Moderators: LyricalRico, nate33, montestewart
80sballboy wrote:?s=21&t=Uqyho3E_lNp9nwBM0Ge7mw
Bickerstaff: who's up for kickball?!!
Ed Wood: Only if it's the no-pants variety.
pcbothwel wrote:PIF... Why are you so hyperbolic?
1) Beal isnt some 30+ y/o player that had a brief prime (I.e. 1 season) that clearly stands out that I reference. No, Beal is 28 and before last year had a 13k minute / 5 year period that he was an AS caliber guard. Assuming a return to that form with no serious injury and under 30 isnt some pie in the sky wishful thinking, but actually far more statistically likely than further regression.
2) You are overselling the necessary improvement for KP. Yes, he needs to be healthier but we can also be fine with just getting 60-65 games from him in the regular season. Also, you cannot gloss over the role change from a pick and pop stretch 5 to being more of a decision maker in the high post. If he truly thrives there then it opens up our potential as a team and a nightly matchup. Jimmy Butler is clearly a step slower than he was 6-7 years ago and his shooting is downright awful, but he is still a great defender and highly efficient and productive. How? He went from becoming a perimeter scorer & defender at the 2/3 to more of a playmaking role and guarding 3/4's.
3) Deni/Kispert/Rui: While neither has shown to be a franchise player, all 3 have shown to be nice glue guys/rotational pieces in the near term that can do well as 4th options. So long as Rui & Kispert continue to hit 3's and not be terrible defenders, then I think we can get by. Deni is really the wild card, but I see no reason to think he wont at least make marginable improvements.
miller31time wrote:I’m asking this not as a jerk but as someone who truly wants to know…
What is it about Tyus Jones that makes the collective members of this board want to spend 10mil per year on him for?
Looking at his advanced numbers, nothing stands out. Pretty average efficiency, doesn’t really do anything really well, hasn’t show much improvement since his rookie season.
Why should we sign this guy and make him our starting point guard? Is he a lockdown defender?
(Again, would love reasons why the numbers might be wrong, or things that I’m just not seeing)
miller31time wrote:I’m asking this not as a jerk but as someone who truly wants to know…
What is it about Tyus Jones that makes the collective members of this board want to spend 10mil per year on him for?
Looking at his advanced numbers, nothing stands out. Pretty average efficiency, doesn’t really do anything really well, hasn’t show much improvement since his rookie season.
Why should we sign this guy and make him our starting point guard? Is he a lockdown defender?
(Again, would love reasons why the numbers might be wrong, or things that I’m just not seeing)
Dat2U wrote:AFM wrote:payitforward wrote:Oh man... are we really at the point where someone will think about the availability of Kris Dunn as a potential solution to a problem? Wow... that is too sad for words.
Got a better idea?
I'm not being an ass, genuinely curious. The draft is over so the time for kicking our feet and screaming about not trading the #10 for the #12 and 30 r2 picks is over. All we have left is our assets.
If this team is smart theyll trade KCP Kuzma and Rui for a decent PG. They obviously arent tanking, and with a healthy brad and a healthy Porzingis I think we're just a little too good to tank anyway. So it's either 9th seed or make a move and try to at least rid ourselves of the reputation of the Kings East.
OKC was focused on getting an extra pick (as they did from NY) not trading one. I don't think the 12 & 30 was in play.
pcbothwel wrote:PIF... Why are you so hyperbolic?....
pcbothwel wrote:...Beal isnt some 30+ y/o player that had a brief prime... Beal is 28....
pcbothwel wrote:...before last year had a 13k minute / 5 year period that he was an AS caliber guard. Assuming a return to that form with no serious injury and under 30 isnt some pie in the sky wishful thinking, but actually far more statistically likely than further regression....
We both hope he returns to form of course! &, hey, while we're hoping why not hope he becomes even better than he was! In fact, hold on a second.... Ok, I just checked & in fact I do: I hope he becomes the best SG in the league. pcbothwel wrote:...2) You are overselling the necessary improvement for KP. Yes, he needs to be healthier but we can also be fine with just getting 60-65 games from him in the regular season. Also, you cannot gloss over the role change from a pick and pop stretch 5 to being more of a decision maker in the high post. If he truly thrives there......
You just inserted the same "improvement" you claimed I was overselling the need for! pcbothwel wrote:...Jimmy Butler is clearly a step slower than he was 6-7 years ago and his shooting is downright awful, but he is still a great defender and highly efficient and productive. How? He went from becoming a perimeter scorer & defender at the 2/3 to more of a playmaking role and guarding 3/4's....
pcbothwel wrote:...Deni/Kispert/Rui: While neither has shown to be a franchise player, all 3 have shown to be nice glue guys/rotational pieces in the near term that can do well as 4th options. So long as Rui & Kispert continue to hit 3's and not be terrible defenders, then I think we can get by. Deni is really the wild card, but I see no reason to think he wont at least make marginable improvements....
pcbothwel wrote:...If you take Beal over the last 3-5 years with some this new version of KP, then we are much more in the Toronto/Chicago ~48 win territory. You want to argue that there is a clear gap between the top 3-5 teams in the league and what Im stating above...fine. But dont act like everything needs to break right for this team to be .500.
nate33 wrote: The special thing about Jones is his turnover rate. He basically never turns the ball over. Note that his ORtg is a very impressive 125 despite the lackluster TS% of just .544. That's due to the low turnover rate (and high assist rate). Also, avoiding turnovers is not only helpful in the efficiency of an offense, but it also helps the efficiency of defense because the opposition gets fewer live-ball turnovers to convert into fast breaks.
I'm not saying Jones is an elite player or anything. I'm just saying that he is better than a first order glance at the box score numbers suggests. Most people glance and points, rebounds and assists, and then maybe check TS% or 3P% and think they have a pretty good read on a guy. But turnovers matter too. Having a PG that virtually eliminates turnovers from the offense is very helpful.
The bottom line is that you can rarely acquire a quality starter for the MLE. The MLE usually gets you a 5th/6th man caliber player. And that's about what Jones would be. But there aren't any other free agent PG's conceivably available for MLE money who are better.
NatP4 wrote:Nate outlined the main reason above: historically good A/TO ratio. Just manages the game correctly. Plays at a great pace. He’s a perfect fit as a guy that can play on or off the ball and make catch and shoot 3s. Not necessarily an elite defender, but solid and smart on that end.
Great leader and competitor, just an overall smart and well spoken guy. High character. He’s just now entering into his prime and exploded when in a starting role with the Grizzlies. Put up great on/off numbers. Might have another level he can take it to.
At worst, you’re getting a solid starter through his prime years for the MLE, which is a really good value.
miller31time wrote:nate33 wrote: The special thing about Jones is his turnover rate. He basically never turns the ball over. Note that his ORtg is a very impressive 125 despite the lackluster TS% of just .544. That's due to the low turnover rate (and high assist rate). Also, avoiding turnovers is not only helpful in the efficiency of an offense, but it also helps the efficiency of defense because the opposition gets fewer live-ball turnovers to convert into fast breaks.
I'm not saying Jones is an elite player or anything. I'm just saying that he is better than a first order glance at the box score numbers suggests. Most people glance and points, rebounds and assists, and then maybe check TS% or 3P% and think they have a pretty good read on a guy. But turnovers matter too. Having a PG that virtually eliminates turnovers from the offense is very helpful.
The bottom line is that you can rarely acquire a quality starter for the MLE. The MLE usually gets you a 5th/6th man caliber player. And that's about what Jones would be. But there aren't any other free agent PG's conceivably available for MLE money who are better.NatP4 wrote:Nate outlined the main reason above: historically good A/TO ratio. Just manages the game correctly. Plays at a great pace. He’s a perfect fit as a guy that can play on or off the ball and make catch and shoot 3s. Not necessarily an elite defender, but solid and smart on that end.
Great leader and competitor, just an overall smart and well spoken guy. High character. He’s just now entering into his prime and exploded when in a starting role with the Grizzlies. Put up great on/off numbers. Might have another level he can take it to.
At worst, you’re getting a solid starter through his prime years for the MLE, which is a really good value.
Thanks for the analysis. I know there’s a lot of flaw in this metric but does the pedestrian PER give you any pause? I figured PER would take into account the low turnovers.
Lastly, one commonality between a lot of low-turnover players is a general lack of aggressiveness. The less aggressive you are, the fewer chances you have to take, the less turnovers you commit. Is this something Jones does or is he just really crafty with the ball?
miller31time wrote:I’m asking this not as a jerk but as someone who truly wants to know…
What is it about Tyus Jones that makes the collective members of this board want to spend 10mil per year on him for?
Looking at his advanced numbers, nothing stands out. Pretty average efficiency, doesn’t really do anything really well, hasn’t show much improvement since his rookie season.
Why should we sign this guy and make him our starting point guard? Is he a lockdown defender?
(Again, would love reasons why the numbers might be wrong, or things that I’m just not seeing)
payitforward wrote:"Statistically likely?" That's not how the term "statistically" works. You just mean to claim that it's "likely" that he returns to form & are looking for a polysyllabic word to go along with "actually" (also not carrying much of a load of meaning in your sentence) & make the claim seem objective rather than simply being what you hope for. But... that's ok.
miller31time wrote:...does the pedestrian PER give you any pause? I figured PER would take into account the low turnovers....
miller31time wrote:...one commonality between a lot of low-turnover players is a general lack of aggressiveness. The less aggressive you are, the fewer chances you have to take, the less turnovers you commit. Is this something Jones does or is he just really crafty with the ball?
doclinkin wrote:miller31time wrote:I’m asking this not as a jerk but as someone who truly wants to know…
What is it about Tyus Jones that makes the collective members of this board want to spend 10mil per year on him for?
Looking at his advanced numbers, nothing stands out. Pretty average efficiency, doesn’t really do anything really well, hasn’t show much improvement since his rookie season.
Why should we sign this guy and make him our starting point guard? Is he a lockdown defender?
(Again, would love reasons why the numbers might be wrong, or things that I’m just not seeing)
Underrated player who makes the guys around him better. This team has been without a floor general for a while. Beal's outside shooting has suffered for it. Porzingis could use someone to get him the ball when he is in motion. Gafford stands to benefit more than any other player, and Rui really needs a mentor on the floor who can alchemize his natural gifts into stat production.
AFM wrote:payitforward wrote:"Statistically likely?" That's not how the term "statistically" works. You just mean to claim that it's "likely" that he returns to form & are looking for a polysyllabic word to go along with "actually" (also not carrying much of a load of meaning in your sentence) & make the claim seem objective rather than simply being what you hope for. But... that's ok.
This deserves to be in the HOF thread for how obnoxious this is. We're talking legendary levels of pedantry. Holy ****.
doclinkin wrote:miller31time wrote:I’m asking this not as a jerk but as someone who truly wants to know…
What is it about Tyus Jones that makes the collective members of this board want to spend 10mil per year on him for?
Looking at his advanced numbers, nothing stands out. Pretty average efficiency, doesn’t really do anything really well, hasn’t show much improvement since his rookie season.
Why should we sign this guy and make him our starting point guard? Is he a lockdown defender?
(Again, would love reasons why the numbers might be wrong, or things that I’m just not seeing)
Underrated player who makes the guys around him better. This team has been without a floor general for a while. Beal's outside shooting has suffered for it. Porzingis could use someone to get him the ball when he is in motion. Gafford stands to benefit more than any other player, and Rui really needs a mentor on the floor who can alchemize his natural gifts into stat production.
payitforward wrote:AFM wrote:payitforward wrote:"Statistically likely?" That's not how the term "statistically" works. You just mean to claim that it's "likely" that he returns to form & are looking for a polysyllabic word to go along with "actually" (also not carrying much of a load of meaning in your sentence) & make the claim seem objective rather than simply being what you hope for. But... that's ok.
This deserves to be in the HOF thread for how obnoxious this is. We're talking legendary levels of pedantry. Holy ****.
Apparently my attempt to be humorous was unsuccessful.
If you were looking at 10 players who'd had "down" seasons, you could look at historical data & perhaps come up with an estimate of how many of them might turn it around. That's what a "statistical likelihood" is. I can't help that; it's just the way it is.
If you look at an individual player who's had a down season, you can't determine what the "statistical likelihood" is for him to turn it around. He either does or he doesn't or he gets worse or he plays better than he ever has. The statistics tell you nothing about his individual case. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.
As I went on to say, we all hope that Brad turns it around. That's what it is -- hope. For that matter, we hope that he becomes even better than he was a couple of years ago. But there is no relationship between that hope & any "statistical" likelihood of anything.
For example, someone in the past may have done that -- had a bad season then came back better than ever. That proves it's possible. If it can be done once then it's possible. But it has no statistical meaning whatever that can be applied to another person. Suppose a second person does it. That doesn't mean that the next person has twice the statistical likelihood of doing it too.
As to "pedantry," tell me... is it useful to think about whether Brad might return to form? I'd say it's useful. So, if we think about it, wouldn't it be a good idea to think about it in a way that has some actual basis? So it seemed to me. & so I pointed out the problem.
pcbothwei hopes Brad will succeed. Me too. Far as it goes.
edit...
Actually, let me make it totally obvious. Joe takes a shot & makes it. Does that make it more "statistically likely" that Harry will make his next shot?