2011-12 RealGM Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[MisterWestside]

Mental aspect of the game is huge, just ask Kings fans about Peja's inability to come through in the clutch.

Please show that a "lack of a mental game" hindered Peja's ability to "come through in the clutch".

[Black Feet]

Mental aspect of the game is huge, just ask Kings fans about Peja's inability to come through in the clutch.

Please show that a "lack of a mental game" hindered Peja's ability to "come through in the clutch".

Proof is in the pudding.

[ElGee]

Mental aspect of the game is huge, just ask Kings fans about Peja's inability to come through in the clutch.

Please show that a "lack of a mental game" hindered Peja's ability to "come through in the clutch".

Proof is in the pudding.

[rrravenred]

[GSP]

Assume that Lebron has the same averages hes had the first 2 games for the rest of the finals and the Heat win in 5 (or 6 if you want to stretch) he has to be a top 10 player ever right? His regular season and playoffs are among the best EVER.

[Mo26]

More like top 15.

[Dr Positivity]

Well I know there's at least one tangible proof of players having a mental/emotional impact on the game: Home court advantage. Basically a significant change in quality of play can be effected by simply extra comfort of playing at home.

[penbeast0]

Or maybe the home court advantage is primarily the effect of refs making homer calls. Philly statistician Harvey Pollack used to publish a breakdown of home/away frequency of foul calls for each referee in the league until David Stern's office made him stop. I remember reading it and it showed that every single referee in the league favored the home team except Mendy Rudolph; some by as much as 15-20% but on average by 5%+

[ElGee]

Well I know there's at least one tangible proof of players having a mental/emotional impact on the game: Home court advantage. Basically a significant change in quality of play can be effected by simply extra comfort of playing at home.

Well, there could be plenty of other reasons for HCA. But more importantly, HCA doesn't contradict a single thing I've said. Players are humans, not robots. Players can be affected, even if it's a mental "comfort." That doesn't go against anything I typed on page 11 of this thread, which had to do with parts of the game being more important and thus players having more value if they consistently perform better in these parts of the game.

I've seen players "choke" by tensing up in situations. I conclude this because they were wide open (or at the line) and their form was whacky. Antawn Jamison shot a wide open jumper off the side of the backboard as Cleveland was losing in Game 6 in 2010. He missed the shot by like 2 FEET and had a concerned, clenching look on his face as he short-armed the shot. To me, that's choking, because I see neither fatigue nor any other explanation that could explain those two events (tensed form, missing worse than he arguably ever has). That also doesn't contradict anything having to do with the point I was addressing on page 11.

[MisterWestside]

For whatever reason, some people can't grasp that you can be perfectly relaxed and strss-free while you miss a shot.

[mysticbb]

Well whatever "off-ball issues" were going on, it didn't keep Wade from playing well in the 2011 Finals. He was still getting into the lane and making shots, and unlike this postseason his jumper wasn't broken.

Wade actually played better when James was not on the court. Even though it was only for a few minutes, it still effected his averages.
It is also not just Wade not being able to score, but also the whole overall game getting tougher for everyone. I picked one example in which a better positioning by James could have lead to an easy inside scoring opportunity for Haslem. As I pointed out multiple times already, we are talking about a 5on5 game and how that fits together.

Isn't this ultimately context-based though? Those big shooters aren't going to be as valuable without a shot-creator diverting defenses away from them (think Steve Novak in the Heat-Knicks series, for example). In this sense, shot-creators also space the floor.

How is the "shot creator" getting the opportunity to pass the ball to those players, if they aren't moving into a position were they can catch and shoot the ball? Yes, the "shot creator" may be able to draw a double team, but when the shooters aren't moving well, there will be no good passing angle in order to get the ball to those shooters.

I just don't see "floor spacing" as something that is more "inherent" with individual skill.

I guess you are taking that as something static here and not something which is dynamic in reality. Your statement leads basically to the assumption that all players are the same in terms of moving without the ball. And yet, players like Ray Allen or Reggie Miller were actually more efficient and effective, because they were both clearly better at moving without the ball and thus getting more and better opportunities to score. Better movement without the ball leads to better spacing, which leads to better opportunities for the ball handler in terms of passing or attacking.

[mysticbb]

What are your thoughts on Love vs Dirk, mystic? Love seems to fit your bill of a bigman that can space the floor as well. Do you think his impact on O is as high as Dirk's?

I don't see Love drawing the attention out of the zone as Nowitzki does that. It makes it a bit easier for the perimeter players, but not even close to the same extent as Nowitzki. Love is just not as big of a threat in 1on1 situations, giving him still some space with the idea to close out on him on the perimeter. The effect Nowitzki has is not just coming from him being a shooter, but also from him being a great iso scorer and post threat.

And going on off a tangent about your spacing effect theory, do you think a guy like say, Ryan Anderson is an elite high impact type offensive player due to his skillset? He had good +/- and on/off numbers this year to support it. Also, Orlando had guys that could space the floor well this year ( Reddick, Nelson, Richardson), along with a post threat in Dwight... and yet the offense was just at league average. Why do you think that is the case?

No, idea but the lineup Nelson, Redick, Turkoglu, Anderson and Howard was the best offensive unit in the league with more than 150 min playing time, scoring 122.8 points per 100 possessions. Overall the Magic were average offensively, because they didn't play their best offensive units more often and they had other units playing much worse offensively.

[mysticbb]

I don't really like your example with LeBron, because you are talking about "standing in a good place." That floor balance is basic stuff and/or dependent on coaching and scheme. I have a hard time believing in 90 offensive possessions, key players are standing next to other players with the ball, messing up the floor balance in that regard.

I think that is the key issue here, because you want to believe certain things and while at that you are missing the point. Somehow I get the impression that you view "spacing" as something static, which is just there because players are standing around. Your question about Terry and Stojakovic implied that you think there are dimishing returns on "spacing", because spreading the floor due to shooters is the reason for that. That is false in the sense that the spacing is not static, but is a dynamic thing, changed by the defensive and offensive movements within a play. When a play is not working, in most cases the reason is bad spacing destroying intended passing angles and driving or cutting lanes. And the small differences are meaning a lot for those things.

You don't like the example, because James is indeed messing up everything here. If James moves away to that corner, the situation becomes so much better for Wade, because the better spacing gives better passing angles and better lanes. And for sure, that doesn't happen in all 90 possessions, but the better players are making less mistakes with that. That is true for offense and defense, btw. Well, when I discussed Deng and his defensive impact on those things, most people just had no clue about it at all. And yet, it explains perfectly the differences in offensive and defensive efficiency.

So yes, I'd say your soccer background has your brain on overdrive here. Being off by a meter, if it were mucking up lanes, would be something a coach can simply point out in the first TO of the game. Again, I've never really seen this be a repetitive problem in this sense. It's like assuming a rebounder has a bad day because he was constantly out of position by a meter (for whatever reason).

And that is the issue here, you believe that this is just coincedence and that players are basically the same in terms of moving without the ball. For me it is really an inane statement and analogy, because why would that be the case that each player has the same courtvision, reaction time, understanding of the game and ability to move without the ball? And again, one of the main changes to James' game was actually moving without the ball. Don't you see the difference in that?

But that's like saying "Steve Nash's 'creation effect' is dictated by his teammates ability to hit open shots." Yes and No. Yes, in the obvious literal sense that if his teammates never hit shots, Nash could create all he wanted and it would be for naught. But no in the sense that, ESPECIALLY IN SMALL SAMPLES, we don't want to penalize players for their teammates missing open shots they should be making.

That is actually a perfect example here, and why I say that Nowitzki with the exception of the first half of game 6 played actually pretty well. He did miss some open looks he usually would make, but the spacing of the Mavericks was still incredible and that gave Nowitzki's teammates enough opportunities to score. Nowitzki also took more shots than usual in late shot clock situations, which is understandable, because the Heat defense was actually not that bad, even though they "overrotated" in some possessions which lead to even better opportunities for the Mavericks.

In Dirk's case, where Spacing is what helps his teammates, the DRIVING/CUTTING lanes are as important, if not more important, than the open shooters standing at the line. Are they not?

Who is saying something else?`In fact I brought up Marion and Barea as examples of how differences in spacing is seen in their shooting numbers. Barea gets more to the rim and can convert those shots better with Nowitzki and Marion gets more open looks in the midrange area with Nowitzki. That is the result of better spacing, not just created by the players standing in the right spots, but actually MOVING into the right spots. I repeat that, which maybe makes it more clear, but the difference between James and Nowitzki during those finals was actually there ability to MOVE without the ball, resulting into differences in terms of floor spacing for each team. While the effect for the Heat was somewhat negative, it was clearly positive for the Mavericks. And that is something which can be seen.

I don't think that's what people are thinking about when they think "Dirk easily > LBJ 2011 Finals," do you?

No, a lot of people are describing James as being "passive" during the finals, which they relate to playing "bad". Well, that "looking passive" is actually a result of lack of movement without the ball. James didn't move into positions in which he could have received the ball and with his static play he messed up the spacing leading to tougher jobs for his teammates. Well, one of the reasons for the tying 3 by Chalmers after the inbound was the movement without the ball by the 4 Heat players and Terry's fail to move to the right player. If everyone would have been static, James would not have had the opportunity to pass the ball to Chalmers in the corner. That is a good example of movement without the ball leading to an opportunity. James recognized that, and he is pretty good at that when having the ball in his hand, but if Chalmers would have tried to just stand on the wings instead, the pass would have not been as effective at all. His move to the corner was actually creating a passing angle for James. Well, and when you think about that further, I'm pretty sure you will come up with the conclusion that better movement without the ball will actually help creating better passing angles, driving or cutting lanes or just help avoiding double or triple teams on the ball handler. If that is true, it means that not moving well without the ball will actually not help the team in that part, but will actually mean they get worse.

[MisterWestside]

Wade actually played better when James was not on the court. Even though it was only for a few minutes, it still effected his averages.

You're going with a few minutes to make your point? Aren't you quibbling here?

It is also not just Wade not being able to score, but also the whole overall game getting tougher for everyone. I picked one example in which a better positioning by James could have lead to an easy inside scoring opportunity for Haslem.

Where did you talk about Haslem? I just recall the example you made with Wade and James.

How is the "shot creator" getting the opportunity to pass the ball to those players, if they aren't moving into a position were they can catch and shoot the ball?

I wasn't saying that the player moving without the ball didn't have importance; just that he still depends on the actions of others to get free and help his team. Teammates still play a large role here for "off-ball" players. Who are setting the textbook-form picks for Miller and Allen? Don't other teammates also have to be on key areas of the floor so that those shooters can catch the ball off the screen and have room to operate? What about the player with the ball? Even if he doesn't have the angle to get the pass out to the "off-ball" guy, he can still dictate where the ball goes (pass out to another teammate who can then make the pass to the "off-ball" player, shoot, keep his dribble, protect the ball [think Wade with your LeBron example; even without the optimal floor spacing he can still help to prevent the turnover] etc.). There's still plenty that the "off-ball" player needs from other players in order to be effective. Couldn't you imagine Miller/Allen/Dirk being on teams where their teammates weren't helping them out in these areas? Their "off-ball" value isn't so valuable now. Their "skill" isn't as individual-based as someone who can literally take the ball and dictate where he wants to go with it and what he wants to do with it.

[mysticbb]

You're going with a few minutes to make your point? Aren't you quibbling here?

You said that Wade was still able to play well. I said that Wade was actually playing better without James. And yes, a few minutes, but those few minutes will still effect his averages in a positive way. That is this part. But you were the one bringing up Wade alone, while I was talking about the overall team performance with James on the court, which was effected negatively due to his static/passive game.

Where did you talk about Haslem? I just recall the example you made with Wade and James.

Same example:

... Wade is dribbling the ball and is forced to move to the wing, he is doubled by Kidd and Nowitzki, giving him no angle to pass the ball to Haslem.
...
When Stevenson follows, Wade has a chance to split the double and/or getting a better angle for a pass inside to Haslem.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1184405&start=135#p32177307

I wasn't saying that the player moving without the ball didn't have importance; just that he still depends on the actions of others to get free and help his team.

I agree with that, I never said something else.

Teammates still play a large role here for "off-ball" players. Who are setting the textbook-form picks for Miller and Allen? Don't other teammates also have to be on key areas of the floor so that those shooters can catch the ball off the screen and have room to operate? What about the player with the ball? Even if he doesn't have the angle to get the pass out to the "off-ball" guy, he can still dictate where the ball goes (pass out to another teammate who can then make the pass to the "off-ball" player, shoot, keep his dribble, protect the ball [think Wade with your LeBron example; even without the optimal floor spacing he can still help to prevent the turnover] etc.). There's still plenty that the "off-ball" player needs from other players in order to be effective. Couldn't you imagine Miller/Allen/Dirk being on teams where their teammates weren't helping them out in these areas? Their "off-ball" value isn't so valuable now.

And how valuable are the skills of an player with the ball, when nobody can convert his passes? Where is the difference here? Unless you think there are basketball players who could win a 1on5 game, I guess you pretty much have to accept that the game is played within 5on5 and everyone on the court is contributing in one way or another. Now, you can easily accept differences in terms of on ball effect, why is that so unbelievable that the differences in off ball effect exist? And, why don't you draw the conclusion from the other side by seeing that without Miller, Allen and Co. being able to use screens those screens would actually be rather useless, which makes that particular skill useless. And in the end would mean that those particular players aren't much worse in the context of the game. And yet, we have players with limited on ball abilities who can effect the offense without even being good shooters. Why is Nick Collison actually having a positive effect on offense, for example?

Their "skill" isn't as individual-based as someone who can literally take the ball and dictate where he wants to go with it and what he wants to do with it.

And that's where we end up with missunderstanding a game of 5on5 as 1on1. No, nobody is able to do anything on the court alone. Even the best players will have a huge problem going against triple teams constantly. And if the teammates aren't forcing the defense to stand with them or teammates aren't opening up lanes via screens, those skills the ball handler has are also pretty much useless in order to win a game.
The skill "moving without the ball" is different for each player. Do you disagree? If the skill is different, do you think that players can have variance in their performance of the ball? If it is different, do you think that players can effect the team game differently with that skill? That is all you need to answer here.
Matter of fact is that the shot selection with Nowitzki changed for his teammates, that the efficiency changed for his teammates. That is backed up by 12 years of data. Now, can you give me any kind of reasonable explanation why that should be the case without referring to any kind of action off the ball for Nowitzki? Do you think that those changes are barely coincendence?

[MisterWestside]

Thanks for the quote about Haslem. To your other points:

And yes, a few minutes, but those few minutes will still effect his averages in a positive way.

Come on mystic. You're always someone who likes to use ample evidence to argue your point, and using a few minutes of data isn't exactly helping you here.

But you were the one bringing up Wade alone, while I was talking about the overall team performance with James on the court, which was effected negatively due to his static/passive game.

Again, it's the lack of information in your posts that I'm not sold on here. You gave one lone (and blatant) example of James negatively affecing his team's play. He played an entire series of games. At least ElGee can provide evidence from the entire series to support his posts about James positively helping his team. Can you do the same?

Let's get to this question since it's at the crux of the disagreement in this discussion (just to save some time):

The skill "moving without the ball" is different for each player. Do you disagree?

No. I'm simply inquring about its dependence on other important factors in the game, especially as it relates to other skills (shooting, shot-creation off the dribble, etc). I believe that it's alot more dependent on other factors in order for it to work. Dirk for example is on a team whose players bring the necessary (and NOT superfluous) skills in order for his "off ball" ability to be realized. Do you think his "off ball" ability is nearly as useful on the Bobcats, a team that lacks the stable team construct and talented shot-creators of the Mavs?

[mysticbb]

Come on mystic. You're always someone who likes to use ample evidence to argue your point, and using a few minutes of data isn't exactly helping you here.

Ok, if someone plays 39 minutes, 34.5 minutes like a 5 and 4.5 minutes like a 10, his average will say that he played like a 5.6. Now, do you think those few minutes had no effect? That is what I wanted to point out. And then again, it is not just an effect on Wade, but also an effect on the overall team performance. In the minutes with Wade+James the Heat were -10 per 100 poss, in the minutes with Wade at +34. That is a huge difference and a big part is likely due to variance, but still, we not only observe that with our eyes, but the numbers are backing it up.

Again, it's the lack of information in your posts that I'm not sold on here. You gave one lone (and blatant) example of James negatively affecing his team's play. He played an entire series of games. At least ElGee can provide evidence from the entire series to support his posts about James positively helping his team. Can you do the same?

Ok, I thought it would have been enough to point out at least one example in order to clarify what I mean. I assumed that once it is clear, it should be rather obvious that this happened more than once.
Why do you think some people said that James was passive during the finals?

No. I'm simply inquring about its dependence on other important factors in the game, especially as it relates to other skills (shooting, shot-creation off the dribble, etc). I believe that it's alot more dependent on other factors in order for it to work. Dirk for example is on a team whose players bring the necessary (and NOT superfluous) skills in order for his "off ball" ability to be realized. Do you think his "off ball" ability is nearly as useful on the Bobcats, a team that lacks the stable team construct and talented shot-creators of the Mavs?

Uh, Kemba Walker or DJ Augustin are worse at shot creating than Barea? I don't see any reason to believe that the shot selection and the efficiency wouldn't change with Nowitzki on the court for the Bobcats as well. In fact I would argue that players like Walker, Augustin, Maggette or Reggie Williams would see their efficiency improved. The Bobcats had 95.2 ORtg this season, the Mavericks without Nowitzki were at 97.3, 9 points worse than with Nowitzki. Actually, I would like to know why you think Nowitzki wouldn't have a similar effect on the Bobcats as well? For sure the overall value depends on how good the teammates can convert the opportunities, but for the most part getting the quality opportunities is important enough.

And then again, how is that any different than value of a passer depends on the shooting abilities of the teammates? Or much value does a great help defender have, if his teammates can't force their opponents into the help at all? We are talking about a 5on5 game, in which each player has a different role, but at the end of the day the ability to work with teammates within the context of that 5on5 game is also a skill, which differs for players. The ability to work off the ball is valuable in that context, and I'm not sure why we should not give the players credit for that only because the overall effect depends on the ability of the teammates as well.

[ElGee]

I don't really like your example with LeBron, because you are talking about "standing in a good place." That floor balance is basic stuff and/or dependent on coaching and scheme. I have a hard time believing in 90 offensive possessions, key players are standing next to other players with the ball, messing up the floor balance in that regard.

I think that is the key issue here, because you want to believe certain things and while at that you are missing the point. Somehow I get the impression that you view "spacing" as something static, which is just there because players are standing around. Your question about Terry and Stojakovic implied that you think there are dimishing returns on "spacing", because spreading the floor due to shooters is the reason for that. That is false in the sense that the spacing is not static, but is a dynamic thing, changed by the defensive and offensive movements within a play. When a play is not working, in most cases the reason is bad spacing destroying intended passing angles and driving or cutting lanes. And the small differences are meaning a lot for those things.

If I'm curt, I apologize, but this tangent about Spacing (useful) related to Winning Bias (relevant) is now feeling more stretched and circular than ever. You say "I'm missing the point." What point?? I don't think Spacing is static. I just explicitly stated my views on Spacing -- what was static about it to you?

You don't like the example, because James is indeed messing up everything here. If James moves away to that corner, the situation becomes so much better for Wade, because the better spacing gives better passing angles and better lanes. And for sure, that doesn't happen in all 90 possessions, but the better players are making less mistakes with that. That is true for offense and defense, btw. Well, when I discussed Deng and his defensive impact on those things, most people just had no clue about it at all. And yet, it explains perfectly the differences in offensive and defensive efficiency.

Ok, I thought it would have been enough to point out at least one example in order to clarify what I mean. I assumed that once it is clear, it should be rather obvious that this happened more than once.
Why do you think some people said that James was passive during the finals?

But you pointed an extreme example. This can't possibly be what you mean -- the rare cases where players, regardless of ability, happen to get in each other's way by not spreading the court. Why is it rather obvious to you that this happens a lot?

It is "rather obvious" to me that is the crux of the spacing issue is related to someone's threat as a shooter. You then cherry-pick an example Wade and James are standing next to each other on offense and try to write it off as something typical, and for what? To substantiate your claim about Dirk being 3 pts/100 better off ball than LBJ? This whole thing started because you had such a strong reaction to me saying their play was close in the Finals. If you're going to make such a bold claim, can you provide more than a single instance?

So yes, I'd say your soccer background has your brain on overdrive here. Being off by a meter, if it were mucking up lanes, would be something a coach can simply point out in the first TO of the game. Again, I've never really seen this be a repetitive problem in this sense. It's like assuming a rebounder has a bad day because he was constantly out of position by a meter (for whatever reason).

And that is the issue here, you believe that this is just coincedence and that players are basically the same in terms of moving without the ball.

You keep conjuring up ideas I have out of thin air. Please stop it, it's useless. Where did you get the idea that I believe this?

But that's like saying "Steve Nash's 'creation effect' is dictated by his teammates ability to hit open shots." Yes and No. Yes, in the obvious literal sense that if his teammates never hit shots, Nash could create all he wanted and it would be for naught. But no in the sense that, ESPECIALLY IN SMALL SAMPLES, we don't want to penalize players for their teammates missing open shots they should be making.

That is actually a perfect example here, and why I say that Nowitzki with the exception of the first half of game 6 played actually pretty well. He did miss some open looks he usually would make, but the spacing of the Mavericks was still incredible and that gave Nowitzki's teammates enough opportunities to score. Nowitzki also took more shots than usual in late shot clock situations, which is understandable, because the Heat defense was actually not that bad, even though they "overrotated" in some possessions which lead to even better opportunities for the Mavericks.

In Dirk's case, where Spacing is what helps his teammates, the DRIVING/CUTTING lanes are as important, if not more important, than the open shooters standing at the line. Are they not?

Who is saying something else?

I was responding to this:

The effect of spacing is more dictated by the efficiency the teammates are able to use that spacing than by role or teammates also being able to provide spacing. The overall effect for Nowitzki gets maximized by putting shooters around him, who can convert the open shots.

[colts18]

The Heat were outscored with LeBron on the court in last years finals. In fact he had their worst plus minus in the finals

[MisterWestside]

I'll respond a bit more in another post, but just to address this comment here:

I don't see any reason to believe that the shot selection and the efficiency wouldn't change with Nowitzki on the court for the Bobcats as well.

That's not what I'm arguing. I'm talking about how this dynamic would play out compared to Dirk on the Mavs - while Kemba and DJ can create shots, the Bobcats overall don't have the offensive bigs (relatively speaking) or shooters that the Mavs have; Dirk running around without the ball wouldn't be as useful on that squad. Defenses could stay more at home with Dirk. The Dirk Mavs on-off numbers don't factor in lineups, do they?

Again, I'm not saying that off-ball play isn't important; I'm questioning its individual vs. team dependency. Yes I agree that things such as passing and defense are also team dependent, but that's not what we're talking about here.