Doctor MJ wrote:Bob8 wrote:Can you please tell me what would have happened with Luka's +/-; on/off, if he would got 4 very good starters, and his bench would have been worse? My wild guess is that bad starting 5, who are injured a lot, has a lot with those numbers. Mavs bench on the other hand is pretty solid with THJ&co. I doubt very much that Jokic could have had much better results playing with Green, Hardy, DDJ, Williams, Exum...Kyrie is injured nonstop.
Mavs have far the worse starters between playoffs teams, when Kyrie is out, that's a lot of the time, Luka basically plays with bench players all the time against opponents starters. Kinda difficult to have good +/- in this circumstances.
SGA is a great example for that. Very bad +/-; on/off and he gets proper starters and his +/- suddenly skyrockets. Coincidence? I don't think so. All players with great +/- have great starting units.
Those debates are academic anyway, nobody cares about +/- or RS games. Luka needs to win a title or two, if he wants to be recognised as a great player, unfortunately he can't with the roster he has at the moment, +/- is right there.
I'm talking about a trend over Luka's entire career, so when you're suggesting that if he simply had good co-starters and worse bench teammates his on/off would look like a normal superstar, you're saying this about 6 years worth of play. Does that not seem strange to you?
Re: SGA as example of great teammates skyrocketing star's +/-. Well, SGA's on/off is towering over his teammates. The idea that if Luka only had better teammates he's separate himself from them more doesn't make a lot of sense.
Re: nobody cares about RS anyway. I mean, this is a discussion about an RS award. If you didn't care, you wouldn't be here.
You should ask yourself, if efficient near 35 points triple double, while being far the most doubled player in the league, is not impactful, maybe something is wrong with measurement. Maybe measuring impact of the lineups and impact of individual players is not the same?
Why he’s far the most doubled player in the league, if his impact on the game isn’t big? Or just maybe teams know that his teammates won’t punish them playing 4/3 and rather risk open shots and take ball out of his hands, because that’s better option than defending him straight.
Even far the most efficient 70+ points game, near triple double, in the history of the game, didn't bring exactly epic +/-, because other teammates didn't do enough in D. Luka + 4 good defenders, who can hit open shots averagely, would be title contenders immediately.
+/- would be great for measuring impact of superstars, if they would have very similar teammates. Expecting that player who's playing with players, who would in other teams be on the bench, can have similar +/- is totally unrealistic. Ask yourself how many Mavs starters, except Kyrie, who is out a lot, would start in Celtics, Bucks, Nuggets, Thunder, Clippers....? No one would. But on the other hand, they would like to have some Mavs bench players.
So you're saying that SGA has become impactful player getting a lot better overnight and not because he got much better support? This that really makes sense for you? Bad first 4 seasons, average in 5th and a monster in 6th, when he finally has good supporting cast. Or maybe he became impactful player in off season and Chet&co don't matter anything.