RealGM

LyricalRico wrote:Nah, LeBron isn't letting Lue leave. He'll get the team to fire Blatt and promote Lue before he'd let him leave.

Whomever the Cleveland "coach" actually is, they also adjusted last night by essentially benching Mozgov. Gutsy IMO since dude was coming off a career night, and it almost worked out. (I think the piece they were missing was playing Marion over James Jones.)

And another move Kerr has made in the last two games has been to use Livingston as the first man off the bench, replacing Barnes and thus playing alongside Curry and Thompson. I watched a lot of GSW games this year, and I can't recall them going to that lineup (unlike the Green/Barnes/Iggy frontcourt which they go to a lot). Genius tweak by Kerr IMO.

Hope Randy has been taking notes...

Bogut.. 3 mins in the last two games.

Lots of small ball.

Not sure I agree with CLE not trying more to punish that line up with Mozgov.

http://www.wizardsxtra.com/2015/06/15/is-randy-wittman-the-right-coach-for-the-wizards

I got sucked in after the previous playoff after another the another regular season where I complained about line ups and rotation most the season. I thought he learned that year. But then last year was more of the same with the regular season rotations.

Randy may have learned something new this last post season and he may actually adjust. Specially with the new roster that is forming, I don't know.

It a big season for him. He has an opportunity to make a major leap in his coaching skills. I'll be open minded for one year to see what he does with that opportunity. He is going to have to take that next big leap if he is going to be the guy to stick around.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/11/5/9674536/randy-wittman-after-timeout-plays-coaching-washington-wizards

A few interesting points that stuck out to me about this post over on Bullets Forever.

1) Plays after timeouts have been pretty effective at creating open looks. Just as importantly, they've opened up looks quickly, sometimes at crucial points in the game.

2) Randy has generally taken the long view with his team at the expense of short term wins and losses. Developing Wall, preserving Pierce until the playoffs, and this year, managing Dudley's minutes coming off injury.

3) Wall and Randy are in sync when it comes to what they're seeing on the floor. This is going to be critical next offseason as Wall will be a big part of selling the team (and Randy) to prospective FAs.

I haven't always been the biggest fan of Wittman, but most of that was due to the style of play and the way that style failed to play into Wall's strengths. That's really dominated my view of him prior to this year. Going forward, I think I'll have to start looking at other aspects of his coaching which I've previously paid much less attention to.

manifested wrote:http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/11/5/9674536/randy-wittman-after-timeout-plays-coaching-washington-wizards

A few interesting points that stuck out to me about this post over on Bullets Forever.

1) Plays after timeouts have been pretty effective at creating open looks. Just as importantly, they've opened up looks quickly, sometimes at crucial points in the game.

2) Randy has generally taken the long view with his team at the expense of short term wins and losses. Developing Wall, preserving Pierce until the playoffs, and this year, managing Dudley's minutes coming off injury.

3) Wall and Randy are in sync when it comes to what they're seeing on the floor. This is going to be critical next offseason as Wall will be a big part of selling the team (and Randy) to prospective FAs.

I haven't always been the biggest fan of Wittman, but most of that was due to the style of play and the way that style failed to play into Wall's strengths. That's really dominated my view of him prior to this year. Going forward, I think I'll have to start looking at other aspects of his coaching which I've previously paid much less attention to.

I actually found this article kinda disappointing. Umair (whose work I generally like) asserts that Wittman is excellent in designing after timeout plays, but the evidence he presents (several successful plays) doesn't support his assertion. To conclude that Wittman is excellent, he'd need to include a comparison with other teams/coaches. Where do the Wizards rank in offensive rating after timeouts? From what I could find online, last season (per Synergy) the Wizards weren't in the top 10 in efficiency after timeouts.

It'd be great if Wittman truly is excellent in designing after timeout plays, but it's still a big "maybe" -- at least in my eyes.

There's also the issue of how much "designing" actually goes on during timeouts. Most coaches I've talked with say they NEVER draw up anything new in a timeout because it's guaranteed that someone is going to forget his assignment. What they do in timeouts is review things they've already practiced.

TheSecretWeapon wrote:

manifested wrote:http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/11/5/9674536/randy-wittman-after-timeout-plays-coaching-washington-wizards

A few interesting points that stuck out to me about this post over on Bullets Forever.

1) Plays after timeouts have been pretty effective at creating open looks. Just as importantly, they've opened up looks quickly, sometimes at crucial points in the game.

2) Randy has generally taken the long view with his team at the expense of short term wins and losses. Developing Wall, preserving Pierce until the playoffs, and this year, managing Dudley's minutes coming off injury.

3) Wall and Randy are in sync when it comes to what they're seeing on the floor. This is going to be critical next offseason as Wall will be a big part of selling the team (and Randy) to prospective FAs.

I haven't always been the biggest fan of Wittman, but most of that was due to the style of play and the way that style failed to play into Wall's strengths. That's really dominated my view of him prior to this year. Going forward, I think I'll have to start looking at other aspects of his coaching which I've previously paid much less attention to.

I actually found this article kinda disappointing. Umair (whose work I generally like) asserts that Wittman is excellent in designing after timeout plays, but the evidence he presents (several successful plays) doesn't support his assertion. To conclude that Wittman is excellent, he'd need to include a comparison with other teams/coaches. Where do the Wizards rank in offensive rating after timeouts? From what I could find online, last season (per Synergy) the Wizards weren't in the top 10 in efficiency after timeouts.

It'd be great if Wittman truly is excellent in designing after timeout plays, but it's still a big "maybe" -- at least in my eyes.

There's also the issue of how much "designing" actually goes on during timeouts. Most coaches I've talked with say they NEVER draw up anything new in a timeout because it's guaranteed that someone is going to forget his assignment. What they do in timeouts is review things they've already practiced.

Agreed that it'd be useful to get some comparisons to other coaches. The other thing that would be interesting is efficiency after timeouts compared to offensive efficiency overall, figuring the difference, and then comparing the same to other coaches.

This would probably control for the talent differentials a bit if you assume more talented teams will tend to have higher offensive efficiency throughout the rest of the game. Basically who's the better coach out of a timeout?

Team A: Average offensive efficiency (all possessions), and the same average efficiency after timeouts
Team B: Low offensive efficiency (all possessions), but average efficiency after timeouts

Not definitive, but it'd be some evidence to think the coach of Team B would be better at helping his team in a close game.

manifested wrote:
Team A: Average offensive efficiency (all possessions), and the same average efficiency after timeouts
Team B: Low offensive efficiency (all possessions), but average efficiency after timeouts

Not definitive, but it'd be some evidence to think the coach of Team B would be better at helping his team in a close game.

To this point, I found another piece from December, 2014 that did this. According to their approach, 8 teams were more efficient in after timeout plays than in their overall halfcourt plays. The Wizards were in the "more efficient" group, ranking 7th, at +1.0 per 100 possessions (I think these are Synergy possessions, though, which are really "plays" in the terminology used by most basketball analysts). They'd done something similar the previous season (December, 2013) showing the Wizards among the worst teams in after timeout efficiency, with a significant drop from their regular offense.

TheSecretWeapon wrote:

manifested wrote:
Team A: Average offensive efficiency (all possessions), and the same average efficiency after timeouts
Team B: Low offensive efficiency (all possessions), but average efficiency after timeouts

Not definitive, but it'd be some evidence to think the coach of Team B would be better at helping his team in a close game.

To this point, I found another piece from December, 2014 that did this. According to their approach, 8 teams were more efficient in after timeout plays than in their overall halfcourt plays. The Wizards were in the "more efficient" group, ranking 7th, at +1.0 per 100 possessions (I think these are Synergy possessions, though, which are really "plays" in the terminology used by most basketball analysts). They'd done something similar the previous season (December, 2013) showing the Wizards among the worst teams in after timeout efficiency, with a significant drop from their regular offense.

Doesn't it fit the narrative that they were bad in 2013 and above average in 2014 when considering that Wittman has improved as a coach? It seems like Wittman has had a run of nice ATO plays since last year that have resulted in easy baskets a lot of the time, and if they performed above expectation in ATO situations in 2014 according to that article then it would confirm what we're seeing, no?

gtn130 wrote:

TheSecretWeapon wrote:

manifested wrote:
Team A: Average offensive efficiency (all possessions), and the same average efficiency after timeouts
Team B: Low offensive efficiency (all possessions), but average efficiency after timeouts

Not definitive, but it'd be some evidence to think the coach of Team B would be better at helping his team in a close game.

To this point, I found another piece from December, 2014 that did this. According to their approach, 8 teams were more efficient in after timeout plays than in their overall halfcourt plays. The Wizards were in the "more efficient" group, ranking 7th, at +1.0 per 100 possessions (I think these are Synergy possessions, though, which are really "plays" in the terminology used by most basketball analysts). They'd done something similar the previous season (December, 2013) showing the Wizards among the worst teams in after timeout efficiency, with a significant drop from their regular offense.

Doesn't it fit the narrative that they were bad in 2013 and above average in 2014 when considering that Wittman has improved as a coach? It seems like Wittman has had a run of nice ATO plays since last year that have resulted in easy baskets a lot of the time, and if they performed above expectation in ATO situations in 2014 according to that article then it would confirm what we're seeing, no?

It could, except a) that wasn't the narrative last season, and b) the article was published December 4, which is extremely early in the season. Without digging more into their methodology and data set, it's hard to know whether the Wizards being better in that second article was the result a small sample size fluke, or reflective of the coach doing something well. The Wiz were 12th in overall efficiency ATO. Some of the results have me leaning toward "small sample size fluke" -- unless we're all prepared to agree that Derek Fisher and Mike Malone were really excellent coaches last season. (Although, I'll say I didn't think Malone was bad.)

Also, it sorta begs the question: Why is "after timeout" being used a measure of coaching prowess at all? The coach is responsible for designing the team's offensive and defensive system -- not just their ATO plays.

All this is a long way of saying that I'd like to see some real analysis of all this. I'd be please if Wittman and the Wizards really were good coming out of timeouts. Those plays can sometimes come in high leverage situations that can swing an outcome. So far, I haven't seen evidence to support the assertion, however.

TheSecretWeapon wrote:

gtn130 wrote:

TheSecretWeapon wrote:To this point, I found another piece from December, 2014 that did this. According to their approach, 8 teams were more efficient in after timeout plays than in their overall halfcourt plays. The Wizards were in the "more efficient" group, ranking 7th, at +1.0 per 100 possessions (I think these are Synergy possessions, though, which are really "plays" in the terminology used by most basketball analysts). They'd done something similar the previous season (December, 2013) showing the Wizards among the worst teams in after timeout efficiency, with a significant drop from their regular offense.

Doesn't it fit the narrative that they were bad in 2013 and above average in 2014 when considering that Wittman has improved as a coach? It seems like Wittman has had a run of nice ATO plays since last year that have resulted in easy baskets a lot of the time, and if they performed above expectation in ATO situations in 2014 according to that article then it would confirm what we're seeing, no?

It could, except a) that wasn't the narrative last season, and b) the article was published December 4, which is extremely early in the season. Without digging more into their methodology and data set, it's hard to know whether the Wizards being better in that second article was the result a small sample size fluke, or reflective of the coach doing something well. The Wiz were 12th in overall efficiency ATO. Some of the results have me leaning toward "small sample size fluke" -- unless we're all prepared to agree that Derek Fisher and Mike Malone were really excellent coaches last season. (Although, I'll say I didn't think Malone was bad.)

Also, it sorta begs the question: Why is "after timeout" being used a measure of coaching prowess at all? The coach is responsible for designing the team's offensive and defensive system -- not just their ATO plays.

All this is a long way of saying that I'd like to see some real analysis of all this. I'd be please if Wittman and the Wizards really were good coming out of timeouts. Those plays can sometimes come in high leverage situations that can swing an outcome. So far, I haven't seen evidence to support the assertion, however.

The narrative last season was definitely that he had good ATO plays.

gtn130 wrote:

TheSecretWeapon wrote:

gtn130 wrote:
Doesn't it fit the narrative that they were bad in 2013 and above average in 2014 when considering that Wittman has improved as a coach? It seems like Wittman has had a run of nice ATO plays since last year that have resulted in easy baskets a lot of the time, and if they performed above expectation in ATO situations in 2014 according to that article then it would confirm what we're seeing, no?

It could, except a) that wasn't the narrative last season, and b) the article was published December 4, which is extremely early in the season. Without digging more into their methodology and data set, it's hard to know whether the Wizards being better in that second article was the result a small sample size fluke, or reflective of the coach doing something well. The Wiz were 12th in overall efficiency ATO. Some of the results have me leaning toward "small sample size fluke" -- unless we're all prepared to agree that Derek Fisher and Mike Malone were really excellent coaches last season. (Although, I'll say I didn't think Malone was bad.)

Also, it sorta begs the question: Why is "after timeout" being used a measure of coaching prowess at all? The coach is responsible for designing the team's offensive and defensive system -- not just their ATO plays.

All this is a long way of saying that I'd like to see some real analysis of all this. I'd be please if Wittman and the Wizards really were good coming out of timeouts. Those plays can sometimes come in high leverage situations that can swing an outcome. So far, I haven't seen evidence to support the assertion, however.

The narrative last season was definitely that he had good ATO plays.

Maybe I missed that or something. I don't remember much on it during the regular season. In the playoffs I recall seeing stuff about the team being good ATO. I do remember a ton of complaining about his ATO plays because so many of them were isos for Wall.

Either way, the articles I mentioned were published so early in the 2014 season that they wouldn't really support the narrative, even if they are methodologically sound. Umair's article supports the narrative in the sense that it asserts it and gives a few examples.

I'm still left with wanting some real analysis on the issue. I'll check in with my play-by-play parsing pals and see if anyone can give me a decent data set.

TheSecretWeapon wrote:Maybe I missed that or something. I don't remember much on it during the regular season. In the playoffs I recall seeing stuff about the team being good ATO. I do remember a ton of complaining about his ATO plays because so many of them were isos for Wall.

Either way, the articles I mentioned were published so early in the 2014 season that they wouldn't really support the narrative, even if they are methodologically sound. Umair's article supports the narrative in the sense that it asserts it and gives a few examples.

I'm still left with wanting some real analysis on the issue. I'll check in with my play-by-play parsing pals and see if anyone can give me a decent data set.

Looks like the video got taken down by Youtube, which is unfortunate, but.. this channel Half Court Hoops (great basketball content btw) did an 'offensive preview' of each team before the season:

https://www.youtube.com/user/CoachesAnalysis/videos


I watched the Wizards one of course, and surprisingly he specifically said that he believes 'Randy Wittman is underrated and has some of the best ATO and SLOB plays out of any coach'

It's a shame the vid got taken down because there was a lot of great stuff there, but I did find this tweet from his channel praising some of Wittman's sets:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HalfCourtHoops/status/659549338037825536[/tweet]

I don't have twitter, but I bet if you tweeted at him he would provide you with some of the examples he broke down in that video. It was about 15min long

The first play the Wizards ran in the 2nd half was pretty nice.

Illmatic12 wrote:

TheSecretWeapon wrote:Maybe I missed that or something. I don't remember much on it during the regular season. In the playoffs I recall seeing stuff about the team being good ATO. I do remember a ton of complaining about his ATO plays because so many of them were isos for Wall.

Either way, the articles I mentioned were published so early in the 2014 season that they wouldn't really support the narrative, even if they are methodologically sound. Umair's article supports the narrative in the sense that it asserts it and gives a few examples.

I'm still left with wanting some real analysis on the issue. I'll check in with my play-by-play parsing pals and see if anyone can give me a decent data set.

Looks like the video got taken down by Youtube, which is unfortunate, but.. this channel Half Court Hoops (great basketball content btw) did an 'offensive preview' of each team before the season:

https://www.youtube.com/user/CoachesAnalysis/videos


I watched the Wizards one of course, and surprisingly he specifically said that he believes 'Randy Wittman is underrated and has some of the best ATO and SLOB plays out of any coach'

It's a shame the vid got taken down because there was a lot of great stuff there, but I did find this tweet from his channel praising some of Wittman's sets:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/HalfCourtHoops/status/659549338037825536[/tweet]

I don't have twitter, but I bet if you tweeted at him he would provide you with some of the examples he broke down in that video. It was about 15min long

Yeah, I love these videos. I'm not looking for examples, though, but for the actual numbers. I've message a couple stat goobers who can probably extract them from the pbps.

A stat goober got back to me with some preliminary information related to the Wizards ATO performance.

So far this season, their efg ATO is .361 on 18 plays where there was a shot following a timeout. For the season, the Wiz have an efg of .498.

Last season, their efg on ATO plays was .445 vs. an overall of efg of .499. In 2013-14, it was .422 vs. an overall efg of .506.

No comparison with other teams yet. I'd also like to get info on free throws, and turnovers. That stuff will take longer.

I think the turnover problem is evidence of poor coaching. If they stressed good ball handling habits in practice there wouldn't be so much of a problem in games.

tontoz wrote:I think the turnover problem is evidence of poor coaching. If they stressed good ball handling habits in practice there wouldn't be so much of a problem in games.

Possibly it is from trying to find the edge where they can play. Where the players can still play but aren't gassed. I think I have to give Wittman a pass for the first 10 games as they try to figure it out.

I give them credit for try to implement a completely new offensive schema. And I am want to give them some time to do so...

Hard to give them much of a pass of the defensive side of the ball though - I just don't understand that part of the failure.

My two cents...

One more thing - our differential is -5.5. Which puts us only above the Nets and Sixers in the east. I would think that would put Wittman on the hot seat in a hurry.

dckingsfan wrote:

tontoz wrote:I think the turnover problem is evidence of poor coaching. If they stressed good ball handling habits in practice there wouldn't be so much of a problem in games.

Possibly it is from trying to find the edge where they can play. Where the players can still play but aren't gassed. I think I have to give Wittman a pass for the first 10 games as they try to figure it out.

I give them credit for try to implement a completely new offensive schema. And I am want to give them some time to do so...

Hard to give them much of a pass of the defensive side of the ball though - I just don't understand that part of the failure.

My two cents...

They were 22nd in turnover rate last year, pretty bad for a veteran team.

tontoz wrote:

dckingsfan wrote:

tontoz wrote:I think the turnover problem is evidence of poor coaching. If they stressed good ball handling habits in practice there wouldn't be so much of a problem in games.

Possibly it is from trying to find the edge where they can play. Where the players can still play but aren't gassed. I think I have to give Wittman a pass for the first 10 games as they try to figure it out.

I give them credit for try to implement a completely new offensive schema. And I am want to give them some time to do so...

Hard to give them much of a pass of the defensive side of the ball though - I just don't understand that part of the failure.

My two cents...

They were 22nd in turnover rate last year, pretty bad for a veteran team.

Solid point - I thought last year the TOs were very much integrated into the offensive schema - there was just no room to operate. But the TOs are back with a vengeance... (although they are now 19th instead of 24th)

dckingsfan wrote:

tontoz wrote:

dckingsfan wrote:
Possibly it is from trying to find the edge where they can play. Where the players can still play but aren't gassed. I think I have to give Wittman a pass for the first 10 games as they try to figure it out.

I give them credit for try to implement a completely new offensive schema. And I am want to give them some time to do so...

Hard to give them much of a pass of the defensive side of the ball though - I just don't understand that part of the failure.

My two cents...

They were 22nd in turnover rate last year, pretty bad for a veteran team.

Solid point - I thought last year the TOs were very much integrated into the offensive schema - there was just no room to operate. But the TOs are back with a vengeance... (although they are now 19th instead of 24th)

The Wizards are LAST in turnovers so far this season -- 17.3% of their possessions end in a turnover; league average so far is 13.9%.