payitforward wrote:Do you mean, I think, that you'll give the better shooter more shots? Sure.
No.
A given player who's role on the team dicates that they take, say, 20 shots per 100 possessions, is going to have lower efficiency than that exact same player if they get traded to a better team and now only have to take 14 shots per 100 possessions.
payitforward wrote:But... no one would rank Justin with Jalen Williams.
Yet no one sensible would rate Shaedon Sharpe anywhere near Justin. Not so far. But Sharpe is still very young.
& Justin is a zillion times better than Devin Vassell
Now I'm confused.
Wouldn't your own logic lead to the conclusion that because Champagnie's true shooting percentage is better than Jalen Williams, and Champagine's possession stats are better than Jalen Williams, Champagnie is better than Jalen Williams?
payitforward wrote:Meanwhile... the ability to create one's own shot is only useful if the shot goes in the bucket at a high rate.
This is fundamentally incorrect, and I can prove it with one clear example.
Imagine a possession where the defense plays very well for the first 19 seconds. Nothing the offense has done has worked, and now the offense has 5 seconds to get a shot up. The ball is then passed to the teams best player, who now has 5 seconds to generate their own shot.
There is a clear and obvious value in a player being able to generate their own shot in that scenario, even at a league-average efficiency. Why? Because players who cannot generate their own shot will shoot at a much lower than league-average efficiency in that scenario. And remember the principle that on every possession, you must get a shot up to have a chance to score.
There are obviously many more reasons why being able to generate your own shot is inherently valuable, one being you aren't reliant on your teammates to create for you (who may or may or may not be able to do that). BUt I chose this example because it is something that happens to every team in every game.
payitforward wrote:You leave out altogether the other half of my little demonstration -- creating possessions.
joshuacf wrote:The possession numbers you pointed out do reflect very well on Champagnie indeed.... I guess where we will probably disagree is the level to which shot volume plays a role in determining a good player.
I think I pretty clearly acknowledged your point about possessions and told you what point I disagreed with you on.
I think your thought process on what makes a good basketball player is overly reductive. The Jalen Williams and Justin Champagnie example is proof of this.
Jalen Williams is 23 years old, making $48.0M a year for the next 5 years, and last year posted a true shooting percentage of 57.3% and created 7.1 possession per 100. Justin Champagine is 24 making $2.5M a year for the next 4 years, and last year posted a true shooting percentage of 61.4% and created 12.9 possessions per 100.
Would you trade Justin Champagine for Jalen Williams? Why or why not?
