iggymcfrack wrote:babyjax13 wrote:iggymcfrack wrote:
Jazz had a better EFG% and FT rate with Mitchell on the bench last season than they did when he was on the floor. Only thing he really made a major improvement on was their turnover rate which was 2.2% better when he played. He wasn’t having some huge impact. The idea that the Jazz would be the worst offense in the league without him is absurd even if you didn’t replace him with an elite playmaker in Simmons.
No, it's absolutely not absurd. You need players that can create shots, Mitchell's EFG% being so low is - in part - a symptom of a team without offensive options. This season will be really interesting to watch, I expect a big jump for Mitchell now that there are other scorers on the team.
I’m not talking about Mitchell’s EFG%. I’m saying the team has a better EFG% when he’s on the bench. Mitchell’s a good young player and I’m sure he’ll develop into a superstar in time, but he hasn’t had a top 30 offensive impact yet, let alone the kind of impact that would turn last year’s Knicks into an average offense.
Why is the eFG% worth mentioning but not the overall ORTG? There are situations where breaking things down into the four factors is useful, but I don't know why it's more useful to mention an eFG% drop off but not acknowledge the offensive rating increase.
Basic on/offs are essentially just comparisons between the starters and the bench lineups anyways. If the Jazz bench was trash, these numbers would look great. If they were the best in the league, they would look worse. Neither says much about Mitchell.
For Ben, there's really no difference...but I wouldn't say he has no impact on offense.
We have a host of numbers that estimate what you're trying to evaluate much better than simple on/off.
