Presti's Tree Reaches DC: The Official Will Dawkins Thread

[payitforward]

Actually, I picked the guy I thought was most productive. At least as a rookie -- I haven't had a reason to pay attention to Jaquez since his rookie year.

Of the 10 guys taken after Bilal, only Cason Wallace & Derreck Lively have been productive. Are they guys you would have taken over Bilal? If so, then you have a point: they're both really good.

What I do not understand is the negative tone of this whole discussion. I can't figure out what motivates it.

[nate33]

You are correct it is about Dawkins. Until Bilal or any of his first rounders actually pan out, he does not deserve credit.

And many of Dawkins defenders were the loudest critics of Shepherd’s drafting, when 3 of his 4 first round picks were better than Dawkins.

I think it's silly, if not flat-out disingenuous to try and compare the production of Dawkins' rookies and very young 2nd-year players versus the production of Shepherd who drafted NBA-ready adults like Rui and Kispert (and Davis lol).

Yes, at this point, Dawkins still gets an "incomplete" on his draft report card, but I think it's pretty reasonable to project that his first two drafts have gone very well relative to the quality of the draft. Based on what I see so far, in a redraft of the 2023 draft, there is only one guy I might consider taking in place of Bilal at #7 and it's Derrick Lively. And I'm not even sure of that.

And in a 2024 redraft, based on what we know so far, the only guy on the board at #14 I'd take over Bub is McCain, and I wouldn't take anybody drafted after George over George. And I think the jury is out on Sarr. It's just too early to make any evaluations on a project like him.

Deni was what: 19 when he was drafted? Odd, I can’t keep up with these double standards.

There is no double standard. Deni was unequivocally a great pick. Sheppard's best by far. But Deni also proves why you need to give a little time before evaluating very young picks. You can't look at the box score for guys like Deni or Bilal in Year 1 or Year 2 and expect to get the full story.

[doclinkin]

That's what you get when you draft for youth and upside. Moments of highlight brilliance, more than instant box score production. Over time you try to train the player to be able to consistently bring you those highlights. If so you have an all-star. Not sure which of the guys you cite you think may have all-star potential. Bilal has a chance. Yes, IF he develops. The team has invested heavily on development. Not just hope. Training.

It is a draft philosophy meant not for short term gain but the biggest best return on the investment in the long haul. A strategy. We need stars most of all. If we can't draft one top 3 then we will have to grow our own.

That is false. Cason Wallace, Dereck Lively and Brandon Podziemski all range from slightly older to just slightly a year older than Bilal.

Additionally, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal, and are at most a year older.

Right. Do players get better in a year? Or everybody is static.

There's a reason why parents hold kids out and re-classify them so they are older in youth sports. Older and more developed kids get the advantage of extra minutes, success, coaching, etc. It's why nowadays we see more 19-20 year old freshmen in college sports than the 18 year olds in years past.

Of course the players who are older than him will also develop and grow. Just one year less so. Bilal was the 4th youngest player in the draft. Of the guys you cite, only Clowney is younger. Though Bilal may have a chance to catch and pass the older players, given that only 3 players in his draft class have played more minutes than him. He is getting opportunity to grow and improve, so we get to see his mistakes live on camera instead of in college practices.

Curious though. By what metric are you saying they are better? Win Shares? I already showed how that stat is based on team wins. Not on individual performance. I like many of the players on your list, had them higher on my draft board than Bilal. I've been pleasantly surprised with the indications of Coulibaly's upside though. Curious which of the guys you cite do you think has all-star talent. All-Defense candidates.

And many of Dawkins defenders were the loudest critics of Shepherd’s drafting, when 3 of his 4 first round picks were better than Dawkins.

Show your work:

https://stathead.com/tiny/SEEcl

Bilal was better than Deni as a rookie. More blocks, steals assists, better 3FG% etc. Despite being a year younger. Rui came out after 3 years of college, do you want to compare his freshman year with Bilal? (avg 2.6 points in 4 minutes per game). Rui would be the argument for the idea that young players improve. He was unplayable as a freshman. He'd also kinda be the argument that older players improve less, since his stats have pretty much flatlined in the league except that surprise surprise he plays better next to LeBron or Luka. That said if you iso his effect in play-off line-ups this year he was a mess, deeply in the negative.

I notice you aren't citing Corey Kispert as the player better than Bilal. Good since he lost his job to the kid. Kispert had really nice stats as a 22 year old rookie with 4 years experience. He also can't defend NBA players. Hope you aren't citing him as an example of a player whose game has the upside edge over Bilal.

[doclinkin]

And if Deni is your model for drafting smart, you are making an argument against yourself, since rookie Deni stacks up poorly against the Dawkins draft picks:

https://stathead.com/tiny/bQjlU

The only thing Deni did better than the Wizkid rookies was rebound. Or score efficiently from 2, though he only tried it when unguarded considering he scored less than 3 two pt baskets per 100 possessions.

Point being: relax. It's is not yet time to judge young players. Deni broke out under this team's development program. In part because he was fed all the minutes to build his confidence and his role was magnified in the things he does do well. That is what folks wished had happened from his rookie year onward, so that he could have broken out sooner. Give it a minute. There's no prize for being the first to shout "SUCK" before players have had a chance to show progression. Players break out most often by age 23 or thereabouts. The guys you see today have growth in front of them. Let's see how they progress before we Johnny Davis them off the roster. (Or PBJ.)

[Kanyewest]

Second, it is odd how first rounders on other teams are seemed to be judged statically, as if what they are now is what they will always be, while Dawkins first rounders are judged dynamically as if what their supporters project them to be is what they will be.

Because the players you cite are 2-4 years older than Bilal.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=bilal-coulibaly--trayce-jackson-davis--jaime-jaquez-jr--brandin-podziemski--cason-wallace

Cason Wallace being an exception (though he was 9 months older than Bilal). Point being young players grow and develop. Older players are more likely closer to fully developed. All of these players are good picks and good value for where they were picked. You can expect them all to have good careers. Guys like Podziemski and Wallace surely will develop more. So far it looks like none of them are likely to shut down opposing scorers as the stats say Bilal has done. Nor are any of them likely to do this:

Watch on YouTube

That's what you get when you draft for youth and upside. Moments of highlight brilliance, more than instant box score production. Over time you try to train the player to be able to consistently bring you those highlights. If so you have an all-star. Not sure which of the guys you cite you think may have all-star potential. Bilal has a chance. Yes, IF he develops. The team has invested heavily on development. Not just hope. Training.

It is a draft philosophy meant not for short term gain but the biggest best return on the investment in the long haul. A strategy. We need stars most of all. If we can't draft one top 3 then we will have to grow our own.

That is false. Cason Wallace, Dereck Lively and Brandon Podziemski all range from slightly older to just slightly a year older than Bilal.

Additionally, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal, and are at most a year older. Do they get the benefit of dynamic grading or is that only reserved for Dawkins first rounders?

I don't see what Doc is saying is "'false''- most of the players you mention are older than Bilal- for example a nearly 2 year difference between Podz and Bilal. Given that they are from the same draft, that is significant when looking at prospects. Of course there are other factors to look at as well including production and maybe you view that as a more valuable criteria than age. That being said, some players like Cam Whitmore are essentially the same age.

Still, it would be interesting to see what Bilal would do on a respectable team. it isn't like Bilal wasn't a well sought out prospect either given that the Wizards traded up to get Bilal in order for OKC not to get him.

For example, I think Podz would struggle in a Wizards uniform instead of playing off Curry (see Podz last 4 games where he shot 47 TS% with Curry out of the lineup ). Cason Wallace playing with the Wizards may also effect his efficiency- not sure how many Wizards would be in OKC's rotation if at all, let alone their starting lineup.

That being said, Bilal's lack of development from his sophomore season compared to his rookie season was a bit demoralizing. Similar things have happened to players like Deni/Rui in their respective 2nd years. Progress isn't always linear. So hopefully Bilal can rebound. Especially given that national writers from the athletic see many promising things in his game.

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

[payitforward]

...Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal....

No. They have not.

[leswizards]

Because the players you cite are 2-4 years older than Bilal.

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=bilal-coulibaly--trayce-jackson-davis--jaime-jaquez-jr--brandin-podziemski--cason-wallace

Cason Wallace being an exception (though he was 9 months older than Bilal). Point being young players grow and develop. Older players are more likely closer to fully developed. All of these players are good picks and good value for where they were picked. You can expect them all to have good careers. Guys like Podziemski and Wallace surely will develop more. So far it looks like none of them are likely to shut down opposing scorers as the stats say Bilal has done. Nor are any of them likely to do this:

Watch on YouTube

That's what you get when you draft for youth and upside. Moments of highlight brilliance, more than instant box score production. Over time you try to train the player to be able to consistently bring you those highlights. If so you have an all-star. Not sure which of the guys you cite you think may have all-star potential. Bilal has a chance. Yes, IF he develops. The team has invested heavily on development. Not just hope. Training.

It is a draft philosophy meant not for short term gain but the biggest best return on the investment in the long haul. A strategy. We need stars most of all. If we can't draft one top 3 then we will have to grow our own.

That is false. Cason Wallace, Dereck Lively and Brandon Podziemski all range from slightly older to just slightly a year older than Bilal.

Additionally, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal, and are at most a year older. Do they get the benefit of dynamic grading or is that only reserved for Dawkins first rounders?

I don't see what Doc is saying is "'false''- most of the players you mention are older than Bilal- for example a nearly 2 year difference between Podz and Bilal. Given that they are from the same draft, that is significant when looking at prospects. Of course there are other factors to look at as well including production and maybe you view that as a more valuable criteria than age. That being said, some players like Cam Whitmore are essentially the same age.

Still, it would be interesting to see what Bilal would do on a respectable team. it isn't like Bilal wasn't a well sought out prospect either given that the Wizards traded up to get Bilal in order for OKC not to get him.

For example, I think Podz would struggle in a Wizards uniform instead of playing off Curry (see Podz last 4 games where he shot 47 TS% with Curry out of the lineup ). Cason Wallace playing with the Wizards may also effect his efficiency- not sure how many Wizards would be in OKC's rotation if at all, let alone their starting lineup.

That being said, Bilal's lack of development from his sophomore season compared to his rookie season was a bit demoralizing. Similar things have happened to players like Deni/Rui in their respective 2nd years. Progress isn't always linear. So hopefully Bilal can rebound. Especially given that national writers from the athletic see many promising things in his game.

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

Brandin Podziemski is 1 year and and 151 days older than Bilal.

Cason Wallace is 261 days older than Bilal.

Dereck Lively is 164 days older than Bilal.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I think it's silly, if not flat-out disingenuous to try and compare the production of Dawkins' rookies and very young 2nd-year players versus the production of Shepherd who drafted NBA-ready adults like Rui and Kispert (and Davis lol).

Yes, at this point, Dawkins still gets an "incomplete" on his draft report card, but I think it's pretty reasonable to project that his first two drafts have gone very well relative to the quality of the draft. Based on what I see so far, in a redraft of the 2023 draft, there is only one guy I might consider taking in place of Bilal at #7 and it's Derrick Lively. And I'm not even sure of that.

And in a 2024 redraft, based on what we know so far, the only guy on the board at #14 I'd take over Bub is McCain, and I wouldn't take anybody drafted after George over George. And I think the jury is out on Sarr. It's just too early to make any evaluations on a project like him.

Deni was what: 19 when he was drafted? Odd, I can’t keep up with these double standards.

There is no double standard. Deni was unequivocally a great pick. Sheppard's best by far. But Deni also proves why you need to give a little time before evaluating very young picks. You can't look at the box score for guys like Deni or Bilal in Year 1 or Year 2 and expect to get the full story.

By drafting 18 year-olds, the Wizards are really drafting to keep one stud and one good role player while the rest re-sign elsewhere by the time the rests games develop fully.

[leswizards]

That's what you get when you draft for youth and upside. Moments of highlight brilliance, more than instant box score production. Over time you try to train the player to be able to consistently bring you those highlights. If so you have an all-star. Not sure which of the guys you cite you think may have all-star potential. Bilal has a chance. Yes, IF he develops. The team has invested heavily on development. Not just hope. Training.

It is a draft philosophy meant not for short term gain but the biggest best return on the investment in the long haul. A strategy. We need stars most of all. If we can't draft one top 3 then we will have to grow our own.

That is false. Cason Wallace, Dereck Lively and Brandon Podziemski all range from slightly older to just slightly a year older than Bilal.

Additionally, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal, and are at most a year older.

Right. Do players get better in a year? Or everybody is static.

There's a reason why parents hold kids out and re-classify them so they are older in youth sports. Older and more developed kids get the advantage of extra minutes, success, coaching, etc. It's why nowadays we see more 19-20 year old freshmen in college sports than the 18 year olds in years past.

Of course the players who are older than him will also develop and grow. Just one year less so. Bilal was the 4th youngest player in the draft. Of the guys you cite, only Clowney is younger. Though Bilal may have a chance to catch and pass the older players, given that only 3 players in his draft class have played more minutes than him. He is getting opportunity to grow and improve, so we get to see his mistakes live on camera instead of in college practices.

Curious though. By what metric are you saying they are better? Win Shares? I already showed how that stat is based on team wins. Not on individual performance. I like many of the players on your list, had them higher on my draft board than Bilal. I've been pleasantly surprised with the indications of Coulibaly's upside though. Curious which of the guys you cite do you think has all-star talent. All-Defense candidates.

And many of Dawkins defenders were the loudest critics of Shepherd’s drafting, when 3 of his 4 first round picks were better than Dawkins.

Show your work:

https://stathead.com/tiny/SEEcl

Bilal was better than Deni as a rookie. More blocks, steals assists, better 3FG% etc. Despite being a year younger. Rui came out after 3 years of college, do you want to compare his freshman year with Bilal? (avg 2.6 points in 4 minutes per game). Rui would be the argument for the idea that young players improve. He was unplayable as a freshman. He'd also kinda be the argument that older players improve less, since his stats have pretty much flatlined in the league except that surprise surprise he plays better next to LeBron or Luka. That said if you iso his effect in play-off line-ups this year he was a mess, deeply in the negative.

I notice you aren't citing Corey Kispert as the player better than Bilal. Good since he lost his job to the kid. Kispert had really nice stats as a 22 year old rookie with 4 years experience. He also can't defend NBA players. Hope you aren't citing him as an example of a player whose game has the upside edge over Bilal.

Your understanding of win shares is wrong.

If a player is a great offensive player on a bad offensive team (which the wizards are), and the player also happens to be a great defensive player on a bad defensive team (which again the wizards are), that player is going to have a great win share regardless of the number of games the team actually won.

[TheBlackCzar]

That is false. Cason Wallace, Dereck Lively and Brandon Podziemski all range from slightly older to just slightly a year older than Bilal.

Additionally, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Gradey Dick and Noah Clowney have all been better than Bilal, and are at most a year older. Do they get the benefit of dynamic grading or is that only reserved for Dawkins first rounders?

I don't see what Doc is saying is "'false''- most of the players you mention are older than Bilal- for example a nearly 2 year difference between Podz and Bilal. Given that they are from the same draft, that is significant when looking at prospects. Of course there are other factors to look at as well including production and maybe you view that as a more valuable criteria than age. That being said, some players like Cam Whitmore are essentially the same age.

Still, it would be interesting to see what Bilal would do on a respectable team. it isn't like Bilal wasn't a well sought out prospect either given that the Wizards traded up to get Bilal in order for OKC not to get him.

For example, I think Podz would struggle in a Wizards uniform instead of playing off Curry (see Podz last 4 games where he shot 47 TS% with Curry out of the lineup ). Cason Wallace playing with the Wizards may also effect his efficiency- not sure how many Wizards would be in OKC's rotation if at all, let alone their starting lineup.

That being said, Bilal's lack of development from his sophomore season compared to his rookie season was a bit demoralizing. Similar things have happened to players like Deni/Rui in their respective 2nd years. Progress isn't always linear. So hopefully Bilal can rebound. Especially given that national writers from the athletic see many promising things in his game.

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

Watch on YouTube

;ab_channel=GameTheoryPodcastw%2FSamVecenie

Brandin Podziemski is 1 year and and 151 days older than Bilal.

Cason Wallace is 261 days older than Bilal.

Dereck Lively is 164 days older than Bilal.

Dereck Lively primary skills on offense are to catch lobs and dunk.... I've seen no post game, no jumper, no hook..... Are you going to talk about efficiency when a guy is so limited in what he can do..... Defensively they play way different positions being asked to do much different things, so I don't know how comparable they can be......

Podz, I mean you're showing he's basically a 1.5yrs older, and he's not even better aside from his shooting ability... He's not as good on defense, doesn't rebound better, just shoots jumpers better, with much better looks as a result of playing with multiple HOF'ers his entire career.....

Wallace might be a better defender than Bilal and maybe not, both are still young so TBD, Wallace shoots outside a little better, but I don't think his drive game isn't much to speak on.... Bilal has a much better first step, but an issue both of them need to develop is a more robust repertoire of moves to rock with as their bags as it stands is kind of light right now....

Bilal is being trained to initiate offense, which is a role neither Pods, Lively or Wallace are capable of doing or being developed to do..... As much as he's struggling with inconsistency, he's shown more than flashes of what he can become..... None of those guys you named are capable of what Bilal is.... Wallace doesn't have the court vision, and is never going to be a primary option at any point on OKC... Even if Shai, JDubb, Chet, were out he'd still not be there number 1 option..... The other 2 are role players at best right now and for the forseeable future....

Now that isn't to say they don't have a role to play on there respective teams where there advantages outweigh there negatives simply because of them doing what they are asked to do..... And honestly until we got Smart and Middleton, we didn't really have quality vets to mentor our youngings, and I considered Poole a younging at 24 when he came in.... He's grown on me quite a bit as initially I was like da'fugg to I misjudged slim much too early and I've really grown to like him and wonder why ya'll be so obsessed with trading him as he's our only player who can carry our team in games scoring... Might not be all the time but he stopped a few losing streaks because he was like hell nah, we not losing tonight, I'm about to act a damn fool and win the damn game..... I definitely want him to be our 6th man at best, but until we find someone better to score the ball for us, I'm not so quick to wanna get rid of him as he's still growing as a player from the mentorships the new vets brought in.....

Lets put things into perspective.... In his rookie year, Bilal showed flashes of ability, but also extreme rawness...... He was still growing in height and weight, which he probably still is and that has to have an affect on your game..... But then he goes to tryout for France's National team.. Most didn't think he'd make it.... He did, and he started, and wasn't featured because of obviously who else is on the team, but played well enough to be a silver medalist and not a glaring weak link on that team... He then comes back this season, peoples expectations is he hadn't grown at all as a player, but he comes back 2-3 inches taller from predraft height, 15lbs stronger, and comes out initiating our offense pretty decently pre-Kuzma injury return... Then when Kuzma came back he deferred and his production dropped significantly.... He goes in and out with the inconsistency, but he kept showing glimpses every few games to remind you why he holds so much promise.... To me he can potentially be like Amen somewhat but he just doesn't play as aggressively, and with that man being from The Town, that might not be something he can attain...... We shall see...

He needs to work on his jumper, spot up and off the dribble... He needs to work on continuously tightening up his handles, which I think will help his off the dribble shooting... He also needs to watch more film with Smart to continue his development in how to watch film and what to look for with his game and his opponents..... He's not perfect but if he keeps putting in the work he's going to at least be a good player.... The issue is can he tap into his vast potential to be come a potentially great player.. TBD...

[doclinkin]

Your understanding of win shares is wrong.

If a player is a great offensive player on a bad offensive team (which the wizards are), and the player also happens to be a great defensive player on a bad defensive team (which again the wizards are), that player is going to have a great win share regardless of the number of games the team actually won.

Incorrect. It is literally a metric measuring who gets credit for the number of wins the team earned.

It uses Dean Oliver’s 4 factors to try to dissect where Wins come from. Read the link I posted. Check the formula. It’s kinda dumb. A useful stat for HOF comparisons. And obviously if a player is so good they force wins that will show up. But players on their team will get partial credit for those wins.

It’s not a good stat for measuring impact of players regardless of the team around them. Win or lose. There are a few out there that are better, like +/- stats, especially cross matched with line-up data. That’s where a player like Deni stood out even on losing teams. And Kuzma was consistently bad.

but WS ain’t it.

Which ok: now I understand why you think those guys are all better players than Bilal. They play on teams that win more. They divvy up a bigger pie of wins. So if that’s the metric you’re using to rank them of course these guys all pass our young pups. Just know they are surfing on the wake of HOFers and it’s making their WS stats look good. And they’re not on teams they are deliberately tanking.

Basketball is a team sport. And defense in particular is hard to tease out of box scores. The video based stats do a better job in that, but I don’t pay for synergy sports. I look at the +/- stats but even those can be dependent on what lineups a guy tends to play with.

Btw. Win Score is different than Win Shares. That one does a better job. I forget the stat geek page that automatically calculates that one. When I find it I’ll drop a link.

[leswizards]

Your understanding of win shares is wrong.

If a player is a great offensive player on a bad offensive team (which the wizards are), and the player also happens to be a great defensive player on a bad defensive team (which again the wizards are), that player is going to have a great win share regardless of the number of games the team actually won.

Incorrect. It is literally a metric measuring who gets credit for the number of wins the team earned.

It uses Dean Oliver’s 4 factors to try to dissect where Wins come from. Read the link I posted. Check the formula. It’s kinda dumb. A useful stat for HOF comparisons. And obviously if a player is so good they force wins that will show up. But players on their team will get partial credit for those wins.

It’s not a good stat for measuring impact of players regardless of the team around them. Win or lose. There are a few out there that are better, like +/- stats, especially cross matched with line-up data. That’s where a player like Deni stood out even on losing teams. And Kuzma was consistently bad.

but WS ain’t it.

Which ok: now I understand why you think those guys are all better players than Bilal. They play on teams that win more. They divvy up a bigger pie of wins. So if that’s the metric you’re using to rank them of course these guys all pass our young pups. Just know they are surfing on the wake of HOFers and it’s making their WS stats look good. And they’re not on teams they are deliberately tanking.

Basketball is a team sport. And defense in particular is hard to tease out of box scores. The video based stats do a better job in that, but I don’t pay for synergy sports. I look at the +/- stats but even those can be dependent on what lineups a guy tends to play with.

Btw. Win Score is different than Win Shares. That one does a better job. I forget the stat geek page that automatically calculates that one. When I find it I’ll drop a link.

I am not searching for the link you provided. It has nothing to do with what I am looking at.

I am looking at win shares as reported by basketball reference page and their formula has nothing to do with distributing a teams wins. In fact, based upon their formula my earlier statement about a great offensive/defensive player on a bad offensive/defensive team will have a great ws regardless of the team’s actual wins is 100% true.

[AFM]

I asked our lord and savior chat GPT if two identical players with identical stats played on a good team vs a terrible team, would one have a higher WS?

Yes — exactly. If two players are statistically identical, but one plays on a winning team and the other on a terrible team, the player on the better team will almost always have a higher Win Shares total.

Why does this happen?
Win Shares are based on team success. The stat is literally trying to answer:

“How many wins did this player contribute to?”

So if a team has 60 wins, there are 60 "Win Shares" to be distributed across the roster.
If a team has 15 wins, there are only 15 Win Shares available — even if a player on that team played at an elite level.

Key Point:
Win Shares don't isolate individual performance from team context. They assume wins are a shared, team-level outcome, then divvy up credit among players based on individual stats.

So in your scenario:
Two statistically identical players.

One on a 60-win team → likely gets 8–12 WS.

One on a 20-win team → likely gets 3–6 WS.

Is this a flaw?
It depends on what you're using it for:

If you're measuring impact on winning, it's useful.

But if you're comparing individual ability independent of team, it can be misleading.

If you want something more team-agnostic, look into:

Box Plus/Minus (BPM)

Player Efficiency Rating (PER)

Estimated Plus-Minus (EPM)

LeBron (from BBall Index)
These try to remove team success bias.

Let me know if you want help comparing any of those or applying them to real players.

[payitforward]

Forget the discussion of "win shares."

leswizards is correct that some '23-24 rookies taken after Bilal had better seasons than he did. 2 of the next 10 players taken after Bilal were better than he as rookies (Wallace & Lively).

OTOH, it's also true that 2 of the 6 players taken before Bilal were worse than he (Miller & Henderson).

So what?

Most (not all) 2023 rookies were older than Bilal.

A couple of "better" rookies went downhill their second year. & few of the measurable stats that cause one to say they were "better" involved defense.

Almost all of his deficit from average was a function of poor shooting -- which did NOT improve his second year. Is that a reason for concern? Of course it is!

OTOH, he's a terrific defender in ways that don't show up in these stats but are clear in specific defensive analysis.

In retrospect, would I rather have Derreck Lively or Cason Wallace. Yes, I would. But, I wouldn't have taken either of those kids over Bilal at 7.

2 of the 10 players taken after Bilal were better than he as rookies (Wallace & Lively), it's true. Yet, it's also true that 2 of the 6 players taken before Bilal were worse than Bilal (Miller & Henderson).

So what? Let's see how all of these kids work out long term, ok?

[doclinkin]

I am not searching for the link you provided. It has nothing to do with what I am looking at.

I am looking at win shares as reported by basketball reference page and their formula has nothing to do with distributing a teams wins. In fact, based upon their formula my earlier statement about a great offensive/defensive player on a bad offensive/defensive team will have a great ws regardless of the team’s actual wins is 100% true.

Yes, from basketball reference:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Win Shares is a player statistic which attempts to divvy up credit for team success to the individuals on the team. Full details are available below, but the important things to note are that it is calculated using player, team and league-wide statistics and the sum of player win shares on a given team will be roughly equal to that team’s win total for the season.

It starts with the wins. Then says “who made this?” and carves them up. (only counting points ‘per win’ in the formula).

So players on a team with a mess of Hall of Famers are going to look much better than a young team without those guys already on the roster. They are going to get a share of the wins generated by Steph Curry, for instance.

Players on OKC are going to draft off SGA. Or Luka / Kyrie on Dallas. Or Tyrese and Siakam on a EC Finals Pacers team. Or the rest of the players on a stacked Rockets team.

Now you know. It’s not a useful stat for this purpose.

[leswizards]

I am not searching for the link you provided. It has nothing to do with what I am looking at.

I am looking at win shares as reported by basketball reference page and their formula has nothing to do with distributing a teams wins. In fact, based upon their formula my earlier statement about a great offensive/defensive player on a bad offensive/defensive team will have a great ws regardless of the team’s actual wins is 100% true.

Yes, from basketball reference:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/ws.html

Win Shares is a player statistic which attempts to divvy up credit for team success to the individuals on the team. Full details are available below, but the important things to note are that it is calculated using player, team and league-wide statistics and the sum of player win shares on a given team will be roughly equal to that team’s win total for the season.

It starts with the wins. Then says “who made this?” and carves them up. (only counting points ‘per win’ in the formula).

So players on a team with a mess of Hall of Famers are going to look much better than a young team without those guys already on the roster. They are going to get a share of the wins generated by Steph Curry, for instance.

Players on OKC are going to draft off SGA. Or Luka / Kyrie on Dallas. Or Tyrese and Siakam on a EC Finals Pacers team. Or the rest of the players on a stacked Rockets team.

Now you know. It’s not a useful stat for this purpose.

Steph Curry’s ws his first 3 seasons were 4.7, 6.6, and 2.2. Golden State only won 26, 36 and 23 games his first 3 seasons. (Steph Curry only played 26 games his 3rd season otherwise his 3rd season ws would have probably been the best of the 3 seasons).

Bilal’s pathetic ws has nothing to do with the number of games that the Wizards have won, but is instead a reflection of Bilal’s play so far.

[AFM]

That’s just not true. Read my last post. It compares identical players on a 20 win team to a 60 win team.

Two statistically identical players.

One on a 60-win team → likely gets 8–12 WS.

One on a 20-win team → likely gets 3–6 WS.

[nate33]

Bilal’s pathetic ws has nothing to do with the number of games that the Wizards have won, but is instead a reflection of Bilal’s play so far.

Let’s cut the bull. Simple question: if you were running the Wizards, would you trade Bilal for Podziemski or Cason Wallace right now? Yes or no?

I’ll happily revisit this in 3 years.

[leswizards]

Bilal’s pathetic ws has nothing to do with the number of games that the Wizards have won, but is instead a reflection of Bilal’s play so far.

Let’s cut the bull. Simple question: if you were running the Wizards, would you trade Bilal for Podziemski or Cason Wallace right now? Yes or no?

I’ll happily revisit this in 3 years.

Yes

[payitforward]

Let’s cut the bull. Simple question: if you were running the Wizards, would you trade Bilal for Podziemski or Cason Wallace right now? Yes or no?

I’ll happily revisit this in 3 years.

Yes

As well, please point to where in the '23 draft conversation you pointed out that you didn't want Bilal & why.
While you're at it, please point to where, in the same thread, you opined as to whom you DID want to take with our '23 pick.

With the above information, we'll be able to assess the significance of your remarks these days. Without that info, you're just another guy who "knows better" after the fact.