he's accounting for is even more preposterous. Guys like Roberson and Perkins only exist in the NBA because of guys like Kanter and they're becoming extinct as more two way players take over the league.

[Kizz Fastfists]

So as long as Kanter isn't allowing the center to score and is switched other players who score 25 points on him in 15 minutes then Kanter's defense is fine because the center didn't outscore him? Is that really what arguing for Kanter has been reduced to? It doesn't matter how many points Kanter gives up as long as they are not to the player of the same "position". As long as we are ignoring the scoreboard, effect on the team and the desire to win then looking at basketball as five individual one on one matchups is fine. If you actually want to win games then it doesn't work that way, because it is a team sport.

[ThunderBolt]

Sleek is right. Here we see another example of Andre failing to shut down hardens historic series whereas Nene had no impact on the play. If you can’t see that then I can’t help you. Roflmao, lol, etc...

[slick_watts]

If Kanter plays in a game and scores 14 points, throws 2 assists which lead to another 4 points and grabs 3 offensive rebounds that lead to another 4 points he accounted for 20 points in let's say 22 minutes. That's an average game for him. Let's say defensively he gives up 12 in that time frame (which would be a ton)...even though he played poor defensively he still put the team 8 points in the plus.

this is the silliest accounting of basketball impact i've seen in my life. what thought processes drove you toward thinking about a basketball game in this manner?

also- aside from the reductive (and, impossible) manner in which you are assigning value, you do know that if kanter wasn't in someone else would be, right? so the proper way to do is this account for what kanter is doing relative to the players that would replace him, right? the team doesn't just take kanter off the floor and leave a void on the court.

it's amusing you say 'post whatever stat or metric you want' when most of the metrics and stats being posted here are doing the thing that you are trying to do in your made up way.

[hardenASG13]

The play where he refused to shoot with 2 seconds left on the shot clock wide open was just another example of how laughable it is that this team can hit their ceiling with him in the lineup. He is the only NBA wing with no confidence offensively. Maybe they are better on defense because he slows down the pace as they have to play 4 on 5, and if the ball does come to his side they have to wait for him to run away to the other side of the floor. Must be so frustrating for NBA players to play offensively alongside him, especially when grant is twice the player. At least abrines is rounding into form and huestis is beginning to get used. The benching is coming, the stars will get frustrated enough with him soon.

[ThunderBolt]

I could understand the frustration with Dre if he weren’t about the tenth biggest issue we need to fix. I also understand Russ’ frustration with Dre. He doesn’t value defense.

[slick_watts]

it must be incredibly frustrating for andre roberson, paul george, and steven adams to carry the team defensively while carmelo anthony and baron westbrook are not even trying half the time. it must feel like 3 v. 5 on the defensive end, sometimes. it must be especially frustrating for andre roberson when baron westbrook yells at you on national t.v. for hesitating on one shot, even though the team has an 18 point lead at that point in large part due to the defense westbrook has little part in.

it must be especially, especially frustrating when you're pulled from the game and you're forced to watch the defense implode as the guy who yelled at you hits rock bottom and, worse, starts taking maniacal shots on offense as well.

after roberson was removed from the game the thunder allowed 140pp100 the rest of the way to the spurs. and westbrook went on to have a terrible game offensively whether he was on the court with roberson or not.

what kind of leader behaves like that? especially to a player like roberson who is making up for all your mistakes on one end of the court?

[Pillendreher]

it must be incredibly frustrating for andre roberson, paul george, and steven adams to carry the team defensively while carmelo anthony and baron westbrook are not even trying half the time. it must feel like 3 v. 5 on the defensive end, sometimes. it must be especially frustrating for andre roberson when baron westbrook yells at you on national t.v. for hesitating on one shot, even though the team has an 18 point lead at that point in large part due to the defense westbrook has little part in.

it must be especially, especially frustrating when you're pulled from the game and you're forced to watch the defense implode as the guy who yelled at you hits rock bottom and, worse, starts taking maniacal shots on offense as well.

after roberson was removed from the game the thunder allowed 140pp100 the rest of the way to the spurs. and westbrook went on to have a terrible game offensively whether he was on the court with roberson or not.

what kind of leader behaves like that? especially to a player like roberson who is making up for all your mistakes on one end of the court?

That's a very good point. MVP calibre player or not, that would not sit right with me as his teammate. You're out there cleaning up after him and he doesn't seem to give a ****. Instead he's gunning for defensive rebounds so he can start the offensive possession.

And this is not new, mind you. Ibaka complained about the same thing. We have guys busting their asses on defense and we don't reward them for it.

[Atomic Punk]

I could understand the frustration with Dre if he weren’t about the tenth biggest issue we need to fix. I also understand Russ’ frustration with Dre. He doesn’t value defense.

All other “issues”aside, if my starting 2 passed up that exact same shot with the clock winding down and forced someone else to take a bad shot, I would have chewed his ass too. The coach should have let him have it as well. As far as Russel Westbrook’s behavior and play after that, yeah, that was unacceptable.

I love what Dre brings to the court defensively but to suggest his complete incompetence on the offensive end is not a problem is just foolish. I get that the team generally does well offensively while he is on the court with the starters, but for crying out loud, you have to be able to hit a damn shot and the team has to have confidence that you can. Even his freakin layups look shaky.

[slick_watts]

I love what Dre brings to the court defensively but to suggest his complete incompetence on the offensive end is not a problem is just foolish. I get that the team generally does well offensively while he is on the court with the starters, but for crying out loud, you have to be able to hit a damn shot and the team has to have confidence that you can. Even his freakin layups look shaky.

how about baron westbrook not trying on 75% of defensive possessions? allowing himself to get rubbed out of a play by any screen? is that a problem?

all these guys have problems right now. dre is performing about as well as you would expect overall, doing what he usually does. he turned down a shot he makes maybe 25% of the time, went to the bench, and then watch westbrook attempt a pull up 28 footer that he probably makes 25% of the time also. the guy who's not doing his job right now on the team is westbrook, not dre.

roberson's issues on offense are being overblown because it's visible and because the team is trying to scapegoat him for some reason; likely because of westbrook.