Sessions Update:Ramon signs T-Wolves OS (page 310 update)

YouthMovement · Post #161 » by **YouthMovement** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:45 pm

How is he playing against bench players most of the time? 25 and 16 against Amare? How about you watch the guy play...

LUKE23 · Post #162 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:49 pm

YouthMovement wrote:How is he playing against bench players most of the time? 25 and 16 against Amare? How about you watch the guy play...

One game sample size? Great argument. Oh, and Amare is not a good defender either.

paul · Post #163 » by **paul** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:52 pm

YouthMovement wrote:How is he playing against bench players most of the time? 25 and 16 against Amare? How about you watch the guy play...

I haven't checked if he did have that against Amare, but I hope it wasn't an attempt to boast if he did. Amare is arguably in the top 5 worst defensive bigs in basketball.

I like Lee, but his numbers from the past few seasons look significantly better than he actually is imo. He's a MLE to $7m ish guy for me. A pretty limited offensive player, very poor defensive player, excellent rebounder who hustles hard. If his agent is really asking around for $10-$12m he's a moron and should be fired immediately - if Lee thinks he's worth that then I don't want him as he would have to have a massively exaggerated self image.

Bernman · Post #164 » by **Bernman** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:53 pm

YouthMovement wrote:How is he playing against bench players most of the time? 25 and 16 against Amare? How about you watch the guy play...

Who me? If so, that's a straw man argument. I used the qualifier, a "portion" of the time. That goes for every starter, that they compete against bench players a portion of time. Which results in positive PER differentials for a high majority of players starting for their teams. But the fact that it's only marginally positive, indicates that he's an average to mediocre player for a starter. I suppose I could have seen if he's worse than over half the starters in the NBA, in PER differential, but it may have been somewhat tedious.

I have seen Lee play many times. I'm using a statistic here because it's the most objective argument that I can make. My determination was originally based on scouting, and then I'm just using statistics to confirm. I'm sure you've used his double-double statistics to champion him before, but if we're going to make statistical arguments, that's just far too simplistic of one.

Post #165 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:58 pm

Any defensive statistic you find is subjective, and any time you mix an already subjective stat (like PER and any other accumulative statistic) you are basically heading into murky waters. +/- in it's common form is awful, NBA teams keep a much better more in depth version but as of yet it hasn't been released to anyone outside of their organizations.

For me PER is a lazy statistic, you know what makes up the core values of it so why not make the evaluation based on them and not on some sort of equation that produces an end number to encompass an already complicated form of statistical measurement. I call it the Shane Battier rule. Judging by his PER he probably shouldn't even be in the league.

Everyone who is into advanced statistics knows that measuring defense is extremely difficult if not impossible, because you can look at opponent PER's but you can't look at who the player was guarding, what the circumstances of the game were, how the opponent scored, what lead to him scoring etc etc. If David Lee is alone against a 3 on 1 fast break and his opposing number scores the lay-up, that counts against him as part of the opponent PER stat. Especially now when a lot of teams run a zone defense where you are guarding an area as opposed to a player, it makes no sense to me. I don't like PER, I never have and I despise winscores. Derek Fisher's opponent PER is like 3 or 4 higher than his own, which would make him in your evaluation a mediocre level starter, yet he is a key player in the Lakers lineup. Too much conjecture for me.

I'm also not a fan of judging a players ability based on what I can see when I watch them because that too is overly subjective. I don't think I have a particularly good basketball eye when it comes to that stuff and I doubt many other people do, even though they may think so.

This isn't a "come up with reasons to get Lee out of trouble" post lol, I genuinely feel that way about those particular stats and you'll never find me using them in arguments. As a fan of advanced stats I'd love for there to be some sort of reliable defensive measurement, but in my opinion there just isn't. Their existence isn't evidence of their reliability. I'm sure NBA teams have something that works but they'll never give it to the rest of us.

Newz · Post #166 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:59 pm

YouthMovement wrote:How is he playing against bench players most of the time? 25 and 16 against Amare? How about you watch the guy play...

Uh oh... A Knicks fan.

Are you going to start explaining to us how half of the guys on your roster are headed for hall of fame status?

David Lee is a good player, but posting numbers for one game means nothing. What does mean something is looking at D'Antoni's history as a coach in the NBA. When he was with Phoenix he made several players look far, far better than they actually were. His run and gun, shoot whenever you are open, don't play any defense system does inflate guys statistics.

David Lee isn't a 15/12 guy in reality, he is a 8/8, 9/9, 10/10 type of guy. He's a good player, but he certainly isn't in the top ten power forwards in the NBA. He's a mid-level exception player. Limited offensively, mediocre defensively... His true value lies in his effort where he can be dominant at times on the glass and gets a lot of extra possessions for his team by picking up lose balls, etc.

Post #167 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:02 pm

David Lee isn't a 15/12 guy in reality, he is a 8/8, 9/9, 10/10 type of guy.

In reality he is whatever statistic he is averaging lol same as any other player. How can you say he's not that in reality? If he averaged 16/10 he is a 16/10 guy because that is what he averaged in reality. You could say "on another team he might be a 8/8 guy" etc but to say in reality...

LUKE23 · Post #168 » by **LUKE23** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:03 pm

In reality he is whatever statistic he is averaging lol same as any other player. How can you say he's not that in reality? If he averaged 16/10 he is a 16/10 guy because that is what he averaged in reality. You could say "on another team he might be a 8/8 guy" etc but to say in reality...

No, it's what he averaged ONE YEAR, in a stat-friendly system. Lee next to Bogut in Skiles defensive system would be an 11/8 type guy.

Lee is not in the top half of starting PF's.

apdamico · Post #169 » by **apdamico** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:04 pm

europa wrote:I put the same amount of stock in Villanueva's brother as I did Jennings when he predicted the Bucks would re-sign Villanueva.

But he also predicted that Sessions was gone, if he's 50% right there will be a lot of unhappy people on this board!

Newz · Post #170 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:05 pm

Citizen.Eras3d wrote:
David Lee isn't a 15/12 guy in reality, he is a 8/8, 9/9, 10/10 type of guy.

In reality he is whatever statistic he is averaging lol same as any other player. How can you say he's not that in reality? If he averaged 16/10 he is a 16/10 guy because that is what he averaged in reality. You could say "on another team he might be a 8/8 guy" etc but to say in reality...

Ok, then the Bucks should pay him 12 million dollars a year because that is what a 16/12 player is worth... In all honesty we might want to give him a max deal since he is the third best rebounder in basketball and an excellent offensive player since he drops 16 a game shooting 55%.

You know... Because he actually is what his numbers say.

Post #171 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:07 pm

No, it's what he averaged ONE YEAR, in a stat-friendly system. Lee next to Bogut in Skiles defensive system would be an 11/8 type guy.

But that's my whole point, the REALITY is that he does play in a supposed stat friendly system. and put up those numbers.. it's like me saying "In reality your name isn't Luke". Reality is reality.

Ok, then the Bucks should pay him 12 million dollars a year because that is what a 16/12 player is worth... In all honesty we might want to give him a max deal since he is the third best rebounder in basketball and an excellent offensive player since he drops 16 a game shooting 60%.

You know... Because he actually is what his numbers say.

I'm not talking about his contract or his worth or whether the Bucks should sign him (in my reply to you) I'm saying that reality is what actually happens. Not what might happen or what you think could happen. He might be a 2/2 player on the Spurs because he'd never play. That doesn't mean in reality he's a 2/2 player.

Newz · Post #172 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:09 pm

Citizen.Eras3d wrote:He might be a 2/2 player on the Spurs because he'd never play. That doesn't mean in reality he's a 2/2 player.

You are right. The reality is that on a majority of teams in the NBA he is a 8/8 - 10/10 type of guy...

Just like I said initially.

paul · Post #173 » by **paul** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:09 pm

LukePliska wrote:
Citizen.Eras3d wrote:
David Lee isn't a 15/12 guy in reality, he is a 8/8, 9/9, 10/10 type of guy.

In reality he is whatever statistic he is averaging lol same as any other player. How can you say he's not that in reality? If he averaged 16/10 he is a 16/10 guy because that is what he averaged in reality. You could say "on another team he might be a 8/8 guy" etc but to say in reality...

Ok, then the Bucks should pay him 12 million dollars a year because that is what a 16/12 player is worth... In all honesty we might want to give him a max deal since he is the third best rebounder in basketball and an excellent offensive player since he drops 16 a game shooting 55%.

You know... Because he actually is what his numbers say.

Yeah I think citizen was more arguing the definition of 'reality' rather than disagreeing with you as such.

Lee's production is heavily influenced in the same way that Biedrins' is in Golden State. They are both really the only bigs in their respective starting 5's who stay close to the bucket, are willing to crash the boards hard and hustle for them and both teams play at a manic pace and shoot the ball a ton, meaning there are an exceptional amount of rebounds and garbage points available to them. I don't knock them for that, but if we want to judge players via only stats both those guys need an * beside their names imo.

Post #174 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:10 pm

You are right. The reality is that on a majority of teams in the NBA he is a 8/8 - 10/10 type of guy...

but that's not reality because he's never played for the majority of NBA teams. Your opinion is that on the majority of teams he's an 8/8 10/10 sort of guy and no one can argue that because it may be true, but we don't know because in reality he's never played for any of those teams.

Post #175 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:11 pm

Yeah I think citizen was more arguing the definition of 'reality' rather than disagreeing with you as such.

That is basically it. I am picky like that.

apdamico · Post #176 » by **apdamico** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:11 pm

LUKE23 wrote:I still think it is completely about the money for Sessions, considering this is his first big contract. He'll sign whatever offer pays him the most, and I don't blame him at all for that.

I don't think anyone would blame him for that! His dream was to reach the NBA, now that he's done that it has to be about the contract. Actually, if he didn't think that way, he'd disappoint me concerning his mental capability of grasping the fact that this is a business and he's earned a raise.

Newz · Post #177 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:12 pm

paul wrote:Yeah I think citizen was more arguing the definition of 'reality' rather than disagreeing with you as such.

That is fine.

In reality he averaged 8/8 - 12/10 or whatever type of numbers before the Knicks completely changed their system to the uptempo game that the Suns used to run.

The reality is that he is that 8/8-10/10 type of guy and not the 16/12 guy that this system turned him into this season.

Bernman · Post #178 » by **Bernman** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:13 pm

Citizen.Eras3d wrote:
David Lee isn't a 15/12 guy in reality, he is a 8/8, 9/9, 10/10 type of guy.

In reality he is whatever statistic he is averaging lol same as any other player. How can you say he's not that in reality? If he averaged 16/10 he is a 16/10 guy because that is what he averaged in reality. You could say "on another team he might be a 8/8 guy" etc but to say in reality...

It's called a projection, and you can make it on several factors like what he totaled in previous years, the fact that he's playing center which he wouldn't get away with in a halfcourt system (you are who you can guard), the system he enjoys, lack of rebounders to compete for a finite # of boards, etc. All those factors exaggerate his raw production.

And if his counterpart, on the same night, tallied 16/11, as long as those averages weren't gained inefficiently, next to inept rebounders on his team; that would make him an average, replacement level player.

You call PER differential a lazy stat, but you're putting more stock in statistics that don't account for pace, efficiency, and defense. That's an ultra conservative perspective.

Newz · Post #179 » by **Newz** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:14 pm

Citizen.Eras3d wrote:
You are right. The reality is that on a majority of teams in the NBA he is a 8/8 - 10/10 type of guy...

but that's not reality because he's never played for the majority of NBA teams. Your opinion is that on the majority of teams he's an 8/8 10/10 sort of guy and no one can argue that because it may be true, but we don't know because in reality he's never played for any of those teams.

The Knicks played a similar style and system to majority of the teams in the NBA before they made a coaching change.

But I guess you are right, reality is what it is. David Lee is a 16/12 guy on 55% shooting. So in reality he is worth a near max contract because he is one of the only bigs in the NBA to put up numbers that impressive.

Post #180 » by **blkout** » Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:14 pm

The reality is that he is that 8/8-10/10 type of guy and not the 16/12 guy that this system turned him into this season.

Somewhere in the World there is a brick wall with a small dictionary bashing it's head repeatedly against it.

Anyways, Lee wont come here, the Bucks will match and no one will be any wiser. But it's fun talking about it nevertheless.