2024-25 NBA Rookie Discussion Thread (Pt. 4: Who is the ROY?)

[G R E Y]

After today, Castle has 14.5 points (on 42.7 FG%, 49.9 2P%, 28.4 3P%, 71.8 FT), 4 assists and 3.6 reb
ROY should be secured by now.

It is if scoring efficiency is meaningless, which it appears to be in ROY voting.

Castle is going to end the season around -123 TS+, which is bottom 5 in the NBA with Barnes, Kuzma, K Johnson and Sarr.

Wemby won ROY at -41.
Paolo won ROY at -140.
Barnes won ROY at -28.
Ball won ROY at -45.
Ja won ROY at -18.
Luka won ROY at -40.

Read on Twitter

Here is Risacher.

Risacher Pre vs. Post All-Star Break

PPG: 11.4 -> 14.0
RPG: 3.3 -> 4.1
APG: 1.2 -> 1.3
Stocks: 1.3 -> 0.5
Turnovers: 1.1 -> 1.5
TS%: 52.6% -> 59.0%
3P%: 31.7 -> 39.8%
Usage: 20.5% -> 21.2%

Castle

Stocks: 1.2 -> 1.3
Turnovers: 1.9 -> 2.6
TS%: 51.5% -> 52.6

Read on Twitter

Risacher last 20 games:

14.7 PPG
3.8 RPG
1.2 APG
50.0 FG% (59.2 eFG%)

Castle

48.8 eFG%

Interestingly, a league predicated on efficiency somehow ignored efficiency in the ROY voting. I don't have a horse in the race, but I would personally side with the player who impacts winning more between these two.

Probably because players don't come into the league ready-made for it. Lots of great players grow in efficiency over time. There is a place for it, but overemphasizing it in a rookie race when a lot of other factors place one player over another sounds like a concession.

We'll see about impact on winning when we're fully healthy and Castle, too, plays alongside the benefits and gravity of a great talent.

[ReggiesKnicks]

There is a place for it, but overemphasizing it in a rookie race when a lot of other factors place one player over another sounds like a concession.

We'll see about impact on winning when we're fully healthy and Castle, too, plays alongside the benefits and gravity of a great talent.

If you read the last 2 pages, there is the exact opposite of overemphasizing on efficiency. Nobody with a Spurs logo next to their name is even bringing it up.

If anything, there is an under-emphasis on it, don't you think? Efficiency should be objectively added, yet all the Spurs fans seem to neglect it completely?

I'm just trying to provide transparency and objectivity. The Pacers don't have a player in the race, but my vote for ROY tends to go to the player who balances on-court impact with projected ceiling. Basically I won't consider Jaylen Wells even though he has arguably been the best rookie in terms of winning.

[Doctor MJ]

So, really hard to feel passionately this year about things, but my question about Castle's scoring and efficiency is this:

Does Castle being an inefficient volume shooter during the dregs of the year after Wemby's injury lead us to believe Castle will be a good fit with a Wemby-based offense?

Seems like Michael Carter-Williams-ish fool's gold to me.

Of course I'm not saying Castle can't improve and if the potential for improvement is what you're excited about that's fine, but I feel like we're going to have to tally re-evaluate Castle next year when we see how he's slotted back in on Wemby's team, and we shouldn't be surprised if he ends up a Dejounte Murray-esque trade asset rather than a Spur building block.

But I've not paid as close attention as people in this thread, so I'm curious what y'all have to say.

Obviously, Castle maybe not being quite as impressive as people think doesn't mean he can't win ROY in this weak year, but I feel like there's not much of a question as to whether the Hawks still pick the same guy at #1 in a re-draft.

[G R E Y]

There is a place for it, but overemphasizing it in a rookie race when a lot of other factors place one player over another sounds like a concession.

We'll see about impact on winning when we're fully healthy and Castle, too, plays alongside the benefits and gravity of a great talent.

If you read the last 2 pages, there is the exact opposite of overemphasizing on efficiency. Nobody with a Spurs logo next to their name is even bringing it up.

If anything, there is an under-emphasis on it, don't you think? Efficiency should be objectively added, yet all the Spurs fans seem to neglect it completely?

I'm just trying to provide transparency and objectivity. The Pacers don't have a player in the race, but my vote for ROY tends to go to the player who balances on-court impact with projected ceiling. Basically I won't consider Jaylen Wells even though he has arguably been the best rookie in terms of winning.

Last two pages of a part. 4 rookie thread?

Again, we know he's not efficient. He came into the league with shooting as the question mark. Risacher came in with being more known as a shooter.

That Castle's efficiency has improved, that he does not hesitate to shoot from longer distances as the season has progressed (he has attempted 7 fewer 3s than Risacher to this point) that he leads in points per game and total points while stepping up to a bigger role with top two players out, that he has the most 20 point games, has the most FTAs, over 120 more than the second placed rook, is first in total steals all factor in. He routinely defends the opposing best player on a given night from Harden to SGA and goes at them on the other end. And yet the main counter point is yeah but efficiency!

As has been pointed out, some now great players came into the league with poor efficiency. It takes time to adjust to the pros for all rookies and efficiency will be a bigger challenge for those who are not known for scoring with long Js. Castle isn't shying from it. On the contrary, he's doing a lot of things in his wheelhouse and outside of his comfort zone, and improving.

A lot goes into winning. Even Wemby's rookie season didn't garner more wins.

I accept the lack of efficiency but would feel it a weak argument when another player had the edge in so many other categories.

[ReggiesKnicks]

There is a place for it, but overemphasizing it in a rookie race when a lot of other factors place one player over another sounds like a concession.

We'll see about impact on winning when we're fully healthy and Castle, too, plays alongside the benefits and gravity of a great talent.

If you read the last 2 pages, there is the exact opposite of overemphasizing on efficiency. Nobody with a Spurs logo next to their name is even bringing it up.

If anything, there is an under-emphasis on it, don't you think? Efficiency should be objectively added, yet all the Spurs fans seem to neglect it completely?

I'm just trying to provide transparency and objectivity. The Pacers don't have a player in the race, but my vote for ROY tends to go to the player who balances on-court impact with projected ceiling. Basically I won't consider Jaylen Wells even though he has arguably been the best rookie in terms of winning.

Last two pages of a part. 4 rookie thread?

Again, we know he's not efficient. He came into the league with shooting as the question mark. Risacher came in with being more known as a shooter.

That Castle's efficiency has improved, that he does not hesitate to shoot from longer distances as the season has progressed (he has attempted 7 fewer 3s than Risacher to this point) that he leads in points per game and total points while stepping up to a bigger role with top two players out, that he has the most 20 point games, has the most FTAs, over 120 more than the second placed rook, is first in total steals all factor in. He routinely defends the opposing best player on a given night from Harden to SGA and goes at them on the other end. And yet the main counter point is yeah but efficiency!

As has been pointed out, some now great players came into the league with poor efficiency. It takes time to adjust to the pros for all rookies and efficiency will be a bigger challenge for those who are not known for scoring with long Js. Castle isn't shying from it. On the contrary, he's doing a lot of things in his wheelhouse and outside of his comfort zone, and improving.

A lot goes into winning. Even Wemby's rookie season didn't garner more wins.

I accept the lack of efficiency but would feel it a weak argument when another player had the edge in so many other categories.

Its extremely difficult to project a player to be good in the modern NBA when they are inefficient. That's just the league environment we live in.

I'd venture to say it is the single most important attribute when projecting success.

RE Wemby: He was -3.1 On-Court and +7.0 On/Off as a rookie. He was impacting winning.

[Doctor MJ]

So on ROY philosophy:

I think Jaylen Wells has been the Most Valuable Rookie this year, but I don't believe that the precedent for ROY is based on maximal rookie value so much as which rookie's play this year did the most to make THE rookie that people should be excited about going forward.

Now, that latter definition as I've laid out is a bit tricky because I'm not just saying that we should give ROY to whoever we're most optimistic about in the future, because that could literally be a guy who played a few games before getting hurt or a guy who wasn't that effective at what he did but showed enough that we're betting on him for the future.

So then if we look at a guy like Risacher: The way he's been playing in recent months, I'd say it's a given he'd get drafted #1 by the Hawks again, and my impression he'd be seen as the #1 big board guy on a re-draft generally. So, then for me to feel like someone else should win ROY, I think I'd have to feel like someone has been outright better than how he's playing right now.

Do people think another rookie is playing better than Risacher right now? What's the argument?

Note that I think it's fine for others to pick someone else because of what happened earlier in the year, but for ROY I'm generally less concerned with cumulative play and more concerned with what the player has shown they can do.

[G R E Y]

If you read the last 2 pages, there is the exact opposite of overemphasizing on efficiency. Nobody with a Spurs logo next to their name is even bringing it up.

If anything, there is an under-emphasis on it, don't you think? Efficiency should be objectively added, yet all the Spurs fans seem to neglect it completely?

I'm just trying to provide transparency and objectivity. The Pacers don't have a player in the race, but my vote for ROY tends to go to the player who balances on-court impact with projected ceiling. Basically I won't consider Jaylen Wells even though he has arguably been the best rookie in terms of winning.

Last two pages of a part. 4 rookie thread?

Again, we know he's not efficient. He came into the league with shooting as the question mark. Risacher came in with being more known as a shooter.

That Castle's efficiency has improved, that he does not hesitate to shoot from longer distances as the season has progressed (he has attempted 7 fewer 3s than Risacher to this point) that he leads in points per game and total points while stepping up to a bigger role with top two players out, that he has the most 20 point games, has the most FTAs, over 120 more than the second placed rook, is first in total steals all factor in. He routinely defends the opposing best player on a given night from Harden to SGA and goes at them on the other end. And yet the main counter point is yeah but efficiency!

As has been pointed out, some now great players came into the league with poor efficiency. It takes time to adjust to the pros for all rookies and efficiency will be a bigger challenge for those who are not known for scoring with long Js. Castle isn't shying from it. On the contrary, he's doing a lot of things in his wheelhouse and outside of his comfort zone, and improving.

A lot goes into winning. Even Wemby's rookie season didn't garner more wins.

I accept the lack of efficiency but would feel it a weak argument when another player had the edge in so many other categories.

Its extremely difficult to project a player to be good in the modern NBA when they are inefficient. That's just the league environment we live in.

I'd venture to say it is the single most important attribute when projecting success.

RE Wemby: He was -3.1 On-Court and +7.0 On/Off as a rookie. He was impacting winning.

Context matters. As shown in comparison tweet, players considered stars now were not as efficient as rookies.

Efficiency is one thing. Improvement, especially for someone with a lesser developed shot coming into the league, is another.

And efficiency only looks at one side of the court.

But here are some more comparables as rookies:

Butler: FG 40.5%; 3s 18.2%

Leonard shot under 25% from 3 in college until his shot mechanics were altered at the pro level.

Cunningham: FG 41.6%; 3s 31.4%

You believe in efficiency off the bat. I believe in improvement over time and Castle has shown it. If others can improve, which is the point, then it stands to reason that having shown it already bodes well.

I'll take the hungry two-way player with a bigger role taking on best opposition and put my wager on him.

[Catchall]

Welp, Filipowski wrecked the Jazz's tank tonight with 30 pts, 18 rebs, 5 asts, 3 stls, 2 blks.

[RRR3]

Castle with 21/3/5 in a massive win over GSW on their home court. Was also guarding Curry.

[wemby]

After today, Castle has 14.5 points (on 42.7 FG%, 49.9 2P%, 28.4 3P%, 71.8 FT), 4 assists and 3.6 reb
ROY should be secured by now.

It is if scoring efficiency is meaningless, which it appears to be in ROY voting.

Castle is going to end the season around -123 TS+, which is bottom 5 in the NBA with Barnes, Kuzma, K Johnson and Sarr.

Wemby won ROY at -41.
Paolo won ROY at -140.
Barnes won ROY at -28.
Ball won ROY at -45.
Ja won ROY at -18.
Luka won ROY at -40.

Read on Twitter

Here is Risacher.

Risacher Pre vs. Post All-Star Break

PPG: 11.4 -> 14.0
RPG: 3.3 -> 4.1
APG: 1.2 -> 1.3
Stocks: 1.3 -> 0.5
Turnovers: 1.1 -> 1.5
TS%: 52.6% -> 59.0%
3P%: 31.7 -> 39.8%
Usage: 20.5% -> 21.2%

Castle

Stocks: 1.2 -> 1.3
Turnovers: 1.9 -> 2.6
TS%: 51.5% -> 52.6

Read on Twitter

Risacher last 20 games:

14.7 PPG
3.8 RPG
1.2 APG
50.0 FG% (59.2 eFG%)

Castle

48.8 eFG%

Interestingly, a league predicated on efficiency somehow ignored efficiency in the ROY voting. I don't have a horse in the race, but I would personally side with the player who impacts winning more between these two.

So a rookie 3&D who gets spoon fed just about everything and has zero responsability creating for himself or others and plays for a more established team has more efficient scoring stats than a guard who plays on a tanking team and needs to create for himself just about everything. Quite an epiphany you had there, huh? What's next, rim running centers also have more efficient stats? Loved the mental gymnastics to say that water is wet though.

Bottom line, comparing rookie stats out of context is a silly, silly argument. Almost as much as citing cherry picked advanced stats to support your case (loved the choice of eFG when one of Castle's strong suits is how much he gets to the line... really a nice touch and difficult to see through). Rookies shouldn't be judged on the success of their teams because there's an obvious bias regarding team and role, which far outweighs individual production.

Castle's efficiency is driven down by the fact that he's allowed to take a lot of threes because the team is tanking, just have him take less and his ability to get to the paint and to the line will make him a lot more efficient instantly. Compare him with other rookies like Cunningham and Banchero, who carried a bigger role creation wise, and you'll see Castle actually compares favorably.

[ReggiesKnicks]

So a rookie 3&D who gets spoon fed just about everything and has zero responsability creating for himself or others and plays for a more established team has more efficient scoring stats than a guard who plays on a tanking team and needs to create for himself just about everything. Quite an epiphany you had there, huh? What's next, rim running centers also have more efficient stats? Loved the mental gymnastics to say that water is wet though.

I'm not trying to argue anything, but the most intriguing rookie to me has been Risacherre, and the last page is mostly Spurs fans posting "cherry-picked stat lines" of their favorite rookie. I'm just trying to give a promising young rookie his flowers in a thread and society that has Castle as a near-unanimous favorite for ROY, and I am not sorry if someone is taking offense to a different view than their own on a basketball forum of all places.

There aren't any mental gymnastics going on here; I am just trying to have an interesting discussion and show some support for another strong rookie season performance of the #1 pick.

Bottom line, comparing rookie stats out of context is a silly, silly argument. Almost as much as citing cherry picked advanced stats to support your case (loved the choice of eFG when one of Castle's strong suits is how much he gets to the line... really a nice touch and difficult to see through). Rookies shouldn't be judged on the success of their teams because there's an obvious bias regarding team and role, which far outweighs individual production.

I want you to take a minute and take a breath. Now, I simply quoted statistics posted by Spurs fans. Then I added additional statistics to the stat lines already posted to show what I would call "the most important attribute of the Modern NBA, scoring efficiency".

I didn't cherry-pick stats. I didn't make an argument in one way or another--I provided additional context. I am sorry that my providing additional context in an objective and non-aggressive manner (a methodology and approach to communication you seem to lack) is somehow considered cherry-picked, but the original statistics, posted by Spurs fans, were not considered Cherry-picked.

Castle's efficiency is driven down by the fact that he's allowed to take a lot of threes because the team is tanking, just have him take less and his ability to get to the paint and to the line will make him a lot more efficient instantly. Compare him with other rookies like Cunningham and Banchero, who carried a bigger role creation wise, and you'll see Castle actually compares favorably.

Castle's efficiency is down because the team is tanking.

That's an interesting defense of Castle's poor efficiency, especially when you consider Castle posted .420/.289/.734 shooting spilts with Wembanyama still playing and competing for a playoff spot.

47.1 eFG% (51.5 TS% for anyone who thinks eFG% is selling one of the Top 5 worst TS+ scoring efficiency scorers in the NBA short since eFG% ignored free throws).

[doogie_hauser]

I think now the general consensus is Steph Castle and Alex Sarr will finish in the top 2 places in ROTY voting. Who will finish 3rd ?

[doogie_hauser]

Welp, Filipowski wrecked the Jazz's tank tonight with 30 pts, 18 rebs, 5 asts, 3 stls, 2 blks.

His ascension Probably means Kessler is definitely being traded in the off season (calling SlimShady83 lol)

[Handlez]

Hopefully Sheppard gets a real opportunity next year.

He's a baller.

Would've been fighting Castle for ROY with a real opportunity.

[Handlez]

Read on Twitter

So let me get it straight: the guy shoots 34.8% from the field and 31.1% from 3 on low volume while being a traffic cone on D, but he'd be BETTER in a larger role? hmmm... color me skeptical.

Sheppard would be far better with a real opportunity.

He never got a real substantial opportunity.

He got TWO STARTS this year and was marvelous in both. 25 in the first on 10-17 and 20 tonight on 7-14 and 6-10 from 3.

Reed Sheppard is absolutely for real and it's extremely disingenuous to judge him based on the weird ass minutes he received this year, which fluctuated with no rhyme or reason.

I guarantee with a real opportunity that he's an all-star level player.

[Exp0sed]

Castle is def the ROY

[brackdan70]

If concerned about impact the Ware followed by Eddy and Clingan.
If want to filter for guys with bigger minutes it’s Wells. If concerned about Box Score stats it’s Castle. Really meh crop of rookies to be honest.

I’d vote Ware if I had a vote.

[Jstock12]

Castle or Clingan deserve it. But my boy Buzelis might be the most intriguing of them all with the flashes he's shown so far.

[ocelot17]

Read on Twitter

?s=46

[cocktailswith_2short]

Castle or Clingan deserve it. But my boy Buzelis might be the most intriguing of them all with the flashes he's shown so far.

Best player of the draft and at 11 ! Who needs tanking .