Nothing Thread--only one opinion counts-LOCK ME

[pancakes3]

i wouldn't bank on "a couple more assists". 8.3 is a darn lot. getting 10+ means he'd go Chris Paul/Deron Williams/Steve Nash on us: sole ballhander with an offensive scheme that features him and his decisionmaking. I don't really anticipate that type of change. I think (hope) he'll raise his fg% to the mid 40's and take about the same amount of shot, and 1-2 more FTA's on higher %'s there as well. That puts my prediction at around 20/8 on reasonably good %'s which is as hopeful as any of us should get for him. notching the double-double may not be the best thing for the team right now. We've got good offensive players in Nick, Blatche, McGee, and Crawford. In order for those guys to progress, we should embrace a more egalitarian offense with ball movement, and not just stagnate the ball in Wall's hands, as good as Wall is.

[Illuminaire]

Then again, Pancakes, Wall got those 8.3 assists despite playing with the Scrub McMuffin squad. We had almost no floor spacers for much of the second half of the season, and no go-to post player. He manufactured those assists out of pixie dust and children's dreams... and that's while he still looked clueless on the pick and roll.

Ten plus is far from out of the question. Indeed, it seems like the natural and inevitable progression.

[theboomking]

Maybe we should move these last few posts about Wall's projected numbers over to the John Wall appreciation thread.

Wall averaged 18.2 ppg 7.44APG 5.22rpg 1.85SPG 0.63bpg 3.96 TO 6.96FTA on .410FG% after the all star break. Wall had to take a lot of shots, and had no shooters to kick out to. Assuming either better health from NY and Rashard Lewis, and/or that we add some scorers around Wall, I'm assuming that he will score at a slightly better rate, but with more efficiency, and more assists.

I'm guessing that Wall posts 19.2ppg 5rpg 9.5apg 2.1spg on .445 shooting with 3.5 TO. What do you think that would amount to in terms of PER?

[Illuminaire]

I put my reply here so as not to further clutter the playoff thread.

Before I get into the details, I want to extend a hand of peace. Much of this argument doesn't make sense - from my perspective, we actually agree on more things than we disagree on. I think you're either missing things I'm saying, or interpreting them in ways that don't jive with my intent. Maybe that's poor wording on my part - I'm not always as clear as I want to be.

Either way, I'd like to end any antagonism. We're fellow fans, so we're practically family. =p

I read your words just fine.

"Like i suspected, you didnt watch the games." (For the record, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're ignorant. Claiming such is pretty weaksauce. ) This statement heavily implies that we are in a state of opposition, and that you believe I am wrong about the things you will go on to discuss.

"The Wizards offense sucks, they lack shooting, and Wall was driving into traffic time and again when the defense was stacked against him." That's very true. I also pointed that out several posts before you. We agree!

That's actually pretty remarkable given our total lack of spacing, and really shows how incredible his first step and transition speed are.

"Obviously the more inside attempts a player takes the more difficult some of those attempts will be." Yes, this is also true. And from the very post you quote in your response,

He does get there a TON, though, and high volume at 60% is certainly a lot more desirable than low volume at 65%.

I do not understand why you are restating my position as your own, while simultaneously attacking my position. This is awkward.

"Comparing Wall to someone like Nash (86% of his attempts are jumpers and plays with multiple shooters) is just " Statements like this are why I don't believe you are reading my posts carefully. I referenced Nash only twice. The first time was in a block of stats for most of the starting PGs in the league... it's not like I was singling Steve out. Also, I included rough info on how often each of those players gets to the line. Again, we seem to be in agreement! And again... I don't know why you're acting so antagonistically.

The second Nash reference was to skills I think Wall could use to become a more effective player. Nash is one of the most effective, dangerous offensive PGs the game has ever seen - what exactly is wrong with suggestion that Wall can learn from his short-range game?

"And using shot attempts out to 9 feet? I don't know what game you play but when i was playing anything over 5 feet was a jumper and we already know Wall sucks at that" I used 3-9ft because that is the data available from hoopdata. You should know this, that's where you got your at-rim data.

If you'll notice, I also separated my statements about his finish ability based on the @rim and close shot distances. I did not use the 3-9ft data to support him being only an average finisher, as you seem to be implying.

OK, that's the first part of my reply. Part two below!

[tontoz]

Not sure why you decided to switch threads but whatever. Now i will include your post in its entiretly bolding where i am confused.

See my above post. He sucks at close shots, and is only average at the rim. He does get there a TON, though, and high volume at 60% is certainly a lot more desirable than low volume at 65%.

My initial post was intentionally negative for the purpose of highlighting how incredibly high I believe Wall's ceiling is. I agree that Wall's ability to score inside is awesome and a strength; I just enjoy speculating on how much more impressive that ability could be if his percentages were better than average.

I definitely don't understand how Wall can suck from close range, be average at the rim yet be awesome at finishing inside. My position is that Wall is a strong finisher at the rim. I am not sure what your position is which may be the root of the problem. I was under the impression that you don't think Wall is that good at finishing at the rim.

now to this.

OK, Wall actually slowly got worse at finishing close shots over the course of the season. So much for the last three month improvement theory.

Do you really believe it is that simple?

During the first half of the season Wall had better players around him and wasn't taking as many inside shots. He actually attempted 3 three pointers per game in November. When he did drive there was better spacing since he was surrounded by better players.

At the end of the year many of the Wizards best scorers during the year (Gil, Lewis, Hinrich, Thornton) were gone. This forced Wall to attack the basket more often even though the defense was stacked against him. It is no coincidence that his free throw attempts jumped from 4.9 before the break to 7 after the break.

Many of his misses had nothing to do with his finishing ability. They were due to a degree of difficulty that would make any gymnast proud. In normal circumstances they would simply be bad shots.

[Illuminaire]

That is statistically insignificant since many of the guys you are comparing him to get to the rim less than half as often as wall. Hence, a higher percentage of their attempts will be wide open.

I compared him to practically everyone who played over 30 minutes. The idea was to see what the numbers actually said, rather than just saying "this must be so!"

I've already said that number of attempts matters. I'm not sure what else you want here, but it feels like you're arguing against some mythical representation of my position, rather than what I have actually expressed with words and numbers.

Lastly, my stated opinion is that Wall is at the low end of average for a finisher. Please prove with the numbers - not anecdotes - that he is a better finisher than that. I'm open to being wrong; heck, the only reason I started looking things up is because I'm genuinely curious where Wall falls, comparatively.

Do you think Mike Bibby is a better finisher at the rim than Wall? After all he shoots a higher percantage.

Please refrain from obvious straw men. I never stated anything like that, nor made any arguments that could be reasonably extended to that conclusion.

Another gem of a quote.

I still don't understand why you're throwing out sarcastic jabs when our positions seem to be nearly the same. =p

Do you really believe it is that simple?

We were dealing with simple statements, Tontoz. Your initial statement was that Wall improved as the season went on. All I said was that the numbers didn't back it up. (And if you'll notice, I initially agreed with you before going stat-diving)

It seems like you want my standard of proof to be higher than yours here.

During the first half of the season Wall had better players around him and wasn't taking nearly as many shots. When he did drive there was better spacing since he was surrounded by better players.

At the end of the year many of the Wizards best scorers during the year (Gil, Lewis, Hinrich, Thornton) were gone. This force Wall to attack the basket far more often even though the defense was stacked against him.

You have some good points here. There are offsetting elements, of course - Nick did quite well before he was injured, Blatche played better later in the year, and Crawford added playmaking we didn't have earlier in the season. Lewis and Gil never played very well, so I'm not sure how much losing them actually hurt the Wiz, but for sure our spacing was terrible by the last two months.

What are you actually arguing here, though? By context, it seems you are saying that Wall did improve as a finisher, but the degree of difficulty increased such that his stats don't show it.

If so, I can agree that's possible. I don't think we can make a concrete case either way. By the numbers, he's not exceptional at finishing (yet). By anecdote, he could be better than the numbers suggest... but we cannot possibly know that because there is no way to prove "would of" or "could of" cases.


Summary: We seem to agree on almost every point, except for the theory that Wall improved as a finisher during the course of the season. So where's the love bro? Where's the love?!

[Illuminaire]

Not sure why you decided to switch threads but whatever. Now i will include your post in its entiretly bolding where i am confused.

I said why in my very first line. o.O

He sucks at close shots, and is only average at the rim.

I am referring to the two categories I included in my big, long stat post. Close shots = 3-9ft, while at the rim = at the rim. I thought that was obvious, but I never did define that. Sorry!

I agree that Wall's ability to score inside is awesome and a strength;

I definitely don't understand how Wall can suck from close range, be average at the rim yet be awesome at finishing inside. My position is that Wall is a strong finisher at the rim. I am not sure what your position is which may be the root of the problem. I was under the impression that you don't think Wall is that good at finishing at the rim.

I'll restate things for clarity. I believe Wall is an average finisher, but gets to the rim at such an incredible rate that it is a definite strength. I don't believe he is above average or exceptional at finishing, just at getting there in the first place. Also, I think he could stand to improve his short-range non-layup game, where he seemed to struggle a great deal this year. (This comes into play as part of finishing only in that those kind of shots often result from drive attempts that are cut off by a rotating big, etc...)

The rest

Couldn't wait for part two, eh? I told you more was coming. =D

[tontoz]

I believe Wall is an average finisher, but gets to the rim at such an incredible rate that it is a definite strength.

At least now i know where you are coming from. I just think you are wrong for a very obvious reason. Look at all the pgs who get to the rim as often as Wall and shoot a better percentage. You will see it is a very short list, as in one player. Parker is one of the best inside finishers i have ever seen for a small guard and he shoots only 5.5% better than Wall. I don't see how you can expect Wall to shoot a much higher percentage at the rim unless he cuts down his attempts.


When i saw your first post and it's negativity it reminded me of the things i was saying about Wall back in January. I was calling him out in the game threads for his lack of effort on D and his tentative offense. Some here (Fishercob comes to mind) started calling me a Wall hater.

Then the light seemed to go on in Feb and he looked like a different player. So when i saw your post it made me think that you may have tuned out at that point. Some people came out and said they wouldn't watch games anymore during that time.

so in the first line of my first post i asked you point blank if you watched the last 3 months of the season. You didn't actually answer but said you would check the stats. I responded thusly.

Wall shot 60% at the rim, the same as Rose and Westbrook.

http://www.hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=John%20Wall

When you consider the Wizards lack of spacing and Wall's slow start i think it is pretty clear that finishing inside is a strength, not a weakness.

Do you see anything antagonistic in that post? It was only after your long statistical post, which i believe to be largely nonsense, that i got on your case. Using percentages alone to say that Wall didn't improve at finishing inside was lame. Comparing Wall to guys who get to the rim less than half as often as Wall didn't impress me. and a small irritation....for future reference using EFG% to discuss shots inside isn't a good look.

[Illuminaire]

No I didn't answer your original question, Tontoz. I've been fairly active in posting throughout the season and have been in many game chats, posted on game threads, etc...

It didn't strike me as necessary to answer something so obvious. Indeed, I hoped you were just employing hyperbole, not trying to make a serious claim about my first hand observational knowledge. The first at least has comedic value; the latter is both offensive and contributes nothing to the actual discussion.

Back to John Wall: It is true that he is not really worse % wise than players who get to the rim a lot less. He is also not better. He is... average. There's no other way to spin it. I'm not saying that to personally insult the guy, I just think he can make an incremental improvement to become above-average.

As for my post, yes, it had a distinctly negative tone. It also concluded with a positive statement; I employed intentional juxtaposition of themes in order to make the last part stand out more. At least, I tried to... judging by responses, I was only about 50-50 in pulling that off.

Re: your quoted post, I never even saw that until after my long post. I was kind of busy looking things up and trying to assemble more information so we could all take a look at the bigger picture of PGs and how they do close to the basket.

No, that post isn't antagonistic - all your other posts are. Needlessly so. Whatever the chip is on your shoulder, maybe you should deal with that before we talk more about the Wiz.

All I did was put some stats together so we could all take a more in depth view of an interesting question. You seem to have taken it kind of personally, and you haven't put a lot of effort into understanding where I'm coming from. I'd even say you took some cheap shots, a few quick 1-2s at easy scarecrows.

To be blunt, that's a lot more lame than me "using percentages alone."

and a small irritation....for future reference using EFG% to discuss shots inside isn't a good look.

See, this is what I'm talking about man. Technically, you used that very same stat FIRST. Then you want to say you're irritated because I did too?

I really, truly, honestly want us to be able to have productive conversations. The way you're arguing is straight up ridiculous though, and you don't seem to want to admit that either you are being purposefully oppositional, or you really didn't bother to read my earlier posts.

Can we figure out a way to be cool here? Hug it out? You tell me where I wronged you, where I did something that made you angry, and if there is ANY validity to it, I'll apologize on the spot. I'll take the hit if that's the only way we can move on without the BS.

I think you're a cool guy, Tont, and I don't want something as stupid as a minor disagreement over Wall's finishing ability to color the way we communicate with each other.

[tontoz]

Technically, you used that very same stat FIRST. Then you want to say you're irritated because I did too?

So you didn't read one post and mistook someone elses post for mine yet you talk about me not reading what you wrote. OK

No i did not mention EFG%. It is no different than FG% in this context.

Back to John Wall: It is true that he is not really worse % wise than players who get to the rim a lot less. He is also not better. He is... average.

Based on what? Again you are looking strictly at percentages, comparing him to guys who get inside far less. Since they get to the rim less that means that a higher percentage of their looks will be uncontested. That is why i objected to looking at guys like Nash (1.7 attempts at the rim), Kidd (.6), Calderon (2.0), Udrich (2.3), Billups (2.4), Nelson (2.7), Paul (2.1), Lowry (2.8), Curry (2.7) who get to the rim far less than Wall (5.3).

Based on your analysis Rose and Westbrook are just average finishers at the rim as well. don't think you will find much support for that in the basketball world.

In addition when a pg has better scorers around him that makes it easier to get to the rim and finish. The only teams rated lower in offensive efficiency were the Cavs and Bucks, and just barely.

No I didn't answer your original question, Tontoz. I've been fairly active in posting throughout the season and have been in many game chats, posted on game threads, etc...

I don't recall you posting much in the game threads when the game was in progress. I do recall guys (like JWiz) saying they were going to stop watching the games back in January since they were so frustrated with the team. That is why i asked, especially since i was feeling the same negative thoughts about Wall back in January.

[dangermouse]

Wall's finishing ability at the rim improved greatly in the second part of the season. I dont even need stats, i could see it with my own eyes. From the first half of the season to the second (around about the time he came back from injury), Wall's offensive game started to bloom. Maybe he was settling in and felt more comfortable?

[Illuminaire]

Tontoz: We pulled our data from the exact same place. You are correct that you did not necessarily use eFG%, and you are correct that it is the same thing in this context. I apologize for falsely claiming you used eFG% - my bad.

That said, nothing else about my point changes. If you even know that FG% is the same as eFG% for two point shots, and yet you quoted his FG% as your only statistical support, getting irritated because I used the same effective statistical data is completely hypocritical.


Feel free to take the last shot, Tontoz. I thought we could work out whatever was going wrong with our communication, and I still hope we can... but I won't be continuing this discussion with you. Hopefully our next one is a better experience for both parties.

[tontoz]

Tontoz: We pulled our data from the exact same place. You are correct that you did not necessarily use eFG%, and you are correct that it is the same thing in this context. I apologize for falsely claiming you used eFG% - my bad.

That said, nothing else about my point changes. If you even know that FG% is the same as eFG% for two point shots, and yet you quoted his FG% as your only statistical support, getting irritated because I used the same effective statistical data is completely hypocritical.


Feel free to take the last shot, Tontoz. I thought we could work out whatever was going wrong with our communication, but it takes two.

The EFG thing was a minor point, as i said. I was half joking with it initially. My problem isnt with communication.

The major problem is your statistical analysis. Any analysis that says Westbrook and Rose are average finishers at the rim is just wrong. Ditto Wall. I am sure you are just harping on the communication thing to avoid having to back up that "analysis".

Anyway i am done packing now and i will be leaving for Florida tomorrow at lunch time to go to the Players Championship. I will donate a few balls to the local courses while i am there. Not even sure if i will have internet access so you are probably off the hook..... at least until next week.

[fishercob]

Dan Steinberg just Tweeted this:

Flip Saunders tells the Junkies that John Wall is still growing, might be 6-5 now, and will peak at nearly 6-6.

Wow.

Maybe the really are interested in a smaller guard (Kemba/Knight) or trading for someone like Steph Curry to run with Wall.

Wall 6'6"? Look out, league.

[nate33]

Wall already has a 6'-9.25" wingspan. He could end up 6'-6" with a 6'-11" wingspan and a 8'-8" standing reach! That gives him roughly the same measurements as Josh Howard, Caron Butler, Ronnie Brewer and Tyreke Evans. Once he fills out, he'll be big for a SG and serviceable as a SF!

I wouldn't have him guarding SG's next year because he's still to thin, but down the road, he'll give us some significant lineup flexibility with that size. The key is that short shooting guards are a dime a dozen. Most of them are only bit role players because they can't function against starters. But by having a pure PG with legit SG size, we can make it work. Wall can turn a tweener like Tony Douglas or Daniel Gibson into a high-quality starter. It's like getting two starters for the price of one.

We should be combing the 2nd round of the draft for undersized pure shooters who can defend.

[keynote]

^ I was just about to post this as well. 6'6"? At that speed? Good gracious.

I'm still not a fan of pairing him w/ a small SG. Unless he bulks up completely, Wall should have no problem keeping in front of smaller PGs. Why give those midgets someone else that's easier to guard?

[Hoopalotta]

Well, I should really be asleep, but...

I'd like to believe the size thing, but I don't know. Here he is next to Crawford, who was 6'3" barefoot at the combine.



It is possible that one or both of them is standing on something at the whim of the photographer's quest for balance.

Here he is next to Ernie, though the angle's a touch oblong:



Ernie's supposedly 6'6" in shoes and Wall seems to be more or less up there with him.

He would need to grow a full 1.75" since the 2010 combine to get to 6'6" and I don't know if I'm sold on that happening, but a solid 6'5" would be nice.

But as noted by Nate, if we were able to use a short shooter as standard operating procedure with Wall guarding 2's some, we'd be at a huge advantage when you think about the volume of talent that fits that criteria compared with the dearth at 2-guard. While you've got to like Wall defensive potential at the point, he could save himself some work by having a guy like Toney Douglas guarding all those elite points; could make a difference over the course of 82 games.

[nate33]

^ I was just about to post this as well. 6'6"? At that speed? Good gracious.

I'm still not a fan of pairing him w/ a small SG. Unless he bulks up completely, Wall should have no problem keeping in front of smaller PGs. Why give those midgets someone else that's easier to guard?

It depends if Wall develops a post game to use against shorter defenders. If he doesn't, then I'd rather match Wall's quickness against opposing SG's. Guys like Mike Conley might be able to stay in front of him, but guys like Kevin Martin sure can't.

Whatever the case, the point is, we'll have more flexibility. Easily acquirable guys like Daniel Gibson can be true assets alongside Wall. Every year, there are draft prospects who can really shoot and defend well, but they're not pure PG's and they're too short to defend SG's. Heck, Lestor Hudson might be a real nice complement to Wall with his defense and scoring ability. When alongside Wall, he'd easily be a more effective player than, say, Cartier Martin.

[keynote]

Wall already has a 6'-9.25" wingspan. He could end up 6'-6" with a 6'-11" wingspan and a 8'-8" standing reach! That gives him roughly the same measurements as Josh Howard, Caron Butler, Ronnie Brewer and Tyreke Evans. Once he fills out, he'll be big for a SG and serviceable as a SF!

I wouldn't have him guarding SG's next year because he's still to thin, but down the road, he'll give us some significant lineup flexibility with that size. The key is that short shooting guards are a dime a dozen. Most of them are only bit role players because they can't function against starters. But by having a pure PG with legit SG size, we can make it work. Wall can turn a tweener like Tony Douglas or Daniel Gibson into a high-quality starter. It's like getting two starters for the price of one.

We should be combing the 2nd round of the draft for undersized pure shooters who can defend.

Eh, I guess I hear you. Those undersized 2s may have some value off the bench for us than they would for another team. Still, I'd prefer that we capitalize on our backcourt's size advantage by starting a SG of at least average height. It's one thing if we come across a transcendent small SG, a la Iverson. But barring that, I'd rather start a Phil Jackson-sized backcourt than start Wall and a Dana Barros-type. If other teams have to start putting their SG on Wall to counter his size, then I want our SG shooting over the top of their more traditionally-sized PG.

[Rafael122]

Guys stop growing at around 25 yes? He has 7 years of growth in him if that were the case. I wouldn't be surprised if he grew an inch, inch and a half between now and then. It's entirely possible.