2013-14 Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[ardee]

Side note, how much of a joke is it that Carmelo didn't make any of the All NBA teams

[SideshowBob]

Funny how he's become underrated in New York despite playing the best ball of his career.

[ElGee]

Can you elaborate on Westbrook as you see him in general here?

Also, what's your take on the whole Durant-Westbrook-Brooks love triangle? Do you think this is a smart offense?

I've spoken on Westbrook over the years but it's certainly been quiet compared to other topics. I think the bashing he gets in completely misguided. To me, it would be very similar to bashing Rose. As far as I can tell, the two main issues against RW are his volume and efficiency (another way of saying "shot selection" or "ball-dominance"/"hoggery").

Let's assume he's a 51-54% TS guy. Like Rose. What makes these guys so effectively offensively is their creation/disruption of the defense. (Let's leave defense alone for a second.) By itself, the disruption can make a good positive offensive player. See Jason Kidd. When you add the benefit of high volume scoring, you potentially add more. Of course, RW isn't a 57-60% guy, so the tendency is to say "Iverson!" But Westbrook would have to be hurting his creation with too many silly shots for this to be a problem, and I don't see evidence for that at all.

This leads to meta-game. This is an issue with guys like Kidd, Rose, Westbrook, even Kobe, etc. It's not necessarily an issue if you can't pass, are a black hole and have no semblance of a floor game. Meta-game is simply the effect that your own shots have on future possessions. Do I think RW has the perfect balance between his own pull-up and something else? No way -- he can pound the ball a lot. But some of his distribution success comes from his own self-creation. If you're saying "he's not Nash," no, Nash basically had perfect balance. But I'd rather have:

20 shots (@ 1.04 pps) that open up 10 Opportunities Created for teammates than
8 shots (@ 1.10 pps) that open up 3 Opportunities Created for teammates

There is an optimal balance curve in that equation and I don't think RW has found it at all. He's still exerting a massive positive force on offense. (You don't have to find this balance perfectly to be great offensively -- Kobe/Michael.)

In addition to that, RW has the ability to self-create, which can come in handy in situations just like in OKC where the team has a poorly run offense and few offensive weapons/structure outside Durant. To me, this is why OKC had no chance last year and why Westbrook sort of stood out for people this year. When the tire hits the pavement, he's an important offensive player. Really important in their case. Is he Chris Paul? Absolutely not.

Interestingly, RAPM has had him as a top offensive player, with this year being his best offensively and defensively. Would he be even better if he shored up his shot selection? Yes. But the current product is really damn good.

Thanks for expounding.

It feels to me like you're saying I'm quibbling with the imperfection rather than appreciating the brilliance, and there's truth in that certainly.

Here's what I see though;
-Westbrook making bad decisions and mistakes.
-Durant being too passive.
-Westbrook failing to get Durant as involved as we'd like, which doesn't absolve Durant, but it's important context.
-OKC's offense not actually working that well.

It's the last thing that makes it seem impossible to rationalize the others to me.

Oklahoma City was a +3.8 ORTG offense this year despite Westbrook's absence who underperformed in every playoff series they were in relative to the expectations relative to degree of difficulty.

And before we start talking about that just being how it goes when Durant is so hard to get involved against tough defenses, let's remember 2012:

In 2012, OKC was a +5.2 ORTG who made each of their final 3 opponent's defenses allow +10 ORTG more than they did in the regular season. They just blew the doors off the toughest defenses around back then.

Unless one wants to attribute all this to being a fluke, OKC has a very clear problem that needs addressing that seems to have began the moment Harden left. And while I think that problem has a lot to do with coaching, the issue with Westbrook is that he often looks his most Westbrook-y while the problem is most apparent. It's not so much that I blame Westbrook for this as I want to avoid praising him for things that are actually a symptom of a problem.

There are a host of articles right now anointing Westbrook while smirking at Durant, and when I look at the situation I just see the same data in terms of a system breaking down.

Last note on the RAPM: Westbrook played half the season this year and on raw +/-, the team did about as well when he was off the court as when he was on it, and the NPI RAPM data we had for Durant this year (until it stopped being updated) was extremely good as he impressed us in Westbrook's presence. Are you sure the data you're looking at isn't using a prior?

Yeah, I think you're quibbling. I'm not sure how much we differ on RW other than you might be anchoring yourself into a negative position. This might be a normal reaction to you perceiving him as being overrated or problematic relative to his role, but I do think it's clouding you on his overall effect.

To wit, Durant being passive is just a function of Durant. He's still in top-40 usage land of all time. We might want this slightly higher but I think that's a combination of OKC's offense (coaching), their personnel and the occasional bad decision from RW. That said, it's possible Duran't spacing off ball (while someone like RW is on ball) is just as or more effective than the global effect of his extra touches. I'm not convinced of that, but I don't watch OKC and think "they should just give it to KD 15% more and clear out!" It's more complicated than that.

Last thing: Can we really say OKC's offense "underperformed?" They were better than +4 in the PS (I think -- off top of my head here) and what should we expect from that roster? Westbrook's ON offense in the RS was still 113.5 and 111 in the PS (with a whopping PS +/-). In 2013 (no Harden) it was 114 ON in the RS, and the offense fell off without him in the PS. Thoughts?

(PS I was looking at PI RAPM.)

[bondom34]

[

Yeah, I think you're quibbling. I'm not sure how much we differ on RW other than you might be anchoring yourself into a negative position. This might be a normal reaction to you perceiving him as being overrated or problematic relative to his role, but I do think it's clouding you on his overall effect.

To wit, Durant being passive is just a function of Durant. He's still in top-40 usage land of all time. We might want this slightly higher but I think that's a combination of OKC's offense (coaching), their personnel and the occasional bad decision from RW. That said, it's possible Duran't spacing off ball (while someone like RW is on ball) is just as or more effective than the global effect of his extra touches. I'm not convinced of that, but I don't watch OKC and think "they should just give it to KD 15% more and clear out!" It's more complicated than that.

Last thing: Can we really say OKC's offense "underperformed?" They were better than +4 in the PS (I think -- off top of my head here) and what should we expect from that roster? Westbrook's ON offense in the RS was still 113.5 and 111 in the PS (with a whopping PS +/-). In 2013 (no Harden) it was 114 ON in the RS, and the offense fell off without him in the PS. Thoughts?

(PS I was looking at PI RAPM.)

Slight OT, but to me this is the frustration when I hear "OKC would be better with a pass first PG like Rubio". Durant's usage is incredibly high at this point, I can't imagine it going up and him keeping any great efficience like now. He did it for a month, sure, but quickly it died off. Sorry for the minor rant, but I hate that argument.

[GSP]

Side note, how much of a joke is it that Carmelo didn't make any of the All NBA teams

And i thought it was just the refs that he didnt get respect from

[GSP]

Just did a rough calculation for ESPN's RPM for playoffs only (note I could only focus on the first page of data, the internet archive would not let me see the next few pages).

James +11.9
Paul +11.2
Curry +8.6
Ginobili +6.6
Aldridge +6.4
Griffin +5.6
Durant +5.5
Westbrook +4.9
Collison +4.7
Nowitzki +4.6
Garnett +4.2
Duncan +3.9

Surprised to see Kg there

[mysticbb]

Would you be willing to share playoff-only RAPM? I'm interested in seeing how well the actual shifts in play line up with my own evaluations.

Too small of a sample size in order to make use of such thing. Only using playoff data would result into a lot of players just around zero (for NPI that is).

Also, you can't use your calculation (assuming, you simply used the aggregated RPM*minutes (possessions) then subtracted the RS portion of that and devided it by the playoff minutes (possessions)) in that fashion. A bigger sample gives a better chance to get further away from zero. The RPM values now are based on ALL available data, and are only the best estimates based on that sample, not some subsequent smaller sample of that. The player may just play at the same level as during the regular season and his value can easily be seen an increase or decrease based on the bigger sample size. Especially when someone is using such big lambdas like J.E. is doing it.

[ronnymac2]

Funny how he's become underrated in New York despite playing the best ball of his career.

My favorite are the "He's not clutch" arguments that have surfaced. This after years where Melo was IIRC very good in the clutch statistically, and where the public's perception of Melo's clutchness actually ran parallel to the statistical truth, albeit it was usually used to bash fellow 2003 draftee LeBron James's lack of clutchness (also a myth).

But NOW, Melo isn't clutch. Couldn't be because there isn't a power forward on the roster or Chandler is older or Felton couldn't guard a chair or Felton makes terrible decisions or JR Smith is an incredibly stupid basketball player. It's because Melo isn't clutch.

To be honest, I'm not really a huge Melo fan despite being a Knicks fan. The trade for him eviscerated my favorite Knicks roster of the past 15 years. But he played balls out this year.

I hear a lot about how playing in New York will make you become overrated because of the media and spotlight and market. I saw Patrick Ewing go through the ringer and be unfairly blamed for losing and basically be labeled a choker despite giving Michael Jordan his greatest challenges. I'm seeing Melo not making ALL-NBA teams and being called unclutch since coming to NY. Coming to NY has its fair share of pluses, but it's not all good. Not even close.

[SideshowBob]

Would you be willing to share playoff-only RAPM? I'm interested in seeing how well the actual shifts in play line up with my own evaluations.

Too small of a sample size in order to make use of such thing. Only using playoff data would result into a lot of players just around zero (for NPI that is).

Cool. Makes sense

Also, you can't use your calculation (assuming, you simply used the aggregated RPM*minutes (possessions) then subtracted the RS portion of that and devided it by the playoff minutes (possessions)) in that fashion. A bigger sample gives a better chance to get further away from zero. The RPM values now are based on ALL available data, and are only the best estimates based on that sample, not some subsequent smaller sample of that. The player may just play at the same level as during the regular season and his value can easily be seen an increase or decrease based on the bigger sample size. Especially when someone is using such big lambdas like J.E. is doing it.

I knew that I'd likely be told off for that Thanks though, I figured it probably wouldn't be the proper way of handling it.

[Doctor MJ]

Yeah, I think you're quibbling. I'm not sure how much we differ on RW other than you might be anchoring yourself into a negative position. This might be a normal reaction to you perceiving him as being overrated or problematic relative to his role, but I do think it's clouding you on his overall effect.

To wit, Durant being passive is just a function of Durant. He's still in top-40 usage land of all time. We might want this slightly higher but I think that's a combination of OKC's offense (coaching), their personnel and the occasional bad decision from RW. That said, it's possible Duran't spacing off ball (while someone like RW is on ball) is just as or more effective than the global effect of his extra touches. I'm not convinced of that, but I don't watch OKC and think "they should just give it to KD 15% more and clear out!" It's more complicated than that.

Last thing: Can we really say OKC's offense "underperformed?" They were better than +4 in the PS (I think -- off top of my head here) and what should we expect from that roster? Westbrook's ON offense in the RS was still 113.5 and 111 in the PS (with a whopping PS +/-). In 2013 (no Harden) it was 114 ON in the RS, and the offense fell off without him in the PS. Thoughts?

(PS I was looking at PI RAPM.)

I think your point about Durant's usage is a great one. It's not like Durant's getting only tiny amounts of opportunities, so what exactly does a better use of Durant look like? Clearly the answer to the dilemma here, should we agree there is one, is not simply "Pass the ball to Durant at the beginning of the possession to max out his touches." But clearly we see the broken possessions and clearly Westbrook is not a genius floor general, it just seems clear to me that things could be better.

So then to me the real debate is whether it's serious or whether it's quibbling. I would agree that if you're like some who simply believe that Durant wasn't himself physically, then it's tough to know whether it's serious.

I also understand that Westbrook doesn't look like a bad player by +/-, and in general as you know that goes a long way for me. I have to admit that while I think Westbrook is a great player by normal standards, I don't find the +/- that reassuring here, and I suppose more than anything else it just feels to me like OKC could do better.

I'm not sure what you mean by +4 in the playoffs. If you're more specific maybe I'll learn something, or maybe I'll see something to focus on to crunch more numbers. When I was looking at expectations I was basically doing this:

Relative Performance = (ORtg-in-Series - Opponent-RS-DRtg) - (RS-ORtg - League-RS-Ortg)

I did it by hand and may have made a dumb error, but I got a negative result for '14 OKC in every series which to me is particularly noteworthy because the RS was done largely without the benefit of a 100% Westbrook. By contrast I got a massive positive result for '12 OKC in each series despite starting from higher RS expectations.

It's when I see things like this that I have trouble letting things slide.

Everyone knows I'm a Nash fan, and everyone also knows that Nash made some unforced errors. He played in a reckless style where one could easily fixate on the errors that could be avoided if he played a more conservative game...except the results spoke for themselves. Utterly dominant team offense, and utterly outlier individual correlation with that success. I get results for that, I let the dude do his thing.

Had the results been weaker though, I'd start to question whether he needs to change how he plays. If when you drive into the crowd then leap up into the air you tend to throw the ball to your opponent, you need to stop doing it. It's not a genius move unless it works often enough to justify it.

Westbrook's results clearly aren't on that level. To me there's just no reason to look at what he's doing and say "Can't mess with the genius". OKC could really use a better offense, there are obvious things we see Westbrook do that we would normally say need to be brought home to civilization, so do it.

If you want to say, "Sure, but that doesn't mean he isn't already great." Well yeah, but Top 5 POY great? Even if you ignore the fact that I think he could be doing better in making his teammates look better, what individual metrics suggest he's on that level?

[Doctor MJ]

Side note, how much of a joke is it that Carmelo didn't make any of the All NBA teams

Doesn't really seem like a joke to me. To me it's an absolute given he shouldn't get a vote for 1st or 2nd team. From that point you have George, Aldridge, and Nowitzki who are all serious competition. Why is it a given to you that Melo deserves to rank ahead of these guys?

Funny how he's become underrated in New York despite playing the best ball of his career.

Here I'd agree that there's something of a point here:

He is playing than he did in Denver, and people are clearly lowering their opinion of Melo at this moment simply because of team issues beyond his control, and they shouldn't.

Since it's not clear to me though he got a lower All-NBA consideration though than he deserved, and since I think Melo probably wouldn't have been massively overrated in Denver had it not been for a supporting cast that could win without him, it seems like two sets of contradictory misconceptions might be resulting him being properly rated for the first time. I'm sure though that will not last, and people will quickly go back to seeing him as a Top 5 player as soon as he has better teammates.

[HeartBreakKid]

I don't get how Anthony is being underrated. I haven't talked to anyone who blames him for the Knicks sucking.

I just don't think Anthony is that great of a player, didn't think he was that great of a player when the Knicks got high seeding last year either. I said Westbrook was a better player than Anthony and I got **** on by a lot of people, if anything the past 2 years he's pretty well protected in debates.

There are a lot of great forwards in the league, him not making an NBA team doesn't mean people are drinking haterade.

[Dr Positivity]

I'd have voted Melo over LMA but Dirk over both of them, with how strong the forwards are, I don't think it's that big of a snub. This is close to the best Melo has played though and the difference between the credit he got and if the Knicks had been holding the 8th seed all year, is indeed unfair

[Doctor MJ]

He did it for a month, sure, but quickly it died off.

Can you expound on why you're dismissive of this? This was the first month of Durant sans Westbrook scouting you've been able to see since Durant hit his prime half a decade ago. In it you saw him put up a higher PPG than than any other full month he's ever played while shooting at a higher TS% than any other month he's ever played.

So what's your scouting report? What's the takeaway?

I certainly buy the idea that there's some degree of hotness involved, and I also understand that success in a more unipolar attack in the regular season is not the same as thriving against tough playoff defense, but it's hard to fathom people categorizing that month as a complete coincidence.

[Doctor MJ]

I'd have voted Melo over LMA but Dirk over both of them, with how strong the forwards are, I don't think it's that big of a snub. This is close to the best Melo has played though and the difference between the credit he got and if the Knicks had been holding the 8th seed all year, is indeed unfair

I can actually see a case for Dirk as not only 3rd team but 2nd team and looking at the voting it's clear he wouldn't have even made a 4th team if it existed. He's clearly the guy getting underrated to me.

[bondom34]

He did it for a month, sure, but quickly it died off.

Can you expound on why you're dismissive of this? This was the first month of Durant sans Westbrook scouting you've been able to see since Durant hit his prime half a decade ago. In it you saw him put up a higher PPG than than any other full month he's ever played while shooting at a higher TS% than any other month he's ever played.

So what's your scouting report? What's the takeaway?

I certainly buy the idea that there's some degree of hotness involved, and I also understand that success in a more unipolar attack in the regular season is not the same as thriving against tough playoff defense, but it's hard to fathom people categorizing that month as a complete coincidence.

Complete coincidence no, but his level of play was just unsustainable by any realistic standard. He was putting up increased usage and efficiency that noone's done for an entire season. Not only that, he was playing heavy minutes and was the only scoring option for the team in a lot of situations. I'm not pioneering Westbrook for top 5 this year, but possibly around 10 or so, and I think he's key to OKC's overall success. I think in the end they traded the right guy, put it that way, and that without the second option of WB the team isn't successful over a longer stretch, particularly in the PO. I think what we saw that month was amazing basketball, but when it comes down to a postseason series where you single in on one opponent, its not going to continue. That's what we saw last year.

[Doctor MJ]

Complete coincidence no, but his level of play was just unsustainable by any realistic standard. He was putting up increased usage and efficiency that noone's done for an entire season. Not only that, he was playing heavy minutes and was the only scoring option for the team in a lot of situations. I'm not pioneering Westbrook for top 5 this year, but possibly around 10 or so, and I think he's key to OKC's overall success. I think in the end they traded the right guy, put it that way, and that without the second option of WB the team isn't successful over a longer stretch, particularly in the PO. I think what we saw that month was amazing basketball, but when it comes down to a postseason series where you single in on one opponent, its not going to continue. That's what we saw last year.

I'm sorry to belabor the point. I get the point that his numbers seem unsustainable and I don't disagree, but it's weird to me the insistence on downplaying what to me was probably the single most noteworthy takeaway of the season. Here we have a superstar scorer whose putative weakness compared to comparable scorers is that he has to rely on another star to create for him, and yet the first serious duration he gets without that other star he looks better than any of those comparable scorers, and then he goes back to looking too dependent on the other star when that star comes back. You add in that the other player in question has clear issues with being pass first, and that the team doesn't look as anywhere near as sharp as they did two years ago in the playoffs. It's very hard for me not to put all these things together.

I'm also confused about the insistence on Durant's minutes causing him some kind of extreme fatigue. I'm not denying fatigue can be a serious thing and can strike unpredictably. Hell, maybe Durant has mono! But Durant in the month in question played less MPG than he did the rest of the season and less MPG than in any season in his prime, and he's a strapping 25 year old athlete in a league where playing 38 PPG as a young star is entirely normal. Chalking the season up as an opportunity missed due to playing Durant too many minutes just seems so weird to me - granted to be clear, that's not what you're saying here, but I've seen others say it in the past week.

[bondom34]

Complete coincidence no, but his level of play was just unsustainable by any realistic standard. He was putting up increased usage and efficiency that noone's done for an entire season. Not only that, he was playing heavy minutes and was the only scoring option for the team in a lot of situations. I'm not pioneering Westbrook for top 5 this year, but possibly around 10 or so, and I think he's key to OKC's overall success. I think in the end they traded the right guy, put it that way, and that without the second option of WB the team isn't successful over a longer stretch, particularly in the PO. I think what we saw that month was amazing basketball, but when it comes down to a postseason series where you single in on one opponent, its not going to continue. That's what we saw last year.

I'm sorry to belabor the point. I get the point that his numbers seem unsustainable and I don't disagree, but it's weird to me the insistence on downplaying what to me was probably the single most noteworthy takeaway of the season. Here we have a superstar scorer whose putative weakness compared to comparable scorers is that he has to rely on another star to create for him, and yet the first serious duration he gets without that other star he looks better than any of those comparable scorers, and then he goes back to looking too dependent on the other star when that star comes back. You add in that the other player in question has clear issues with being pass first, and that the team doesn't look as anywhere near as sharp as they did two years ago in the playoffs. It's very hard for me not to put all these things together.

I'm also confused about the insistence on Durant's minutes causing him some kind of extreme fatigue. I'm not denying fatigue can be a serious thing and can strike unpredictably. Hell, maybe Durant has mono! But Durant in the month in question played less MPG than he did the rest of the season and less MPG than in any season in his prime, and he's a strapping 25 year old athlete in a league where playing 38 PPG as a young star is entirely normal. Chalking the season up as an opportunity missed due to playing Durant too many minutes just seems so weird to me - granted to be clear, that's not what you're saying here, but I've seen others say it in the past week.

I'm not saying it was lost due to overplaying Durant though. I simply feel that in the playoffs, the sort of success seen in that month isn't sustainable when you have an opponent who can single in on a team and gameplan them. Going back to last yrs Memphis series, he wasn't as effective when going against the same team over and over, and the team fell apart. I think if fatigue was an issue it may have been MENTAL. As in, WB goes down last year, Ibaka this year, carrying the team while WB was out, winning MVP, he may have just been mentally tired. It seemed at times he got really down in the playoffs when the team fell behind, his head dropped and effort levels fell off on both ends. I think he may be mentally exhausted, not physically, but I still don't think that's why they lost.

[bondom34]

BTW Doc, not belaboring a point either, its an interesting topic.

OT but I think after tonight we saw Lebron's impact on the Heat. Man that team depends on him more than any other team I can think of.

[acrossthecourt]

To kill the "LeBron is weak for not playing through it' discussion:

There is no athlete on the planet who could've played through those cramps," Thomas told Yahoo Sports. "Michael Jordan absolutely couldn't have played through those cramps. I absolutely couldn't have played through those cramps. As an athlete, there's nothing you could do.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/isiah-thom ... 14640.html

And no, cramps aren't about some silly weakness and LeBron simply not drinking enough water. We think it's genetic, but we don't understand what factors lead to cramping and with two athletes who have the same routine and diet, one can cramp and the other not.

http://hardwoodparoxysm.com/2014/06/06/ ... e-genetic/