Roster & Rotation Evaluation

[nate33]

But, tell me, have you looked at Giannis's box score data? How about LeBron's box score data? How about, historically, Michael Jordan's box score data.

Should we also ignore their box score data, because "box score data doesn't capture everything..."? Does box score data capture nothing at all, or even just say nothing important, about those players?

To put it slightly differently, don't you think you might be downplaying box score data in the case of this comparison precisely because you have a settled opinion about the players in question? Just something to think about -- not to reject out of hand, nor to accept automatically either, but to think about.

I can't have the same argument with you over and over. Jordan and Giannis are exceptional defenders and primary creators against the focus of defensive attention. Their box score data has to be viewed in that light. Bryant needs other to set him up and furthermore, he needs guys like Bertans to space the floor for him. And he plays terrible defense. It's apples and oranges.

...Bryant has an on/off differential of -5.7 per 100 possessions. Bertans has an on/off differential of +8.1 per 100 possessions. Arguing that Bryant has been better than Bertans doesn't pass the smell test...

I don't give "the smell test" a whole lot of credence. & I don't give individual on/off numbers much credence either. Wasn't it you who pointed out that... I don't remember who... came off the bench & played against bench players? Isn't that true of Bertans? Should we ignore the fact in this instance, while we accept its relevance in the other?

Or, instead, let me reproduce your statement with a slight difference of players: "Bradley Beal has an on/off differential of -4.9 per 100 possessions. Bertans has an on/off differential of +8.1 per 100 possessions. Arguing that Beal has been better than Bertans doesn't pass the smell test."

Any problem with that analysis? Admittedly, -4.9 is a little better than -5.8. Bertans is plus 13.8 vs. Bryant & only +12.9 vs Beal.

Of course, you wouldn't suggest that the comparison has any significance whatever when it's Bertans vs. Beal. If I used it as data to support the idea that Bertans is a better player than Beal, you would scoff at the idea. But... if the value of a comparison of data can't be judged until we know who is being compared... well, then, that data -- unlike box score data -- is altogether irrelevant.

On/off data requires a good amount of on time and a good amount of off time, and preferably some time alongside starters and some time alongside the bench to be the most accurate. Bertans and Bryant satisfy all that criteria so I think the on/off data for them is pretty sound.

Beal's on/off data is concentrated against opposing starters (while alongside really bad teammates on our starting lineup due the idiosyncratic way Brooks stacks his bench unit). Furthermore, Beal has very little off time that's not also garbage time or time against the opposition's bench.

[payitforward]

nate, I'm not having an argument with you; you're having an argument with me!

Did I address my first post to you? No. But, you responded that you couldn't have the same argument with me over & over. I.e. that you somehow had to have it. IOW, you're arguing with me not the reverse. Why would I argue with you? I think you are one of the most thoughtful posters on basketball on this board!

What I am doing is discussing an objective subject -- data & how to analyze it.

It's not customary in analyzing data to apply contextual interpretation based on knowledge/opinion of the subjects involved to change the meaning of the data. E.g. Bertans's high 3-point % on a large number of attempts means what it means. It has the impact it has. Period. The points don't know who put them up there on the board.

&, what is true of the 3-point % is also true of the rebounding. How well or badly Davis rebounds is an essential aspect of how good a player he is. Period. The ball doesn't know who's on the floor.

Getting a rebound is good; not getting a rebound isn't good. If a Wizard gets a defensive rebound, the team has the ball back without the other team having scored. Whoever gets the rebound, the value is the same. If it's on offense, ditto -- good if a Wizard gets the rebound, b/c we have another chance to score w/o giving the opponent a chance to score. Not good if the other team gets the ball.

Ditto for your desire to relativize the on/off data you use, so that one use of it is highly significant but the other is not. Thus, if Beal plays alongside bad players (i.e. worse than necessary) b/c of Brooks's weird rotations, then presumably Bertans' plays alongside better players?

Davis Bertans claim to unusual value rests on his extremely efficient scoring. Neither you nor anyone else suggests that he's a guy we want to keep for any other reason. Hell, his nickname is "Laser."

4s also protect the rim, not just 5s. But people don't want to pay Bertans because of his ability to protect the rim. Or for his defense, or for his ability to pass & get assists. Or for anything at all outside of his 3 point shooting. That's it. Period.

In his case, no one says "he MUST be a better rebounder." No one says "his offense is fools gold, because he isn't a good defender." No, no, he's the Latvian laser. That's what makes him valuable.

Yet, Bryant is an equally proficient & equally efficient scorer. More efficient in fact. Overall, Bertans is not a better scorer than Bryant; he isn't as good a scorer as Bryant.

This is not to suggest that Bryant doesn't need to get better at protecting the rim & moving on defense -- of course he does! &, as you've pointed out, he's still only 22; bigs can take some time to develop defensively at the NBA level.

[DCZards]

When debating Bryant vs. Bertans and why Davis might be pricier and more of an asset you can't overlook their roles and skillsets. Bertans' floor-stretching, 3 pt shooting is simply more valuable and sought after in today's NBA. There's a reason why several teams were hoping to trade for Davis prior to the trade deadline.

Bertans is much better at what, I believe, the Zards need most from him (3 pt shooting) than Bryant is at what, I believe, the Zards need most from a big man...rebounding and rim protection.

[payitforward]

Those are very strong points, Zards.

Keep in mind that my original question was why people here wanted Bertans so determinedly, yet these same people seemed to be willing to trade Bryant for half a ham sandwich! IOW, my goal wasn't really to compare the two players. I only compared their numbers to point out that the eagerness to keep one of them & to trade the other made little sense to me. No doubt I could have made that clearer!

& on that subject, when you point out that GMs around the league seem to have been aggressively interested in trading for Bertans, well, that's an indication that it's not just fans here who place this much value on him! Above all, the fact that teams were willing to trade a R1 draft pick for him (& that we had the gumption to ask for 2 of them!!) certainly speaks to the value NBA front office people place on Bertans. Of course, we don't know what GMs would or wouldn't give for Bryant, but all the same....

What's really interesting, come to think of it, is that those same GMs could have had Davis Bertans last Summer for a lot less!

We got him for a TPE (& kudos to Tommy Sheppard for giving next to nothing for a guy who some months later his peers want enough to offer a R1 pick for him! That is some superlative work!).

Yet... why the sudden jump in Bertans' value?

His numbers are not different from last year. His usage is, however; it's jumped 40%. Plus, he's playing 40% more minutes per game. The result is that he's already taken way way more 3 point shots than he did all of last season.

Pretty good value for a TPE !!

[wall_glizzy]

What's really interesting, come to think of it, is that those same GMs could have had Davis Bertans last Summer for a lot less!

When considering the market for Bertans last summer, it should be noted that the Spurs had basically no choice but to trade him for an exception, since the deal was specifically made out of desperation to clear space for a Marcus Morris deal.

That said, I believe this does imply that there were no offers of picks on the table (Nate or someone else more familiar with the cap can chime in), since I believe they could have traded Bertans for just a pick and created a trade exception of their own in the process. In any event, there's no question that Bertans has appreciated in value quite a bit since last summer!