2016 RAPM/RPM/etc. *Full 2016 RS + PS RPM & RAPM Updated 6/24*

[penbeast0]

Top 10 Offense

Curry +9.6
Westbrook +8.0
Lowry +5.7
James +5.0
Harden +4.6
Bledsoe +4.2
Durant +4.1
Knight +3.9
Thomas +3.9
Butler +3.7

Top 10 Defense

Duncan +4.8
Jordan +3.9
Drummond +3.8
Gren +3.7
Mahinmi +3.7
Demon +3.6
Asik +3.0
Chandler +3.0
Hibbert +2.9
Hilario +2.9

Who is summoning Satanic forces to play defense for them (and why isn't it the Wizards!)?

[SideshowBob]

Top 10 Offense

Curry +9.6
Westbrook +8.0
Lowry +5.7
James +5.0
Harden +4.6
Bledsoe +4.2
Durant +4.1
Knight +3.9
Thomas +3.9
Butler +3.7

Top 10 Defense

Duncan +4.8
Jordan +3.9
Drummond +3.8
Gren +3.7
Mahinmi +3.7
Demon +3.6
Asik +3.0
Chandler +3.0
Hibbert +2.9
Hilario +2.9

Who is summoning Satanic forces to play defense for them (and why isn't it the Wizards!)?

*Dedmon.

[PCProductions]

Thanks. Wonder how much of DAJ's high rating is due to the SPM prior.

PCP asked JE about it.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JerryEngelmann/status/669262181121265665[/tweet]

Also, I tweeted him for multi-year RPM/xRAPM and he just responded saying its in the works.

I have never felt so naked on RealGM in my life!

[PCProductions]

This definitely hammers home the point that Doc has been making for a while: RAPM and box score stuff need to be separate.

[SideshowBob]

PCP asked JE about it.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JerryEngelmann/status/669262181121265665[/tweet]

Also, I tweeted him for multi-year RPM/xRAPM and he just responded saying its in the works.

I have never felt so naked on RealGM in my life!

Just happened to notice the same question directed at JE as what you posted in the GB thread.

This definitely hammers home the point that Doc has been making for a while: RAPM and box score stuff need to be separate.

Yeah, the stat guys prefer the pursuit of the "perfect predictor" so its understandable why we've been getting a lot of hybrids (adding the box-score makes the model more stable). They're not necessarily looking to expand the analytical toolset, more just minimize error on predictions as much as possible. Which is fine, but it doesn't suit our interests.

[CommonerCoffee]

RPM is a regression based model that uses SPM as a prior, it is similar to other box&+/- hybrid metrics such as IPV, but it is not a blend in the same manner. This kind of stat needs a considerably larger sample size for stability; I wish ESPN had held out, just for the sake of irrational responses that we'll now see.

RPM (in this case) is meant to say the following:

All else held equal, if [Player X] is in a lineup, the lineup's performance (MOV per 100 possesions) is expected to change by [Rating] per 100 possessions.

It is NOT a catch-all player rater.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A valid statement I can make based on RPM:

"If I put Steph Curry on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Steph Curry is on the court, to improve by 8.85 points per 100 possessions, given the the league-wide lineup data we have for the first 3 weeks of the 2016 season."

An invalid statement:

"Kyle Lowry is the 3rd best player in the league."

I like RAPM and RPM as a statistic (prefer the former) but just wondering, what would this mean for small sample sizes, and how it effects players?

I mean, Obviously im a davis fan, but I honestly can understand his offensive rapm being bad so far (his offense has, to be blunt, not been up to par this year, though I expect that to change)

otoh, I dont understand how his defense has been so bad. is this just due to small sample size? I mean, his net rating on that end is 9.5, which looks really good looking at the teams lineups. though granted, he was utter trash teh first 3 games on that end, which would effect the small sample size

where can we find a list of SPM stats (im not sure what that is, but its a type of plus minus right?)

The collinearity problem is accentuated with small sample sizes. This effect is likely negatively biasing Davis' rating on both ends due to how bad his supporting cast is. With a sample size this small, it's especially difficult to tease out individual impact due to limited lineup data, so we're basically still lumping Davis in with the rest of his offensively and defensively inept teammates. 15 or so games is a really small sample so I wouldn't take anything about the statistic too seriously right now.

[trex_8063]

RPM is a regression based model that uses SPM as a prior, it is similar to other box&+/- hybrid metrics such as IPV, but it is not a blend in the same manner. This kind of stat needs a considerably larger sample size for stability; I wish ESPN had held out, just for the sake of irrational responses that we'll now see.

RPM (in this case) is meant to say the following:

All else held equal, if [Player X] is in a lineup, the lineup's performance (MOV per 100 possesions) is expected to change by [Rating] per 100 possessions.

It is NOT a catch-all player rater.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A valid statement I can make based on RPM:

"If I put Steph Curry on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Steph Curry is on the court, to improve by 8.85 points per 100 possessions, given the the league-wide lineup data we have for the first 3 weeks of the 2016 season."

An invalid statement:

"Kyle Lowry is the 3rd best player in the league."

Except of course that this is also a valid statement:

"If I put Anthony Davis on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Anthony Davis is on the court, to improve by 1.12 points per 100 possessions, given the the league-wide lineup data we have for the first 3 weeks of the 2016 season, while I expect if I put Clint Capella on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Clint Capella is on the court, to improve by 2.66 points per 100 possessions."

And if any human walks up to you and makes that statement you laugh in his face for being an idiot and tell him to go back to his mommy's basement and watch some more World Series of Poker or whatever it is he watches instead of basketball.

But now dress that dumbass up as a "metric" and ooh! What amazing insight he must have!

You still appear to be implying that this stat is attempting to define "player goodness", but doesn't do a good job of it (which is what makes it worthless in your eyes). Except that's NOT what this stat does; it's more an amalgamation of player goodness, role, and circumstance/fit. SSB forgot to acknowledge that in his above post, but another poster came along and made the addendum.

Further, you've apparently ignored the big blue caveat which SSB clearly acknowledged.
And when he stated "given the league-wide lineup data we have for the first 3 weeks of the season" the [imo clear] subtext was "hey, you need to to take this with a great deal of salt because This kind of stat needs a considerably larger sample size for stability and things will likely change substantially by the season's end." (even if Anthony Davis's or Chris Paul's performances don't improve dramatically, it's likely things will round out to something closer to expectation)

[Doctor MJ]

Thought this was interesting:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/11/sort/ORPM

The very worst ORPM ratings so far:

1. Okafor
2. Mudiay
3. Noel
4. Lawson
5. Foye

It's early obviously, but it's really telling the way people have been so quick to make the narrative that Okafor is a lone great player stuck among absolute trash when the reality is that the offense is worse than ever, he's scoring his volume inefficiently, and we're in a league now when even letting a big man score volume with mediocre efficiency is a questionable tactic.

I don't know what the future holds for him. He could become the next Cousins talent-wise, but what I do know is that anyone looking at him by scoring volume is missing a lot.

Then of course there's Mudiay whose inefficiency is much, much worse but still has people praising him for similar reasons. It's just really amazing to me how much the narrative of a rookie is defined by how much their team lets them shoot.

[Doctor MJ]

Except of course that this is also a valid statement:

"If I put Anthony Davis on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Anthony Davis is on the court, to improve by 1.12 points per 100 possessions, given the the league-wide lineup data we have for the first 3 weeks of the 2016 season, while I expect if I put Clint Capella on any random team, I expect the team performance (MOV), while Clint Capella is on the court, to improve by 2.66 points per 100 possessions."

And if any human walks up to you and makes that statement you laugh in his face for being an idiot and tell him to go back to his mommy's basement and watch some more World Series of Poker or whatever it is he watches instead of basketball.

But now dress that dumbass up as a "metric" and ooh! What amazing insight he must have!

That's not what the metric says though, it simply gives a best-estimate correlation of impact based on the performance to this point using a standard approach used across science.

Folks like you tend to look at any new thing you don't understand, find something you see as imperfect about it, and use that as a reason to feel righteous about your rejection of it.

Folks like us are looking for additional tools to put in our analyst's arsenal. We expect all tools to have flaws and limits, the only question is how it can add to our understanding of what's happening. As such, at least for me personally, there are very few metrics that are bad enough I wish they weren't around, and the incorporation of regression data to the analysis is certainly not one of them. And the NBA obviously agrees.

But hey, I don't really expect to convince you Winsome, so unless you really think you're going to have a productive discussion here, you should probably avoid jumping into thread to hate-post on the concept it's discussing.

I think I'll continue to hop into any thread that I feel like to poke giant holes into its shoddy premises or logic. Which is to say a whole bunch of them around here. When I start resorting to "this stoopid!" posts, feel free to re-disinvite me.

Well look, as long as you're polite you've got no issues with me as a mod issuing warnings. So you have the right to hop into any thread you want.

All I'm saying is that you're hopping into something you don't respect and don't really understand in depth and the result is that you're not scoring any points with the people who actually want to discuss this stuff and you're basically refusing to learn from them, so what are you getting out of it?

[GSP]

Thought this was interesting:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/11/sort/ORPM

The very worst ORPM ratings so far:

1. Okafor
2. Mudiay
3. Noel
4. Lawson
5. Foye

It's early obviously, but it's really telling the way people have been so quick to make the narrative that Okafor is a lone great player stuck among absolute trash when the reality is that the offense is worse than ever, he's scoring his volume inefficiently, and we're in a league now when even letting a big man score volume with mediocre efficiency is a questionable tactic.

I don't know what the future holds for him. He could become the next Cousins talent-wise, but what I do know is that anyone looking at him by scoring volume is missing a lot.

Then of course there's Mudiay whose inefficiency is much, much worse but still has people praising him for similar reasons. It's just really amazing to me how much the narrative of a rookie is defined by how much their team lets them shoot.

Lawson/Harden is such a horrible fit. Harden plays much better onball with an offguard that can hit an open shot and especially if they can play defense like Beverly. Even Prigioni and Retirement Home Jason Terry were better fits. I also think it shows limitations in Hardens game. He really doesnt do much of anything offball on offense (we already knew he didnt on defense). Hes been initiating less pickandrolls this season which is a part of his and his teams struggles. His offense is just those pickandrolls and drawing fouls for the most part, threat of his 3pt shot is setup from those two things. Teams are finding it easier to defend him now. I think Harden is a really interesting case because hes an elite offensive talent but hes a star player ive always felt that doesnt do much outside the boxscore. All of his impact can be found there give or take a couple things, you can see if he had a bad game, amazing game, or middling game just from his raw box score numbers. With other stars they do little things not captured from the boxscore (outside of defense), screens, movement offball, threat of an inside, outside or middle game that sets up teammates, initiating mismatches from post/key etc. He doesnt do much of that

[Doctor MJ]

Thought this was interesting:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/11/sort/ORPM

The very worst ORPM ratings so far:

1. Okafor
2. Mudiay
3. Noel
4. Lawson
5. Foye

It's early obviously, but it's really telling the way people have been so quick to make the narrative that Okafor is a lone great player stuck among absolute trash when the reality is that the offense is worse than ever, he's scoring his volume inefficiently, and we're in a league now when even letting a big man score volume with mediocre efficiency is a questionable tactic.

I don't know what the future holds for him. He could become the next Cousins talent-wise, but what I do know is that anyone looking at him by scoring volume is missing a lot.

Then of course there's Mudiay whose inefficiency is much, much worse but still has people praising him for similar reasons. It's just really amazing to me how much the narrative of a rookie is defined by how much their team lets them shoot.

Lawson/Harden is such a horrible fit. Harden plays much better onball with an offguard that can hit an open shot and especially if they can play defense like Beverly. Even Prigioni and Retirement Home Jason Terry were better fits. I also think it shows limitations in Hardens game. He really doesnt do much of anything offball on offense (we already knew he didnt on defense). Hes been initiating less pickandrolls this season which is a part of his and his teams struggles. His offense is just those pickandrolls and drawing fouls for the most part, threat of his 3pt shot is setup from those two things. Teams are finding it easier to defend him now. I think Harden is a really interesting case because hes an elite offensive talent but hes a star player ive always felt that doesnt do much outside the boxscore. All of his impact can be found there give or take a couple things, you can see if he had a bad game, amazing game, or middling game just from his raw box score numbers. With other stars they do little things not captured from the boxscore (outside of defense), screens, movement offball, threat of an inside, outside or middle game that sets up teammates, initiating mismatches from post/key etc. He doesnt do much of that

Yeah I was tempted to get into Lawson too, but it's just sad. Lawson is a good player, but the Rockets seem like they made the move with the thought process, "It may or may not work out, but if it works maybe we win a title, and if not we're still in good shape". There's more to it than Lawson's presence of course, but it's staggering the way the wheels have come off the Rockets this season.

Re: limitations on Harden's game. Yes and no. Harden has issues and shouldn't be above criticism. Additionally, I find myself laughing at the Players' Awards. They make this big stink about player's doing a better job than reporter's in evaluating players, and then they immediately side against Curry in favor of Harden. I'm a Harden fan, but to me it was no contest.

I think though that it is important to remember what Harden did in OKC. There he made both great on-ball plays as a distributor and played the off-ball 3-point shooter role exceptionally. So while Harden in Houston has adopted a stye of play that seems to require ball dominance, I don't think Harden actually needs that. The issue is that unlike a Curry in GS situation, getting from "very good" to "unreal" as a team isn't simply a matter of refining things around what the star is actually doing, rather Houston needs to start a more sophisticated scheme from scratch around Harden. And for that you need the right talent and the right coaching.

Re: game doesn't go beyond the box score. Oh I don't agree with that. Player tracking data has showed that Harden's an absolute master at manipulating the defense to allow for role player open 3's. Harden is a very intelligent player, and intelligence always pays off in ways that are hard to quantify. I just think Harden as we speak has to pretty big issues to work through:

1) The continued problems with his defense.

2) Fully recognizing that there's a ceiling to the style he's played in Houston and that he has more work to do than most who have achieved similar levels of impact.

[Dr Spaceman]

Spoiler:

Thought this was interesting:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/11/sort/ORPM

The very worst ORPM ratings so far:

1. Okafor
2. Mudiay
3. Noel
4. Lawson
5. Foye

It's early obviously, but it's really telling the way people have been so quick to make the narrative that Okafor is a lone great player stuck among absolute trash when the reality is that the offense is worse than ever, he's scoring his volume inefficiently, and we're in a league now when even letting a big man score volume with mediocre efficiency is a questionable tactic.

I don't know what the future holds for him. He could become the next Cousins talent-wise, but what I do know is that anyone looking at him by scoring volume is missing a lot.

Then of course there's Mudiay whose inefficiency is much, much worse but still has people praising him for similar reasons. It's just really amazing to me how much the narrative of a rookie is defined by how much their team lets them shoot.

Lawson/Harden is such a horrible fit. Harden plays much better onball with an offguard that can hit an open shot and especially if they can play defense like Beverly. Even Prigioni and Retirement Home Jason Terry were better fits. I also think it shows limitations in Hardens game. He really doesnt do much of anything offball on offense (we already knew he didnt on defense). Hes been initiating less pickandrolls this season which is a part of his and his teams struggles. His offense is just those pickandrolls and drawing fouls for the most part, threat of his 3pt shot is setup from those two things. Teams are finding it easier to defend him now. I think Harden is a really interesting case because hes an elite offensive talent but hes a star player ive always felt that doesnt do much outside the boxscore. All of his impact can be found there give or take a couple things, you can see if he had a bad game, amazing game, or middling game just from his raw box score numbers. With other stars they do little things not captured from the boxscore (outside of defense), screens, movement offball, threat of an inside, outside or middle game that sets up teammates, initiating mismatches from post/key etc. He doesnt do much of that

Yeah I was tempted to get into Lawson too, but it's just sad. Lawson is a good player, but the Rockets seem like they made the move with the thought process, "It may or may not work out, but if it works maybe we win a title, and if not we're still in good shape". There's more to it than Lawson's presence of course, but it's staggering the way the wheels have come off the Rockets this season.

Re: limitations on Harden's game. Yes and no. Harden has issues and shouldn't be above criticism. Additionally, I find myself laughing at the Players' Awards. They make this big stink about player's doing a better job than reporter's in evaluating players, and then they immediately side against Curry in favor of Harden. I'm a Harden fan, but to me it was no contest.

I think though that it is important to remember what Harden did in OKC. There he made both great on-ball plays as a distributor and played the off-ball 3-point shooter role exceptionally. So while Harden in Houston has adopted a stye of play that seems to require ball dominance, I don't think Harden actually needs that. The issue is that unlike a Curry in GS situation, getting from "very good" to "unreal" as a team isn't simply a matter of refining things around what the star is actually doing, rather Houston needs to start a more sophisticated scheme from scratch around Harden. And for that you need the right talent and the right coaching.

Re: game doesn't go beyond the box score. Oh I don't agree with that. Player tracking data has showed that Harden's an absolute master at manipulating the defense to allow for role player open 3's. Harden is a very intelligent player, and intelligence always pays off in ways that are hard to quantify. I just think Harden as we speak has to pretty big issues to work through:

1) The continued problems with his defense.

2) Fully recognizing that there's a ceiling to the style he's played in Houston and that he has more work to do than most who have achieved similar levels of impact.

On Lawson, I still like the trade frankly because they basically lost nothing considering the contract change he agreed to and so it's basically all upside. I like the way Lowe puts it: with Lawson, the have a chance to go from great to special. If it turns out that Lawson is indeed such a negative cultural influence then I'll retract, but in my opinion your team already has serious structural issues if one bad apple can *** everything up so badly.

In terms of the fit on the floor, I actually thought it was going to buoy their offense quite a bit. In general when predicting fit I think people get way too dichotomous, ie. shooter/slasher, ball-dominant vs. off-ball, good D vs. bad D. Those things are fine to bring up, but I think it's too much of an oversimplification when I see things like "this guy needs the ball and so does this one so it's never going to work" without any explanation of what the actual on-court product will look like. So with that said I could've easily seen Lawson/Harden making it work in that you can use Harden as a battering ram and swing the ball for a weak side pick and roll with Lawson against a defense that's now compromised. I'm with Doc, I think more than anyone since Nash, Harden knows exactly how defenses are going to react to his every step and the way he pushes them around with his eyes and footwork is pretty crazy. So I don't know if McHale wasn't creative enough or if nobody could get through to Lawson at this point, but there's quite a bit of potential there as an offensive pairing that it's a shame we aren't seeing.

My biggest problem with Houston now is that it's a one-pass offense. The ball is either in Harden's hands or he passes to a guy who immediately shoots. There's no swinging, or cuts, or handoffs, or anything really; just a pick and roll that ends in either a lob, or a foul or a role player shooting a 3. Whether this is a fault of Harden or coaching I don't know, but I rarely see a guy take a shot who's truly open. Last year they were pretty good at setting backside screens t free up shooters on the weakside of a PNR, but it seems that's mostly gone this year in favor of Harden jab-stepping three times and taking a flat-footed three.

I don't question whether Harden has the smarts to play the way Doc is describing, but I do question whether he has the desire to. I can't remember which podcast I heard it on, but I distinctly remember someone saying that the OKC situation was never going to end another way than either Durant or Harden leaving. Harden that badly wanted to be "the guy". This might be apocryphal or it might be just bias (I'm thinking it was Royce Young...?) but it might be that Harden just likes having everything stop with him. He certainly likes being a megastar off the court.

[bondom34]

Spoiler:

Lawson/Harden is such a horrible fit. Harden plays much better onball with an offguard that can hit an open shot and especially if they can play defense like Beverly. Even Prigioni and Retirement Home Jason Terry were better fits. I also think it shows limitations in Hardens game. He really doesnt do much of anything offball on offense (we already knew he didnt on defense). Hes been initiating less pickandrolls this season which is a part of his and his teams struggles. His offense is just those pickandrolls and drawing fouls for the most part, threat of his 3pt shot is setup from those two things. Teams are finding it easier to defend him now. I think Harden is a really interesting case because hes an elite offensive talent but hes a star player ive always felt that doesnt do much outside the boxscore. All of his impact can be found there give or take a couple things, you can see if he had a bad game, amazing game, or middling game just from his raw box score numbers. With other stars they do little things not captured from the boxscore (outside of defense), screens, movement offball, threat of an inside, outside or middle game that sets up teammates, initiating mismatches from post/key etc. He doesnt do much of that

Yeah I was tempted to get into Lawson too, but it's just sad. Lawson is a good player, but the Rockets seem like they made the move with the thought process, "It may or may not work out, but if it works maybe we win a title, and if not we're still in good shape". There's more to it than Lawson's presence of course, but it's staggering the way the wheels have come off the Rockets this season.

Re: limitations on Harden's game. Yes and no. Harden has issues and shouldn't be above criticism. Additionally, I find myself laughing at the Players' Awards. They make this big stink about player's doing a better job than reporter's in evaluating players, and then they immediately side against Curry in favor of Harden. I'm a Harden fan, but to me it was no contest.

I think though that it is important to remember what Harden did in OKC. There he made both great on-ball plays as a distributor and played the off-ball 3-point shooter role exceptionally. So while Harden in Houston has adopted a stye of play that seems to require ball dominance, I don't think Harden actually needs that. The issue is that unlike a Curry in GS situation, getting from "very good" to "unreal" as a team isn't simply a matter of refining things around what the star is actually doing, rather Houston needs to start a more sophisticated scheme from scratch around Harden. And for that you need the right talent and the right coaching.

Re: game doesn't go beyond the box score. Oh I don't agree with that. Player tracking data has showed that Harden's an absolute master at manipulating the defense to allow for role player open 3's. Harden is a very intelligent player, and intelligence always pays off in ways that are hard to quantify. I just think Harden as we speak has to pretty big issues to work through:

1) The continued problems with his defense.

2) Fully recognizing that there's a ceiling to the style he's played in Houston and that he has more work to do than most who have achieved similar levels of impact.

On Lawson, I still like the trade frankly because they basically lost nothing considering the contract change he agreed to and so it's basically all upside. I like the way Lowe puts it: with Lawson, the have a chance to go from great to special. If it turns out that Lawson is indeed such a negative cultural influence then I'll retract, but in my opinion your team already has serious structural issues if one bad apple can *** everything up so badly.

In terms of the fit on the floor, I actually thought it was going to buoy their offense quite a bit. In general when predicting fit I think people get way too dichotomous, ie. shooter/slasher, ball-dominant vs. off-ball, good D vs. bad D. Those things are fine to bring up, but I think it's too much of an oversimplification when I see things like "this guy needs the ball and so does this one so it's never going to work" without any explanation of what the actual on-court product will look like. So with that said I could've easily seen Lawson/Harden making it work in that you can use Harden as a battering ram and swing the ball for a weak side pick and roll with Lawson against a defense that's now compromised. I'm with Doc, I think more than anyone since Nash, Harden knows exactly how defenses are going to react to his every step and the way he pushes them around with his eyes and footwork is pretty crazy. So I don't know if McHale wasn't creative enough or if nobody could get through to Lawson at this point, but there's quite a bit of potential there as an offensive pairing that it's a shame we aren't seeing.

My biggest problem with Houston now is that it's a one-pass offense. The ball is either in Harden's hands or he passes to a guy who immediately shoots. There's no swinging, or cuts, or handoffs, or anything really; just a pick and roll that ends in either a lob, or a foul or a role player shooting a 3. Whether this is a fault of Harden or coaching I don't know, but I rarely see a guy take a shot who's truly open. Last year they were pretty good at setting backside screens t free up shooters on the weakside of a PNR, but it seems that's mostly gone this year in favor of Harden jab-stepping three times and taking a flat-footed three.

I don't question whether Harden has the smarts to play the way Doc is describing, but I do question whether he has the desire to. I can't remember which podcast I heard it on, but I distinctly remember someone saying that the OKC situation was never going to end another way then either Durant or Harden leaving. Harden that badly wanted to be "the guy". This might be apocryphal or it might be just bias (I'm thinking it was Royce Young...?) but it might be that Harden just likes having everything stop with him. He certainly likes being a megastar off the court.

It was Elhassan and another ESPN guy on that pod. I remember as well, and it is (sort of) known among OKC fans Harden wanted out. A guy on our board spoke w an ex player from the team who told him exactly that Harden wanted out.

[Dr Spaceman]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jerryengelmann/status/670008697767264256[/tweet]

[RSCD3_]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jerryengelmann/status/670008697767264256[/tweet]

Top 10 Offense

Code: Select all

T-1. LeBron James      5.0
T-1. Stephen Curry       5.0
3. James Harden      4.7
4. Russell Westbrook      4.3
T-5. Chris Paul         3.6
T-5. Kevin Durant       3.6
7. Klay Thompson      3.2
8. Damien Lillard      3.0
9. Patrick Patterson      2.7
T-10. Anthony Davis       2.6
T-10. Kevin Love      2.6



Top 10 Defense

Code: Select all

T-1. Draymond Green      3.6
T-1. Kawhi Leonard      3.6
T-3. Ricky Rubio      2.9
T-3. Demarcus Cousins   2.9
5. Paul George         2.7
T-6. Tony Allen         2.6
T-6. Jared Dudley      2.6
8. Tiago Splitter      2.5
T-9. Patrick Mills       2.4
T-9. Justice Winslow      2.4
T-9. Darrell Arthur      2.4


[Nitro1118]

Thought this was interesting:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/page/11/sort/ORPM

The very worst ORPM ratings so far:

1. Okafor
2. Mudiay
3. Noel
4. Lawson
5. Foye

It's early obviously, but it's really telling the way people have been so quick to make the narrative that Okafor is a lone great player stuck among absolute trash when the reality is that the offense is worse than ever, he's scoring his volume inefficiently, and we're in a league now when even letting a big man score volume with mediocre efficiency is a questionable tactic.

I don't know what the future holds for him. He could become the next Cousins talent-wise, but what I do know is that anyone looking at him by scoring volume is missing a lot.

Then of course there's Mudiay whose inefficiency is much, much worse but still has people praising him for similar reasons. It's just really amazing to me how much the narrative of a rookie is defined by how much their team lets them shoot.

I think you are jumping the gun on Okafor. Rookies tend to struggle with efficiency their first season or two, and his efficiency from the field has been actually solid. His FTR and FT % is what is bringing down his TS% . As he matures, I do believe that will be an area he can and will improve on. But, his talent as a post scorer is there...therefor, his ceiling as a centerpiece scoring option is there.

Now, could he also be Al Jefferson 2.0? Sure, but even in today's NBA, a strong post presence is a huge advantage.

I put no stock into the +/- of a rookie not even 1/4 of the way into his rookie season. He is playing with the least talented team in the league that also happens to be one of the worst 3pt shooting teams as well. Therefor, when he isn't scoring, he is clogging the paint with no one to space the floor to balance the team out. I haven't watched the Sixers closely, but I'm sure when Okafor is out, the Sixers offense moves more freely, which falls on Hinkie to fix by adding stronger perimeter talent. An offense with strong spacing doesn't always require going small or having 5 3pt shooters. Better perimeter talent and shooting will take pressure off Okafor in the post, make team's crowding him pay, and allow his offense to come more naturally and unforced.

[spearsy23]

Re: limitations on Harden's game. Yes and no. Harden has issues and shouldn't be above criticism. Additionally, I find myself laughing at the Players' Awards. They make this big stink about player's doing a better job than reporter's in evaluating players, and then they immediately side against Curry in favor of Harden. I'm a Harden fan, but to me it was no contest.

I don't see how Harden playing like crap this year somehow invalidates his legitimacy as an MVP candidate last year.

[QRich3]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/jerryengelmann/status/670008697767264256[/tweet]

That's more like it.

I still just don't get what JE says about Deandre rating so high in RPM because of his individual stats resembling a good defender, it's not even true unless they weight volume rebounds and blocks more than anything else, in which case why even use RPM instead of PER or whichever straight boxscore stat. His defensive +/- is awful, his rebounding % this year is awful, specially his on/off DRB%, and he's not even getting close to as many volume rebounds or steals as last year. He's just getting more per-possession blocks, is that enough to make your RPM jump like that? if so, it's pretty useless a stat ain't it?

[bballexpert]

Man i got to tell you Duncan is killing it man he is top guy in Drpm and dbpm and has been playing just great defense. I mean i hope he keeps it up and wins a dpoy which he should of done so many times spurs defense looking like early days again.

[bballexpert]

Man i got to tell you Duncan is killing it man he is top guy in Drpm and dbpm and has been playing just great defense. I mean i hope he keeps it up and wins a dpoy which he should of done so many times spurs defense looking like early days again.

Not to mention his rim protection is at 39 percent the only one ahead of Duncan who has the same attempts is Gobert. I really hoping Duncan can keep it up really liking the defense we are showing this year it is pretty epic man.