Trae Young is Ridiculously Underrated

[Rainwater]

Scoring efficiency is the only thing that matters. Why are you so insistent on isolating FG% separately and not including a clear strength that makes him a much better scorer? Do you think Shaq wouldn't have been more efficient or a better scorer if he could shoot 75% from FT?

If you blow by your defender for a wide open layup, and he decides to wrap you up and force you to make the free throws and you do, how is that less efficient than him letting you go in for the layup? This is basically what you are arguing.

Noone can stay in front of Trae and he gets into the lane at will, and he's such a great passer on top of that defenses are routinely out of position. Just look at Hawks offensive efficiency over the last few years. It's not like he is starting with supremely gifted offensive players. The dude is literally leading Clint Capela/John Collins/Deandre Hunter/DJM to a top 5 offense the last 2 years. Hell we were top 2 two seasons ago with Heurter. Do those lineups look like top 5 offenses?

But sure he isn't "efficient" from the field. Let's not count TS% even though many games are won and closed out with free throws and they also place opposing teams in foul trouble, and also get your team in bonus faster which usually leads to big runs.

When did I say let’s not count TS%? TS% has value. However it’s a terrible stat to use to determine shooting efficiency, it’s a better stat to determine scoring ability. If you want to count a foul as a shot that is your objective however in reality that doesn’t make you efficient. You can be good at getting points but that doesn’t mean you are an efficient shooter.

When Trae is taking 30 shots and makes 11, something he does quite often, I don’t think that leads to long term success for the hawks regardless of how many free throws he takes.

Um. This is like saying FG% is a terrible stat to determine rebound %. Of course TS% isn't a great stat to determine shooting ability from the field, it's not supposed to be. That's not my point. I don't give a damn how a player scores as long as he scores efficiently. Why wouldn't scoring ability be the only thing that matters? I dont care if he shot 0% of the field, if he had a 70% TS% scoring 30 ppg that's a winning player that anyone would want on their team. Now that might be a boring player to watch but it would be highly efficient.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Defense let him finish layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Defense hacked sending him to the line for 2.

You are arguing that Player A is better. Which is ridiculous. It's the same outcome.
Except player B drew a foul and is one step closer to putting his team in the bonus. It's arguable that B is the better outcome.

I just don’t understand why you responded to my post about debating efficiency from the field when you agree that is not what is. Again, TS% doesn’t gauge how efficient you are, it gauges how good you at getting points. This is a massive difference. Regardless of how you paint it if you told someone that you went 0-30 from from the field but ts% of 70, that is not efficiency you are just good at drawing fouls. The fact you call that efficient is crazy to me.

[lebootz21]

I went to a Hawks vs Thunder game where Trey obliterated our home team: He was making everything from layups, midrange, 3pt, and even half court shots. I think he put up 40+ pts 10+ assist while shooting 60% ... it was the single best live performance I have ever witnessed.

I've seen KD, Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, etc. live and even they couldn't not do what Trey did that night. It was 5 vs 1 and he torched the entire team by himself.

I expected this performance to be on the front page of every major sports news station.

It was crickets. Not even one organization talked about the greatest performance I have ever witnessed live.

Trey is basically Kyrie on steroids and nobody even cares.

[Ballerhogger]

Small guard that gets abused defensivley no not underrated . He can get hot but when you on ball pressure him he’s has nothing .

[Duffman100]

I went to a Hawks vs Thunder game where Trey obliterated our home team: He was making everything from layups, midrange, 3pt, and even half court shots. I think he put up 40+ pts 10+ assist while shooting 60% ... it was the single best live performance I have ever witnessed.

I've seen KD, Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, etc. live and even they couldn't not do what Trey did that night. It was 5 vs 1 and he torched the entire team by himself.

I expected this performance to be on the front page of every major sports news station.

It was crickets. Not even one organization talked about the greatest performance I have ever witnessed live.

Trey is basically Kyrie on steroids and nobody even cares.

It almost feels like you let that one performance bias you on his overall performance.

Sort of like how I feel about Maxey.

[Roger Murdock]

In general I think basketball writers and fans are wising up to the min / maxed, one man army, heliocentric offenses that allow one player to accumulate ungodly numbers.

Harden is the ultimate example but we’ve seen it elsewhere. Doncic and Trae for current players. Embiid is the big man version of it.

It works extremely well during the regular season and we’ve seen some wild, unprecedented stat lines from it. However it fails during the playoffs for a few reasons

1. Reliance on referees and foul baited = less player agency over game

2. Lack of versatility, in a 7 game series you can scheme around it better than on a Tuesday in December

3. Prone to variance when reliant on one player

4. If your one player doesn’t respond well to the additional pressure things fall apart

Really only Doncic has elevated his game in the playoffs whereas Harden, Embiid, and Trae have seen declines in performance. In addition, Trae is by far the worst defender of the bunch.

I think Trae is a bit underrated as a result of an over correction against this type of player. He’s essentially private label Harden which is still an all star. It’s just most people would rather have a more team focused player who’s maybe 85% as good but more versatile and willing to adapt.

[NDaATL]

When did I say let’s not count TS%? TS% has value. However it’s a terrible stat to use to determine shooting efficiency, it’s a better stat to determine scoring ability. If you want to count a foul as a shot that is your objective however in reality that doesn’t make you efficient. You can be good at getting points but that doesn’t mean you are an efficient shooter.

When Trae is taking 30 shots and makes 11, something he does quite often, I don’t think that leads to long term success for the hawks regardless of how many free throws he takes.

Um. This is like saying FG% is a terrible stat to determine rebound %. Of course TS% isn't a great stat to determine shooting ability from the field, it's not supposed to be. That's not my point. I don't give a damn how a player scores as long as he scores efficiently. Why wouldn't scoring ability be the only thing that matters? I dont care if he shot 0% of the field, if he had a 70% TS% scoring 30 ppg that's a winning player that anyone would want on their team. Now that might be a boring player to watch but it would be highly efficient.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Defense let him finish layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Defense hacked sending him to the line for 2.

You are arguing that Player A is better. Which is ridiculous. It's the same outcome.
Except player B drew a foul and is one step closer to putting his team in the bonus. It's arguable that B is the better outcome.

I just don’t understand why you responded to my post about debating efficiency from the field when you agree that is not what is. Again, TS% doesn’t gauge how efficient you are, it gauges how good you at getting points. This is a massive difference. Regardless of how you paint it if you told someone that you went 0-30 from from the field but ts% of 70, that is not efficiency you are just good at drawing fouls. The fact you call that efficient is crazy to me.

Because your point has zero relevance. Scoring efficiently is the only thing that matters, it doesn't matter where the points come from. Once again I will ask, you tell me what is the better impact.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense let him finish 2nd shot as a layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense hacked sending him to the line for 2. Puts defense in foul trouble and gets the team into the bonus faster.

You are arguing that Player A is better, when the reality is the outcome is the exact same, and arguably better for player B. Even though player A's efficiency from the "field" is better. It's irrelevant.

[dickfox]

I think he'd be great as a number 2 or 3 guy with an elite rim protector + runner and another 1 or 2 elite defenders. His negative defensive rating will not win a championship. It would have to be a team like below to be a contender.

Anthony Davis
Aaron Gordon
Mikal Bridges
Gary Trent Jr.
Trae Young

[Rainwater]

Um. This is like saying FG% is a terrible stat to determine rebound %. Of course TS% isn't a great stat to determine shooting ability from the field, it's not supposed to be. That's not my point. I don't give a damn how a player scores as long as he scores efficiently. Why wouldn't scoring ability be the only thing that matters? I dont care if he shot 0% of the field, if he had a 70% TS% scoring 30 ppg that's a winning player that anyone would want on their team. Now that might be a boring player to watch but it would be highly efficient.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Defense let him finish layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Defense hacked sending him to the line for 2.

You are arguing that Player A is better. Which is ridiculous. It's the same outcome.
Except player B drew a foul and is one step closer to putting his team in the bonus. It's arguable that B is the better outcome.

I just don’t understand why you responded to my post about debating efficiency from the field when you agree that is not what is. Again, TS% doesn’t gauge how efficient you are, it gauges how good you at getting points. This is a massive difference. Regardless of how you paint it if you told someone that you went 0-30 from from the field but ts% of 70, that is not efficiency you are just good at drawing fouls. The fact you call that efficient is crazy to me.

Because your point has zero relevance. Scoring efficiently is the only thing that matters, it doesn't matter where the points come from. Once again I will ask, you tell me what is the better impact.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense let him finish 2nd shot as a layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense hacked sending him to the line for 2. Puts defense in foul trouble and gets the team into the bonus faster.

You are arguing that Player A is better, when the reality is the outcome is the exact same, and arguably better for player B. Even though player A's efficiency from the "field" is better. It's irrelevant.

Lol again, your point has no relevance to my original comment. You have literally agreed with me that TS% percentage doesn’t measure efficiency from the field which was my original point.

Your hypothetical situation has nothing to with my original point. You have literally changed the conversation into the value of TS% which I have no interest in taking about and I never said “doesn’t matter”. If you think scoring efficiency will win you a title despite shooting inefficient from the field have a ball. But just because Trae is scoring efficient doesn’t take away from the fact he is still shooting inefficient (personally, I feel like that is the fact you are trying not to admit and disregard). Whatever other conclusion you want to draw from that has nothing to do with my original point and it’s just you creating a debate where there is no debate. I feel like am going in circles trying to explain this to you.

Man, when I think of TS% and Trae I just imagine playing on the playgrounds with a guy shooting 0-30 and baiting foul calls and calling that efficient. That would be frustrating to watch and play against. But it works for him and the hawks I guess lol.

I value TS% however most stars with high TS% typically have a pretty good FGA to go along with it. I just feel like that and his defense is what is keeping him to be considered as good as other stars in the league.

[NDaATL]

I just don’t understand why you responded to my post about debating efficiency from the field when you agree that is not what is. Again, TS% doesn’t gauge how efficient you are, it gauges how good you at getting points. This is a massive difference. Regardless of how you paint it if you told someone that you went 0-30 from from the field but ts% of 70, that is not efficiency you are just good at drawing fouls. The fact you call that efficient is crazy to me.

Because your point has zero relevance. Scoring efficiently is the only thing that matters, it doesn't matter where the points come from. Once again I will ask, you tell me what is the better impact.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense let him finish 2nd shot as a layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense hacked sending him to the line for 2. Puts defense in foul trouble and gets the team into the bonus faster.

You are arguing that Player A is better, when the reality is the outcome is the exact same, and arguably better for player B. Even though player A's efficiency from the "field" is better. It's irrelevant.

Lol again, your point has no relevance to my original comment. You have literally agreed with me that TS% percentage doesn’t measure efficiency from the field which was my original point.

Your hypothetical situation has nothing to with my original point. You have literally changed the conversation into the value of TS% which I have no interest in taking about and I never said “doesn’t matter”. If you think scoring efficiency will win you a title despite shooting inefficient from the field have a ball. But just because Trae is scoring efficient doesn’t take away from the fact he is still shooting inefficient (personally, I feel like that is the fact you are trying not to admit and disregard). Whatever other conclusion you want to draw from that has nothing to do with my original point and it’s just you creating a debate where there is no debate. I feel like am going in circles trying to explain this to you.

Man, when I think of TS% and Trae I just imagine playing on the playgrounds with a guy shooting 0-30 and baiting foul calls and calling that efficient. That would be frustrating to watch and play against. But it works for him and the hawks I guess lol.

I value TS% however most stars with high TS% typically have a pretty good FGA to go along with it. I just feel like that and his defense is what is keeping him to be considered as good as other stars in the league.

Fair enough, we can agree to disagree. You believe that shooting from the field efficiently is more important than scoring efficiently. Even though both will equal the same in points per possession for the team (if their TS% is the same). So why not just use TS%?

Let's look at an example.
Anthony Edwards has an eFG of 52.8%
Shai has an eFG of 53.1%.

They attempt about the same amount of FG per game. Based on eFG someone may determine that Edwards is on the same level as Shai as a scorer. But yet we know that is not the case. Why does Shai have much better scoring numbers?

(Hint: Shai has 62.6 TS% and Edwards has a 56.4 TS%). Shai gets to the line twice as much and is a better FT shooter. That is a ton of value added to a team. Would you take Shai over Edwards?

This is why eFG is much more flawed than TS%.

[Dick Tate]

Just for fun lets compare Trae to other young PGs in the league...

Point guards with seasons of 4 or more turnovers a game?

0 seasons with 4 or more turnovers a game:

LaMelo
Ja
Hali
Fox

1 season with 4 or more turnovers a game:

Young


2 seasons with 4 or more turnovers a game:

Young

3 seasons with 4 or more turnovers a game:

Young

4 seasons with 4 or more turnovers a game:

Young

Stupid argument

Shaquille ONeal ft %

Season 1

Below 53%


Season 2

Below 53%


Season 3

Below 53%


You see how weak and baseless your argument is or you want me to explain this to you on apples ?

LMAO!
Thanks.

[lebootz21]

I went to a Hawks vs Thunder game where Trey obliterated our home team: He was making everything from layups, midrange, 3pt, and even half court shots. I think he put up 40+ pts 10+ assist while shooting 60% ... it was the single best live performance I have ever witnessed.

I've seen KD, Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, etc. live and even they couldn't not do what Trey did that night. It was 5 vs 1 and he torched the entire team by himself.

I expected this performance to be on the front page of every major sports news station.

It was crickets. Not even one organization talked about the greatest performance I have ever witnessed live.

Trey is basically Kyrie on steroids and nobody even cares.

It almost feels like you let that one performance bias you on his overall performance.

Sort of like how I feel about Maxey.

It just boggles my mind a guy who puts up 40+ 10+ assists don't even get any exposure from the media. If Lebron puts up 30, you'll hear it at every major sports website including non sports ones ...

He's not even being underrated ... it's straight up disrespected.

When has there ever been a star player who puts up 40+ night in and night out and nobody talks about it?

[Tacoma]

I went to a Hawks vs Thunder game where Trey obliterated our home team: He was making everything from layups, midrange, 3pt, and even half court shots. I think he put up 40+ pts 10+ assist while shooting 60% ... it was the single best live performance I have ever witnessed.

I've seen KD, Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, etc. live and even they couldn't not do what Trey did that night. It was 5 vs 1 and he torched the entire team by himself.

I expected this performance to be on the front page of every major sports news station.

It was crickets. Not even one organization talked about the greatest performance I have ever witnessed live.

Trey is basically Kyrie on steroids and nobody even cares.

It almost feels like you let that one performance bias you on his overall performance.

Sort of like how I feel about Maxey.

It just boggles my mind a guy who puts up 40+ 10+ assists don't even get any exposure from the media. If Lebron puts up 30, you'll hear it at every major sports website including non sports ones ...

He's not even being underrated ... it's straight up disrespected.

When has there ever been a star player who puts up 40+ night in and night out and nobody talks about it?

James Harden alone has 46 double-double games where he scored 40+ pts. There were 203 40+ point games this past season. Donovan Mitchell scored 40+ points in 4 consecutive games last season and needed a 70-pt, 10 assist game to get attention.

No disrespect against Trae and I recall there was mention in sports news about it, but one 40/10 game is just not that attention grabbing anymore. Just because it boggled your mind doesn't make it so for others.

[BigGargamel]

Trae has his flaws but so did Steph Curry before he got into a truly winning situation. No, I'm not comparing the two, but I put the blame more on the Hawks organization than Trae. I'd go to war with him on my team.

[ChuckChilly]

Trae is a flawed player, but he has pluses (offensively) that can only be duplicated by MAYBE 4 or 5 players in the league. I'm not a big fan of him, even as a Hawks fan, but I respect his talent.

But most people criticize him with some kind of bias, whether its the Luka trade, them not liking his playing style, the way he looks, or even just him being an Atlanta (the sports city that is always the butt of jokes) athlete. Its whats most annoying when reading threads like this.

[Rainwater]

Because your point has zero relevance. Scoring efficiently is the only thing that matters, it doesn't matter where the points come from. Once again I will ask, you tell me what is the better impact.

Player A - 1-2 from the field, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense let him finish 2nd shot as a layup untouched.
Player B - 0-1 from the field 2-2 FT, 2 points. Missed first shot. On 2nd shot, defense hacked sending him to the line for 2. Puts defense in foul trouble and gets the team into the bonus faster.

You are arguing that Player A is better, when the reality is the outcome is the exact same, and arguably better for player B. Even though player A's efficiency from the "field" is better. It's irrelevant.

Lol again, your point has no relevance to my original comment. You have literally agreed with me that TS% percentage doesn’t measure efficiency from the field which was my original point.

Your hypothetical situation has nothing to with my original point. You have literally changed the conversation into the value of TS% which I have no interest in taking about and I never said “doesn’t matter”. If you think scoring efficiency will win you a title despite shooting inefficient from the field have a ball. But just because Trae is scoring efficient doesn’t take away from the fact he is still shooting inefficient (personally, I feel like that is the fact you are trying not to admit and disregard). Whatever other conclusion you want to draw from that has nothing to do with my original point and it’s just you creating a debate where there is no debate. I feel like am going in circles trying to explain this to you.

Man, when I think of TS% and Trae I just imagine playing on the playgrounds with a guy shooting 0-30 and baiting foul calls and calling that efficient. That would be frustrating to watch and play against. But it works for him and the hawks I guess lol.

I value TS% however most stars with high TS% typically have a pretty good FGA to go along with it. I just feel like that and his defense is what is keeping him to be considered as good as other stars in the league.

Fair enough, we can agree to disagree. You believe that shooting from the field efficiently is more important than scoring efficiently. Even though both will equal the same in points per possession for the team (if their TS% is the same). So why not just use TS%?

Let's look at an example.
Anthony Edwards has an eFG of 52.8%
Shai has an eFG of 53.1%.

They attempt about the same amount of FG per game. Based on eFG someone may determine that Edwards is on the same level as Shai as a scorer. But yet we know that is not the case. Why does Shai have much better scoring numbers?

(Hint: Shai has 62.6 TS% and Edwards has a 56.4 TS%). Shai gets to the line twice as much and is a better FT shooter. That is a ton of value added to a team. Would you take Shai over Edwards?

This is why eFG is much more flawed than TS%.

We can agree to disagree but I am not saying that I prefer TS% over FG% or prefer Fg% over TS% it’s about analyzing what these stats mean and how they interact to come to an understanding about what a player is because a single stat doesn’t explain much. Take Trae for example, FG% is incorporated in TS%. If he has a low FG% which he does but has a high TS% that means he is poor shooter but is likely great at getting at the line.

Let’s use your Anthony Edwards and Shai example. Shai has has an amazing fg% at 51% higher than Edwards at 45% but Edwards has a higher eFG%. That just means Shai is far more efficient player from the field but doesn’t take that many 3s. Then when you incorporate TS% into this not only is Shai efficient he also gets to the line making him a better scorer. A single stat will not describe a player but analyzing multiple stats will.

We can go deeper into this by using shot distributions as well.

It just bothers when people use TS% as a tool for efficiency when it is really a tool for how you get your points.

[Dick Tate]

I went to a Hawks vs Thunder game where Trey obliterated our home team: He was making everything from layups, midrange, 3pt, and even half court shots. I think he put up 40+ pts 10+ assist while shooting 60% ... it was the single best live performance I have ever witnessed.

I've seen KD, Westbrook, Harden, Lebron, etc. live and even they couldn't not do what Trey did that night. It was 5 vs 1 and he torched the entire team by himself.

I expected this performance to be on the front page of every major sports news station.

It was crickets. Not even one organization talked about the greatest performance I have ever witnessed live.

Trey is basically Kyrie on steroids and nobody even cares.

It almost feels like you let that one performance bias you on his overall performance.

Sort of like how I feel about Maxey.

It just boggles my mind a guy who puts up 40+ 10+ assists don't even get any exposure from the media. If Lebron puts up 30, you'll hear it at every major sports website including non sports ones ...

He's not even being underrated ... it's straight up disrespected.

When has there ever been a star player who puts up 40+ night in and night out and nobody talks about it?

I gather this is the game you referenced?:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/202203300OKC.html
Not 60%, not 10 assists.
But a good performance nonetheless against a starting lineup of Isaiah Roby, Aaron Wiggins, Theo Maledon, Aleksei Pokusevski and Vit Krejci (who was tasked with guarding Trae).
How did Sportscenter ignore this one?

[meekrab]

Are these not the exact same thing? Being good at scoring is scoring efficiently.

Uh, no. Effectively and efficiently are not the same. Young is a volume scorer, not an efficient one by any stretch.

Sent from my [Samsung Z4 Fold] using RealGM mobile app

Yes, just because you get points doesn’t mean it’s efficient.

Okay I get it now, you're trying to redefine "scoring efficiency" as "shooting percentages." Good luck.

[brutalitops]

Oh look it's come out that last time at Team USA he was basically cussed out for continually going under screens by coaches. I wonder why he wasn't invited back? Must be a Spo/Pop/Kerr conspiracy to make him look bad

[brutalitops]

Trae has his flaws but so did Steph Curry before he got into a truly winning situation. No, I'm not comparing the two, but I put the blame more on the Hawks organization than Trae. I'd go to war with him on my team.

Trae had a way better first 3 years while Steph had a great second half to his first year. Good second and then a ruined third with his ankles again.

The warriors were a joke when he turned up, worse then Atlanta. Curry is one of the main reasons they became a powerhouse (other factors) Trae has honestly gone backwards since his third year. While Curry got better and better individually as well Trae has regressed on areas that guys like Dame/Steph improved on.

Again. Trae has all the offensive potential with the ball to carve a HOF type career. But not a winning one. He needs to involve guys more, get into the top 80% of the league for defense and one day relocate off the ball and care on defense before he's truly rated as elite.

[xBulletproof]

I mean, he has to be overrated, right? When people talk about the best shooters in the NBA, he's one of the first names that comes up. For ***** sakes people compare him with Curry.

Then you look at the stats for the reality of it. He's shot UNDER 35% 3 of his 5 years in the NBA. He has legitimately been under the league average as a 3 point shooter 60% of his career. But people will list him as a top 3-5 shooter.

So inefficient offense, and just awful defense. I don't know how anyone can see it another way without blinders on.