Intangible players list

[Mykhyn]

Who else would you add to a list of players like

Shane Battier
Andre Iguodala
Tim Duncan
Jimmy Butler

Basically people who were whatever they needed to be on any given night or provided a massive amount of glue that never had their impact properly quantified by analytics

[falcolombardi]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

[Mykhyn]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

Well below their actual value though

[parsnips33]

Klay. So much of his value is things that just do not get counted statistically

[falcolombardi]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

Well below their actual value though

You sure? Duncan looks like a goat tier player per plus-minus metrics butler as a superstar and even guys like battier and iggy come out really good

https://www.thespax.com/nba/quantifying-the-nbas-greatest-five-year-peaks-since-1997/

[Mykhyn]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

Well below their actual value though

You sure? Duncan looks like a goat tier player per plus-minus metrics butler as a superstar and even guys like battier and iggy come out really good

https://www.thespax.com/nba/quantifying-the-nbas-greatest-five-year-peaks-since-1997/

Ya, because it doesn't properly measure their willingness to be whatever is needed, when it is needed.

Duncan would prioritize defense instead of offense when necessary etc. That was never really properly reflected in the stats.

Even if you disagree with specific examples, you understand the template for the question.

What players performed better than their stats or metrics indicated. Ideally non selfish players

[Mykhyn]

Klay. So much of his value is things that just do not get counted statistically

This is a very good example and a huge reason his winning percentage is so high I suspect

[DraymondGold]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

Well below their actual value though

In a 3-year playoff sample, Duncan has the 4th best Box Plus Minus of all time, the 1st best PIPM of all time, and the 1st best AuPM of all time.

If this is "well below his actual value"... you must have Duncan as the greatest peak by such a wide margin it would be insane How much better is peak Duncan than peak MJ or LeBron? 25%? 50%?

All teasing aside, It's true that some box stats can miss value. If Duncan is a really intimidating defensive presence that prevents players from driving to the rim, that would never get captured in blocks or steals or rebounds. But here's the thing: by definition, that would get captured in plus minus data (since that intimidation factor would change when Duncan was on the court vs off the court).

Really, there's not that much that wouldn't get captured in plus minus data. The only stuff I can think of are:
-Stuff that plus minus data would miss while a player's on the court (e.g. if player's injured, if they're playing a role perfectly suited or terribly suited for their skills, etc.)
-Stuff that plus minus data would miss while a player's off the court (e.g. if they somehow still had value while they were off the court, like if they were also coaching/teaching teammates in practice, if they were big cultural/chemistry centerpieces, etc.).

That's not to say plus minus metrics are perfect. They can have a lot of variance in smaller samples. But they definitely capture a lot of the "intangible" stuff you seem to be getting at. happy to talk more if you have more questions about plus minus metrics.

[Mykhyn]

A intangible player would have a ton of trouble stopping anyone defensively with his lack of mass, slashers would just go through him

Anyway, Dont all those guys have monster impact metrics? Duncan in particular?

Well below their actual value though

In a 3-year playoff sample, Duncan has the 4th best Box Plus Minus of all time, the 1st best PIPM of all time, and the 1st best AuPM of all time.

If this is "well below his actual value"... you must have Duncan as the greatest peak by such a wide margin it would be insane How much better is peak Duncan than peak MJ or LeBron? 25%? 50%?

All teasing aside, It's true that some box stats can miss value. If Duncan is a really intimidating defensive presence that prevents players from driving to the rim, that would never get captured in blocks or steals or rebounds. But here's the thing: by definition, that would get captured in plus minus data (since that intimidation factor would change when Duncan was on the court vs off the court).

Really, there's not that much that wouldn't get captured in plus minus data. The only stuff I can think of are:
-Stuff that plus minus data would miss while a player's on the court (e.g. if player's injured, if they're playing a role perfectly suited or terribly suited for their skills, etc.)
-Stuff that plus minus data would miss while a player's off the court (e.g. if they somehow still had value while they were off the court, like if they were also coaching/teaching teammates in practice, if they were big cultural/chemistry centerpieces, etc.).

That's not to say plus minus metrics are perfect. They can have a lot of variance in smaller samples. But they definitely capture a lot of the "intangible" stuff you seem to be getting at. happy to talk more if you have more questions about plus minus metrics.

BPM is heavily impacted by the players surrounding you on the court.

It's not a perfect metric for what I'm asking or really even close to it.

[falcolombardi]

Klay. So much of his value is things that just do not get counted statistically

This is a very good example and a huge reason his winning percentage is so high I suspect

He is very good but his pedestrian plus-minus impact makes me think he is a bit overated if anythingh

I actually think his excelent boxscore/raw stats are better than his impact, an actual weak stats/great impact guy in those warriors would be iguodala or maybe draymond at times

[parsnips33]

Klay. So much of his value is things that just do not get counted statistically

This is a very good example and a huge reason his winning percentage is so high I suspect

He is very good but his pedestrian plus-minus impact makes me think he is a bit overated if anythingh

I actually think his excelent boxscore/raw stats are better than his impact, an actual weak stats/great impact guy in those warriors would be iguodala or maybe draymond at times

The reason I say Klay is because so much of his value comes from:

Offense - gravity. He doesn't have the same gravity impact of Steph because Steph's off-ball movements are so crisp. But even on plays where Klay doesn't move a ton and doesn't touch the ball, the impact of having a guy glued to him and not able to help like they would against other teams is always there.

Defense - staying in front of his man (less so post injury). Being able to switch on to smaller players. There's no high block/steal totals, no sexy plays where he comes out of nowhere to blow up plays. Just consistently applying resistance as the first line of defense.

Obviously he also brings the flamethrower scoring which is far from intangible

[Colbinii]

RAPM typically catches these players in their metrics quite accurately.

I cant think of many players who lack boxscore and impact metrics [+/- based statistics] but are glue guys but never had their impact properly noted.

Maybe Ricky Rubio?

[penbeast0]

A number of guys before impact stats that did things that didn't go into the box score like Wes Unseld with his GOAT level pick setting and outlet passing. But that's too easy. I think to look at the OP correctly we have to look only at players post RAMP. I wonder how much real impact the nothing but intangibles guys like the walking corpse of Adonis Haslem have.

[falcolombardi]

This is a very good example and a huge reason his winning percentage is so high I suspect

He is very good but his pedestrian plus-minus impact makes me think he is a bit overated if anythingh

I actually think his excelent boxscore/raw stats are better than his impact, an actual weak stats/great impact guy in those warriors would be iguodala or maybe draymond at times

The reason I say Klay is because so much of his value comes from:

Offense - gravity. He doesn't have the same gravity impact of Steph because Steph's off-ball movements are so crisp. But even on plays where Klay doesn't move a ton and doesn't touch the ball, the impact of having a guy glued to him and not able to help like they would against other teams is always there.

Defense - staying in front of his man (less so post injury). Being able to switch on to smaller players. There's no high block/steal totals, no sexy plays where he comes out of nowhere to blow up plays. Just consistently applying resistance as the first line of defense.

Obviously he also brings the flamethrower scoring which is far from intangible

Sure but then why doesnt plus-minus capture that impact?

Is a serious question, if a player with impressive boxscore stats like klay has even more value outside the basic boxscore why is that not evident in team improvement when he plays?

[DraymondGold]

He is very good but his pedestrian plus-minus impact makes me think he is a bit overated if anythingh

I actually think his excelent boxscore/raw stats are better than his impact, an actual weak stats/great impact guy in those warriors would be iguodala or maybe draymond at times

The reason I say Klay is because so much of his value comes from:

Offense - gravity. He doesn't have the same gravity impact of Steph because Steph's off-ball movements are so crisp. But even on plays where Klay doesn't move a ton and doesn't touch the ball, the impact of having a guy glued to him and not able to help like they would against other teams is always there.

Defense - staying in front of his man (less so post injury). Being able to switch on to smaller players. There's no high block/steal totals, no sexy plays where he comes out of nowhere to blow up plays. Just consistently applying resistance as the first line of defense.

Obviously he also brings the flamethrower scoring which is far from intangible

Sure but then why doesnt plus-minus capture that impact?

Is a serious question, if a player with impressive boxscore stats like klay has even more value outside the basic boxscore why is that not evident in team improvement when he plays?

Hi falcolombardi, parsnips33! Could it be that the plus minus stats are capturing these two areas of value, but are lower on other areas?

I definitely agree with parsnips33 that Klay's offensive gravity and glue-guy role wouldn't be captured in the box score (but might in plus minus data). But there's another important area of offense that Klay performs pretty poorly in: creation. For example, in the Warriors death lineup, is there a worse playmaker than Klay? Maybe Harrison Barnes back in the day or mayybe KD, but that's about it, right? He's far from the most willing passer, he doesn't have the best vision, and he also isn't the best at executing a pass once he sees it. He has gotten a bit better at execution in 2022, but he also struggled to find a balance of when to shoot and when to pass in the flow of the offense, which might limit the newer passing skill.

To be clear, Klay still is a great glue-guy without playmaking. He's one of the best high-volume off-ball guards in history. But I wonder if his worse playmaking on ball is dragging him down on offense.

On defense, Klay definitely is great at the point of attack. But is there a worse offball/team defender in the long-term Warriors playoff-rotation players? He often has moments where he misses something or falls asleep off ball, and is far less effective with timing off-ball help than other guards/wings. He's also probably the worst defensive rebounder of the Warriors' core. Could these be dragging down his defensive value?

[agkagk]

siakam

[parsnips33]

The reason I say Klay is because so much of his value comes from:

Offense - gravity. He doesn't have the same gravity impact of Steph because Steph's off-ball movements are so crisp. But even on plays where Klay doesn't move a ton and doesn't touch the ball, the impact of having a guy glued to him and not able to help like they would against other teams is always there.

Defense - staying in front of his man (less so post injury). Being able to switch on to smaller players. There's no high block/steal totals, no sexy plays where he comes out of nowhere to blow up plays. Just consistently applying resistance as the first line of defense.

Obviously he also brings the flamethrower scoring which is far from intangible

Sure but then why doesnt plus-minus capture that impact?

Is a serious question, if a player with impressive boxscore stats like klay has even more value outside the basic boxscore why is that not evident in team improvement when he plays?

Hi falcolombardi, parsnips33! Could it be that the plus minus stats are capturing these two areas of value, but are lower on other areas?

I definitely agree with parsnips33 that Klay's offensive gravity and glue-guy role wouldn't be captured in the box score (but might in plus minus data). But there's another important area of offense that Klay performs pretty poorly in: creation. For example, in the Warriors death lineup, is there a worse playmaker than Klay? Maybe Harrison Barnes back in the day or mayybe KD, but that's about it, right? He's far from the most willing passer, he doesn't have the best vision, and he also isn't the best at executing a pass once he sees it. He has gotten a bit better at execution in 2022, but he also struggled to find a balance of when to shoot and when to pass in the flow of the offense, which might limit the newer passing skill.

To be clear, Klay still is a great glue-guy without playmaking. He's one of the best high-volume off-ball guards in history. But I wonder if his worse playmaking on ball is dragging him down on offense.

On defense, Klay definitely is great at the point of attack. But is there a worse offball/team defender in the long-term Warriors playoff-rotation players? He often has moments where he misses something or falls asleep off ball, and is far less effective with timing off-ball help than other guards/wings. He's also probably the worst defensive rebounder of the Warriors' core. Could these be dragging down his defensive value?

Great points - I can't say for sure why impact stats seem to be lower on him, but this all tracks with what I see when watching the team

[PistolPeteJR]

Add Caruso. I know it’s early in his career still, but the mold is basically selfless, high-IQ ball players who are excellent defenders and also have other helpful skills (eg. making the right pass).

[SNPA]

Who else would you add to a list of players like

Shane Battier
Andre Iguodala
Tim Duncan
Jimmy Butler

Basically people who were whatever they needed to be on any given night or provided a massive amount of glue that never had their impact properly quantified by analytics

Another thread about Bird?

[Jaivl]

RAPM typically catches these players in their metrics quite accurately.

I cant think of many players who lack boxscore and impact metrics [+/- based statistics] but are glue guys but never had their impact properly noted.

Maybe Ricky Rubio?

Nah, Ricky has always been a RAPM king when healthy, especially in long samples (Engelmann's 15 year dataset, 5-year RAPM, etc)