2013-14 Player of the Year Discussion Thread

[JLei]

Westbrook top 5 for one series after a mediocre RS by his standards? Talk about getting caught up in the moment, I mean he didn't exactly tear up the Grizzlies(he was out played by Michael Conley...). If we're going to just award guys based on being on fire for having one series, why not give Lamarcus Alridge top 5 status too?

Westbrook is feasting on a great match up, I don't see how that makes him a top 5 player in the NBA.

Mediocre RS?

Incomplete RS? Yes
Needing some games to get back in rhythm after he was out multiple times? Yes

Mediocre? Hell no

22 points 7 assist on 4 turnovers is not even top ten material and was a downgrade from last year in which he wasn't top 5 either, Westbrook arguably wasn't even a top 15 player during the RS when he was on the floor, then you have to factor in he missed nearly half the regular season. Relative to the competition we're talking about (the best players in the NBA), he didn't have a great RS at all.

Anyone who is saying Westbrook is a top 5 player is going off the sports problem of "you're only as good as your last game". Two weeks ago, everyone was giving the Thunder lip for getting their asses whooped by the Thunder because their big two underperformed (not to mention they only passed round one because of a gift from the NBA via suspending Randolph).


I don't get it. Yes, he is destroying the Clippers, Chris Paul and their one way shooting guards can't guard him, but I don't get how that means Westbrook is a top 5 player. Blake Griffin isn't the talk of the town this series, but he's had a great post season on top of a great regular season. Lamarcus Alridge destroyed the Rockets. Tony Parker has had phenomenal games which has lead to blow outs in the second round. Westbrook is better than Howard, Love, Curry? Take out the Clipper series (not that it isn't important, but for comparisons sake) and where's the argument for it even being close?

I just don't see it. Westbrook didn't have a great season by his standards, much less in a season where so many guys performed at such a high level.

Per minute production in the regular season was as good as ever. 26-7-8 per 36 with a 24.7 PER (highest of his career). Now that he is continuing this production in the playoffs with no minutes/ back to back restriction. I can safely assume he is this player going forward.

I don't see why you can't call him a top 5 player in the league. Maybe for the Player of the Year purposes since it encompasses the whole season but in terms of goodness level he's a top 5 player in my book.

[HeartBreakKid]

Westbrook top 5 for one series after a mediocre RS by his standards? Talk about getting caught up in the moment, I mean he didn't exactly tear up the Grizzlies(he was out played by Michael Conley...). If we're going to just award guys based on being on fire for having one series, why not give Lamarcus Alridge top 5 status too?

Westbrook is feasting on a great match up, I don't see how that makes him a top 5 player in the NBA.

When he played it was the most effective RS of his career. Triple doubles or near triple doubles galore, played well defensively and his shooting was great after he came back from injury.

He did tear up the Grizzlies. Come on. Efficiency was dragged down by a couple of poor games but 26/10/8 is beastly whichever way you look at it. After game 4 there was no looking back, he's been on an AT level tear since then.

#letrussberuss

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

That's revisionist history on something that happened less than a month ago.

Westbrook was horrible the first four games, wasn't even better than Durant, who got a lot of flack for that series too.

I think it was Game 5 or game 6, the one where he got the first triple double, was an extremely bloated triple, not all that impactful. He had like one truly great game that series, I guess if you want to count game 7 too that is two, I tend to forget Game 7 happened for Memphis vs OKC because of how meaningless that victory was for OKC.

Westbrook made his presence felt these playoffs because he is everywhere, but that doesn't mean he's playing better than nearly everyone in the league. His aggression and tenacity for boards are nice, but he couldn't score very well at all, and the offense the Thunder were running was just putrid (not Westbrook's fault, but he does take some blame for it). Russell Westbrook wasn't the best player in the Memphis vs OKC series.

I am really really really against anyone that has Westbrook in their top 5 for the year. We're acting like what he's doing against the Clippers is what he did all year, he didn't even do this against the Grizzlies. I mean maybe if he moves on to other rounds and has the same exact performances against the other teams, but that seems pretty unlikely to me.

[mysticbb]

Nothing too insightful. On-topic, I need to strongly reconsider putting WB in my top 5.

Be careful with such a decision. Even though Westbrook right now is playing at a level which would warrant the 5th spot, he did not do that in average for the season. We might as well have a sample size issue here, where Westbrook simply is playing better than we realistically can expect in future games. So, and if we assume that Westbrook would be surrounded with an average cast, the missed time would have caused a team with Westbrook as its best player to barely miss the playoffs in an average season. It is quite different than for Paul, who with an average cast would have still be on a playoff team despite the missed games.

So, with the recent games included, I have LaMarcus Aldridge dropping out of my Top5, even going behind Nowitzki now. Curry is taking his place in the Top5. Durant lost further value and is now only 0.2 points per game ahead of Love, while Paul is now up by 0.2 points per game. Well, James is still so far ahead, that there is realistically very little chance that he will lose his top spot.

1. James
2. Paul
3. Durant
4. Love
5. Curry

HM: Nowitzki, Aldridge, Harden

Fun fact: If I ignore the missed games by Westbrook (which means the his value does not get reduced by 58/71, 71 would be the number for "above 75% of the available games"), he would end up being 11th in the list, still behind those other mentioned 8 players as well as behind Iguodala and Griffin. At this point it is rather unlikely that, even if Westbrook can keep his average level for the playoffs while the Thunder go on and play the maximum of games (16, 2 more against the Clippers and then possible 14 in a WCF and Finals series), that he will enter the Top8. To give an impression: His playing level in the playoffs caused him to raise from 3.34 per 100 poss to 3.85 per 100 poss this season. His level in the playoffs is therefore about +5.4 per 100 poss, which is quite impressive, but it would have still be just the 5th place, if he had that level for the entire season.

[ceiling raiser]

Nothing too insightful. On-topic, I need to strongly reconsider putting WB in my top 5.

Be careful with such a decision. Even though Westbrook right now is playing at a level which would warrant the 5th spot, he did not do that in average for the season. We might as well have a sample size issue here, where Westbrook simply is playing better than we realistically can expect in future games. So, and if we assume that Westbrook would be surrounded with an average cast, the missed time would have caused a team with Westbrook as its best player to barely miss the playoffs in an average season. It is quite different than for Paul, who with an average cast would have still be on a playoff team despite the missed games.

So, with the recent games included, I have LaMarcus Aldridge dropping out of my Top5, even going behind Nowitzki now. Curry is taking his place in the Top5. Durant lost further value and is now only 0.2 points per game ahead of Love, while Paul is now up by 0.2 points per game. Well, James is still so far ahead, that there is realistically very little chance that he will lose his top spot.

1. James
2. Paul
3. Durant
4. Love
5. Curry

HM: Nowitzki, Aldridge, Harden

Fun fact: If I ignore the missed games by Westbrook (which means the his value does not get reduced by 58/71, 71 would be the number for "above 75% of the available games"), he would end up being 11th in the list, still behind those other mentioned 8 players as well as behind Iguodala and Griffin. At this point it is rather unlikely that, even if Westbrook can keep his average level for the playoffs while the Thunder go on and play the maximum of games (16, 2 more against the Clippers and then possible 14 in a WCF and Finals series), that he will enter the Top8. To give an impression: His playing level in the playoffs caused him to raise from 3.34 per 100 poss to 3.85 per 100 poss this season. His level in the playoffs is therefore about +5.4 per 100 poss, which is quite impressive, but it would have still be just the 5th place, if he had that level for the entire season.

Thanks for the response. I'm probably overreacting.

Speaking of Iguodala, what do you think the reasonable range for him is? What about Dwight or Gasol?

[RebelWithACause]

Nothing too insightful. On-topic, I need to strongly reconsider putting WB in my top 5.

Be careful with such a decision. Even though Westbrook right now is playing at a level which would warrant the 5th spot, he did not do that in average for the season. We might as well have a sample size issue here, where Westbrook simply is playing better than we realistically can expect in future games. So, and if we assume that Westbrook would be surrounded with an average cast, the missed time would have caused a team with Westbrook as its best player to barely miss the playoffs in an average season. It is quite different than for Paul, who with an average cast would have still be on a playoff team despite the missed games.

So, with the recent games included, I have LaMarcus Aldridge dropping out of my Top5, even going behind Nowitzki now. Curry is taking his place in the Top5. Durant lost further value and is now only 0.2 points per game ahead of Love, while Paul is now up by 0.2 points per game. Well, James is still so far ahead, that there is realistically very little chance that he will lose his top spot.

1. James
2. Paul
3. Durant
4. Love
5. Curry

HM: Nowitzki, Aldridge, Harden

Fun fact: If I ignore the missed games by Westbrook (which means the his value does not get reduced by 58/71, 71 would be the number for "above 75% of the available games"), he would end up being 11th in the list, still behind those other mentioned 8 players as well as behind Iguodala and Griffin. At this point it is rather unlikely that, even if Westbrook can keep his average level for the playoffs while the Thunder go on and play the maximum of games (16, 2 more against the Clippers and then possible 14 in a WCF and Finals series), that he will enter the Top8. To give an impression: His playing level in the playoffs caused him to raise from 3.34 per 100 poss to 3.85 per 100 poss this season. His level in the playoffs is therefore about +5.4 per 100 poss, which is quite impressive, but it would have still be just the 5th place, if he had that level for the entire season.

Could you please post your entire Top15, very interested in it?!

[sp6r=underrated]

Kerr makes me sick the way he was defending the refs. Paul was fouled on that strip as much as Westbrook was. Games like this are why home court advantage is so important. I'm livid. That was B.S.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Do you mean the strip on the last play? Did the help defender hit the ball or his arm? I can't see too good.

It was Jackson and it was a decent strip. I think sp6r's point stands though, that was about as much contact as Westbrook got on that 3PA. It's that call and the no-call on the intentional by Paul on Ibaka that I might take issue with.

Yup, that was my point. If you're going to call a touch foul on one end which bailed out an awful, awful shot you can't swallow your whistle on the other end. That is completely unfair.

I also take exemption with the ejection on the moving screen as that level of contact was allowed on the OKC end during the last 3 minutes. Overall the borderline calls went to OKC by a significant margin over that game.

I am by no means suggesting the NBA is rigged or that overall officiating is horrible. I am alleging that the NBA does have a problem with referees unintentionally favoring the home team and that home team bias does end up as a deciding factor in many games.

[SideshowBob]

I have him as a +4.0 on offense and +0.5 on defense.

What are your numbers for CP3 and Curry? (Those 3 have been my Top3 PGs since last year basically)

Paul +5.5-6.0

Curry +4.5

Westbrook +4.0

[mysticbb]

Speaking of Iguodala, what do you think the reasonable range for him is? What about Dwight or Gasol?

Could you please post your entire Top15, very interested in it?!

So, in essence an answer to both:

Per 100 poss (in order):

LeBron James
Chris Paul
Kevin Durant
Kevin Love
Andre Iguodala
Dirk Nowitzki
Stephen Curry
Blake Griffin
Manu Ginobili
LaMarcus Aldridge
James Harden
Mike Conley
Amir Johnson
Russell Westbrook
Nick Collison

Taking playing time into account (essentially the Player of the Year vote):

LeBron James
Chris Paul
Kevin Durant
Kevin Love
Stephen Curry
Dirk Nowitzki
LaMarcus Aldridge
James Harden
Andre Iguodala
Blake Griffin
Russell Westbrook
Mike Conley
Paul George
Dwight Howard
Manu Ginobili


Sorry, not much time at my hands now, so just copy&paste of the names. Hope, that answers the question, at least slightly.

[ElGee]

Kerr makes me sick the way he was defending the refs. Paul was fouled on that strip as much as Westbrook was. Games like this are why home court advantage is so important. I'm livid. That was B.S.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using RealGM Forums mobile app

Do you mean the strip on the last play? Did the help defender hit the ball or his arm? I can't see too good.

It was Jackson and it was a decent strip. I think sp6r's point stands though, that was about as much contact as Westbrook got on that 3PA. It's that call and the no-call on the intentional by Paul on Ibaka that I might take issue with. That Jackson call, on the other hand, was iffy, there's some room for interpretation there. But that's the one that everyone's going to attack.

Was able to see some clear replays here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dENg8C9d5WQ

Takeaway: Jackson's reach in was a hack. Paul basically snakebite RW on the 3 (a great call IMO). RW's strip of Paul before was clean (another great call). And we all know what happened on the Barnes call.

[SideshowBob]

Was able to see some clear replays here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dENg8C9d5WQ

Takeaway: Jackson's reach in was a hack. Paul basically snakebite RW on the 3 (a great call IMO). RW's strip of Paul before was clean (another great call). And we all know what happened on the Barnes call.

Mhmm, caught that this morning. That call on Paul was really close so I trust that the sideline ref had clear site there. Westbrook's strip on Paul was just a great play and poor decision-making and execution by Paul, whatever he was trying to do there (pass or 3PA) was just completely unnecessary.

Only thing I'd take a little issue with now is the non-call on Paul's intentional foul on Ibaka, but looking at it again, it wasn't a very concerted effort so I can see that as a miss, it was a pretty haphazard grab.

[bondom34]

Posted this on the gen board, but maybe someone here saw it too. Wasn't it a really similar play at the end of Miami's game w/ Pierce, and they made the same call? Looked it to me, but wasn't sure.

[PaulieWal]

Posted this on the gen board, but maybe someone here saw it too. Wasn't it a really similar play at the end of Miami's game w/ Pierce, and they made the same call? Looked it to me, but wasn't sure.

Yeah, this is what I posted in the LeBron thread:

I am a little confused by the precedent the NBA is setting these last two days. Last night Barnes fouls Reggie Jackson and it should have been Clips ball but they give it to OKC. Today LeBron fouls PP and it should have been Miami ball but they give it back to Brooklyn. Either change the review where they can review the foul calls or stop this precedent of "make-up" calls on a review. That's pretty stupid honestly.

Of course, this time around people were mad that the foul was not called and didn't care that the Nets got the ball back because a lot of people want to see the Heat lose .

[therealbig3]

My proposed rule changes in terms of reviewing out of bounds plays:

-Keep it to within the last 2 minutes...I like that rule

-If the refs determine that the player who the ball went out of bounds on was fouled and the ball went out ONLY as a result of that foul, then the refs can determine that the ball stays with that player's team, and the reason would officially be "missed foul call"...no FTs or anything, they just retain possession, and the refs are basically saying "mea culpa" for the missed call...I think this is fair

-Again, only if the ball went out of bounds AS A RESULT of the foul...if the player gets hacked earlier in the possession, and that doesn't get called, and the player still maintains control of the ball and then ultimately loses the ball out of bounds on his own...that can't be overturned as a result of the missed foul, because that's not what caused the ball to go out of bounds...that's just a missed call you have to live with

-2/3 refs have to agree that there was a foul, and that the foul caused the ball to go out of bounds


That sounds very reasonable to me, and it should significantly reduce the amount of controversy that recent plays have stirred up.

[MisterHibachi]

-Again, only if the ball went out of bounds AS A RESULT of the foul...if the player gets hacked earlier in the possession, and that doesn't get called, and the player still maintains control of the ball and then ultimately loses the ball out of bounds on his own...that can't be overturned as a result of the missed foul, because that's not what caused the ball to go out of bounds...that's just a missed call you have to live with

This is very open to interpretation. There can be many fouls on last plays, its not always clear cut whether this one foul caused him to lose to ball or that other foul or that other one.

-2/3 refs have to agree that there was a foul, and that the foul caused the ball to go out of bounds

How would anyone know this was enforced? We never know what individual refs think about calls, only what the crew as a whole decides. I seriously doubt fans will be privy to voting results in an officiating crew.

[PaulieWal]

snip...

I don't have a problem with changing the review rule for possession to account better for fouls. The problem is right now the rule doesn't account for that and the refs are supposed to give the ball to the right team whether or not they missed a foul call. Furthermore, until now they haven't done "make-up" calls on these video reviews. To start in the middle of the playoffs in two key games is quite strange and begs for more transparency. I am of the view that some people will never stop believing that the NBA is rigged because of its history or simply because they are sore losers but incidents like these don't help the NBA.

[therealbig3]

This is very open to interpretation. There can be many fouls on last plays, its not always clear cut whether this one foul caused him to lose to ball or that other foul or that other one.

Of course it's open to interpretation, that's why I proposed there has to be some sort of general consensus among the refs in order to change a call. There are a lot of calls that are open to interpretation, such as possession on a clear path foul and flagrant fouls. Refs are already using the review system to help make subjective calls, I think to expand it in terms of further clarifying missed fouls and out of bounds plays is necessary at this point. A player that gets fouled and doesn't get the call, and then as a result loses the ball out of bounds is being doubly punished by the review system (or at least, should be). Not only did they not get the foul, but they're forced to give up possession following the replay.

Also, the intention of my rule would be if any foul caused the ball to go out of bounds. So if a player gets fouled 3-4 times on a drive, all of them uncalled, for example...if any of them caused the ball to go out of bounds, then the refs can decide to keep the ball with that player's team. I just wouldn't want the refs to give the ball to the player's team if the player got fouled EARLY in the possession, no call, and then proceeded to dribble the ball off his foot and out of bounds a few seconds later when he tries to cross someone up. The foul was just missed...it didn't affect the ball going out of bounds though, so the ref shouldn't be able to overturn the out of bounds call based on an uncalled foul that had nothing to do with it.

In terms of knowing how the refs voted...the league would know. The refs use the voting among themselves to decide how to proceed with the call after reviewing the play. I'm pretty sure that refs have to report on their decision-making process to the league on reviewed plays already, so part of that report would be how the refs voted on reviewed plays.

[mysticbb]

Posted this on the gen board, but maybe someone here saw it too. Wasn't it a really similar play at the end of Miami's game w/ Pierce, and they made the same call? Looked it to me, but wasn't sure.

It may look similar, but it wasn't. James is hitting the ball (hand is part of the ball here) and gives the ball the direction to go out of bounds. Pretty clear decision that James essentially hit the ball out of bounds. When we look at what happens with Barnes and Jackson, and we see that Barnes hits the ball (here again, hand is part of the ball, Barnes does not hit the wrist, thus no foul!), but he does not give the ball the direction to go out of bounds. That direction is given to the ball by Jackson when Barnes has his hands nowhere near the ball. Thus, the ball should have been given to the Clippers. That the review is supposed to be "inconclusive" is a joke, because just the change of direction of the ball implies a contact between the ball and Jackson after Barnes had hit the ball. How should the ball change direction, if no contact occured? Just look at the movement of Barnes' arm and hand and then look closely in which direction that puts the ball. It goes forward towards the right hand of Jackson, then Jackson's right hand causes the ball going backwards towards out of bounds. So, that this is not really observable in real-time, is clear and I can understand the refs to review the situation, but in the replay the change of direction of the ball is visible, proclaiming that this would have been "inconclusive" is just bad.

On the other hand, Paul then fouls Westbrook on that 3pt attempt, thus those 3 FT were correct, just that this situation should not have been there in the first place. Then the refs are missing the foul on Paul by Jackson, which caused the turnover. That should have been 2 Ft for Paul (OKC was in the penalty due to the foul on Griffin with 1:10 left, last two minutes of the game, team is in the penalty after 1 foul, if the team is not in the penalty already before). That's essentially part of "bad luck" for the Clippers ...

The Barnes/Jackson situation also shows a weakness in the NBA ruleset. The refs need to be unsure about which team gets the ball in order to have the ability to review. If no decision is made on the floor, an inconclusive review would have meant a jump ball at the middle. Now, because one ref made a decision without having a good view on that, the ball goes back to the Thunder. If the refs only can review, if unsure about the right call there, the decision on the floor should be overruled per se, and the decision should made based on the review anyway. When you can't even decide in slow motion, which team should get the ball, it makes no sense to stick with the decision made when a ref has even less view on the situation.

[mysticbb]

That sounds very reasonable to me, and it should significantly reduce the amount of controversy that recent plays have stirred up.

That wouldn't change much about that at all. Neither James nor Barnes committed a foul, because when the hand is in contact with the ball, it becomes part of the ball. Thus, James and Barnes were allowed to hit the hand of Pierce/Jackson in that situation. They wouldn't have been allowed to hit the wrist or arm, but the hand in those situation is considered part of the ball.
For the James/Pierce situation, they made the right call, because James is slapping the ball towards out of bounds, which caused the ball go out of bounds. For the Barnes/Jackson situation that is not the case, because Barnes hits the ball away from the out of bounds, while Jackson's right hand then gives the ball the direction towards out of bounds without Barnes being close to the ball, which caused the ball to go indeed out of bounds. Saying, that the review was "inconclusive" was the only way under the current ruleset of the NBA how the Thunder could have maintained possession of the ball. The controversy about that situation is based on the fact, that when "inconclusive" in the review, the refs have to go with the call on the floor. Which makes little sense given the fact, that only when the refs are unsure which team should get the ball, they can review the situation. So, they are either unsure about that, in which case the current rule should apply which says that it becomes a jump ball at the middle or they are sure about it, in which case they do not review the situation anyway. Having a "inconclusive" review and then maintaining the previous made call on the floor, makes very little sense.

[SideshowBob]

Didn't want to make another new BBR thread so I figured I'd just post here.

They've been making a lot of useful small additions lately.

http://www.sports-reference.com/blog/2014/05/new-team-and-opponent-statistics-tables/

The franchise and team season pages have seen a major overhaul. They've added stuff that we've come to use here, like relative offense/defense, and made it easily sortable, yearly ranks for every stat for every team, and other things of that nature.

[Dr Positivity]

1. Lebron James
2. Kevin Durant
3. Paul George
4. Blake Griffin
5. Dwight Howard

I'm fine with RWB consideration but I don't think he should be in the top 4. He's putting up eye popping stats but I'm not sure he's even been more valuable in the PS than guys like George and Griffin who space the floor instead of dominating the ball and are a smoother fit in an offensive system instead of becoming it, while also putting up very good numbers. PG's the worst of him, Blake and RWB, but also in the most difficult situation coverage wise.

For #5 it's between Howard, RWB, Curry, Harden, Aldridge, Paul for me. Howard had more impressive 1st round than Curry or Harden so I'll go his way over them. CP is difficult because I still he's the 3rd best player in the league. But looking at his missed games and less than dominant overall playoff stats and it's hard to make a case