Time to 'pull the plug' or Dr Jack, where are you?

[MrMiyagi]

People talking about the Nash/Marion/Amare Suns as being infinitely better than this squad... Y'all realize our bench was paper thin, right? The 04/05 had LB and Steven Hunter as the only bench players to play in more than half our games. 05/06 had LB, James Jones and Eddie House, although Tim Thomas gave us a late season boost. 06/07 had LB, Kurt Thomas and James Jones. Then 07/08 we got Shaq.

Our best bench player was LB, a tunnel-vision scorer. As much as I loved LB, was he really any better than IT is?

That was always the downfall of those teams in my book. Yeah, they were well-oiled machines, but we had no damn spare parts. If any of our guys on this current squad went down, would we really be in that big of trouble? Not really. That's such an underrated strength of our squad, it's ridiculous.

As for Goran's iso numbers, I got to digging and bigger statheads than me, correct me if I'm wrong, but his Usage % is down from last season and he went from being what was basically a tie for 1st with Bledsoe to being 5th behind Green, IT, Bled and Kieff in that order (using the guys with regular playing time). So it looks like he went from option 1a to option 5. I'd bet that his poor iso numbers comes from trying to do too much when he has the ball. Also his Assist % has plummeted from last season, going from 28% to 19%

So, maybe there is a point to this hero ball talk. (There Frank, some numbers that support you)

[Revived]

Its interesting that when the Suns signed the Isaiah Thomas, they actually weren't even planning on playing the 3 PGs a lot. Its something they wanted in small doses originally.

Now it seems like the go to lineup for them to close games with.

[bigfoot]

Its interesting that when the Suns signed the Isaiah Thomas, they actually weren't even planning on playing the 3 PGs a lot. Its something they wanted in small doses originally.

Now it seems like the go to lineup for them to close games with.

Yeah but they also thought Plumlee was good. He regressed. Couldn't keep him on the court. Now we have Wright. Expect much fewer minutes of 3 PGs on the floor (or I guess we will see over the next few weeks).

[RunDogGun]

Its interesting that when the Suns signed the Isaiah Thomas, they actually weren't even planning on playing the 3 PGs a lot. Its something they wanted in small doses originally.

Now it seems like the go to lineup for them to close games with.

Yeah but they also thought Plumlee was good. He regressed. Couldn't keep him on the court. Now we have Wright. Expect much fewer minutes of 3 PGs on the floor (or I guess we will see over the next few weeks).

I thought Jeff said that at least two of the three would be on the floor at all times. Jeff said in a few interviews that he would play five point guards if they were playing well together. Of course he was joking a bit, but I think they knew we had three guys who could put up 20+ points on any given night.

As far as comparing Goran's last year usage to this year, one can only look at the usage when Bledsoe was playing, not the full season.

[Wannabe MEP]

Its interesting that when the Suns signed the Isaiah Thomas, they actually weren't even planning on playing the 3 PGs a lot. Its something they wanted in small doses originally.

Now it seems like the go to lineup for them to close games with.

136 minutes total, which works out to about 3 minutes per game. I'd say that qualifies as "small doses."

[Wannabe MEP]

So let me try to grasp wtf you are actually showing. Is this correct....?

Example... the most effective trio w/Thomas is Bledsoe / Dragic / Thomas .... the 'monster '
21 games / 126 minutes / ortg 122.5 / drtg 102.4/ netrtg 20.1

Is this saying that combo has/would out score its opponents by 20 pts per game ??? If it played the entire game of course.

Frank, to answer your question: The point of ortg, drtg, and netrtg is just to talk about points per possession. The idea is that raw points can get skewed in a couple different ways:

• Points per game (or per a certain number of minutes) is greatly impacted by pace. So for example, the Suns SSOL teams would win games 130 to 120, and people would say, "They gave up 120 points, so they must play really bad defense." But the defense was actually better than it looked, because they were playing at such a fast pace that there were a lot more possessions for the other team to try to score. (E.g., in 2004-05, the Suns were last in defensive points per game, but 15th in drtg/defensive points-per-possession.)
• Offensive/defensive specialists sometimes get subbed to maximize their specialty. So Tony Allen might play 100 more defensive than offensive possessions over the course of a season, resulting in, say, 95 extra points scored against the team while he was on the court. But that's not an accurate representation of how good the defense was while he was on the court. Hence points-per-possession while he was on offense, and points-per-possession while he was on defense.

So that's why we try to use stats based on points-per-possession (ppp), rather than per game, per 36 minutes, etc.

NBA teams tend to score about 1 point per possession, but the difference between 1.056 ppp and 1.028 ppp is rather significant (that's Portland's current ppp vs Lakers current ppp). And most humans' eyes glaze over when you're looking at the 2nd and 3rd decimal.

So we just move the decimal and talk about 105.6 ORtg and 102.8 ORtg, which is actually points-per-100-possessions. That number reads like a per game number, even though it technically has nothing to do with a game.

Finally, we subtract DRtg from ORtg to get NetRtg, and we're done.

For example, the IT-Bled-Dragic-Markieff-Len lineup is scoring 125.9 points-per-100-possessions and giving up 83.8 points-per-100-possessions, for a NetRtg of +42.1.

[JTrain]

I wish we had a stricter system to use when IT is playing point. Some players benefit from a more free flowing system. I don't think he's one of them. He has some skills that could make him a good point guard if we could constrain him.

[kennydorglas]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/VantageSports/status/556250277796663298[/tweet]

[Kerrsed]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/VantageSports/status/556250277796663298[/tweet]

I dont understand how there can be a square at the top of a pyramid. Its physically impossible.

[Revived]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/VantageSports/status/556250277796663298[/tweet]

Good read. OKC's ranking on there obviously has a little something to do with KD/Westbrook being out.

Other than that, we're the only good team out of the last tier.

[Frank Lee]

So let me try to grasp wtf you are actually showing. Is this correct....?

Example... the most effective trio w/Thomas is Bledsoe / Dragic / Thomas .... the 'monster '
21 games / 126 minutes / ortg 122.5 / drtg 102.4/ netrtg 20.1

Is this saying that combo has/would out score its opponents by 20 pts per game ??? If it played the entire game of course.

Frank, to answer your question: The point of ortg, drtg, and netrtg is just to talk about points per possession. The idea is that raw points can get skewed in a couple different ways:

• Points per game (or per a certain number of minutes) is greatly impacted by pace. So for example, the Suns SSOL teams would win games 130 to 120, and people would say, "They gave up 120 points, so they must play really bad defense." But the defense was actually better than it looked, because they were playing at such a fast pace that there were a lot more possessions for the other team to try to score. (E.g., in 2004-05, the Suns were last in defensive points per game, but 15th in drtg/defensive points-per-possession.)
• Offensive/defensive specialists sometimes get subbed to maximize their specialty. So Tony Allen might play 100 more defensive than offensive possessions over the course of a season, resulting in, say, 95 extra points scored against the team while he was on the court. But that's not an accurate representation of how good the defense was while he was on the court. Hence points-per-possession while he was on offense, and points-per-possession while he was on defense.

So that's why we try to use stats based on points-per-possession (ppp), rather than per game, per 36 minutes, etc.

NBA teams tend to score about 1 point per possession, but the difference between 1.056 ppp and 1.028 ppp is rather significant (that's Portland's current ppp vs Lakers current ppp). And most humans' eyes glaze over when you're looking at the 2nd and 3rd decimal.

So we just move the decimal and talk about 105.6 ORtg and 102.8 ORtg, which is actually points-per-100-possessions. That number reads like a per game number, even though it technically has nothing to do with a game.

Finally, we subtract DRtg from ORtg to get NetRtg, and we're done.

For example, the IT-Bled-Dragic-Markieff-Len lineup is scoring 125.9 points-per-100-possessions and giving up 83.8 points-per-100-possessions, for a NetRtg of +42.1.

Thanks....
Points per possession??? ok... is an offensive rebound from the opposing team consider a new possession? If so, then the inability to secure the defensive board effects the 'true' statistic of how 'effective' a team is. Furthermore, this stat, I will assume, is not taking out the high and low ends of the so far small sample. Still good info, and its is noted that our GM does apply these types of stats.

Me...I'm still going to lean to the good ole eye ball test... BTW, having Len or Wright on the floor negates the TinyBall label in my book. I really don't mind the 3Gs if they match up well.... its the rebounding/interior D that is atrocious w/o an effective center.

[Wannabe MEP]

Points per possession??? ok... is an offensive rebound from the opposing team consider a new possession?

Nope.

Furthermore, this stat, I will assume, is not taking out the high and low ends of the so far small sample.

It just takes all the data there is.

Me...I'm still going to lean to the good ole eye ball test...

This isn't some kind of super-complicated, nebulous formula like, say, PER. It's basically just counting. Ignoring it is like saying, "Well, I know the scoreboard says we lost, but I'm going with the eye test: it looked like we won."

Now, these numbers don't say anything about why something is working or not working. The why is where the eye test comes in.

BTW, having Len or Wright on the floor negates the TinyBall label in my book. I really don't mind the 3Gs if they match up well.... its the rebounding/interior D that is atrocious w/o an effective center.

DefRtg with Markieff at the 4: 100.4
DefRtg with Markieff at the 5: 102.8

Not that big of a difference.

OffRtg with Markieff at the 4: 106.3
OffRtg with Markieff at the 5: 121.3

HUGE difference.

[Frank Lee]

numbers numbers numbers.....throw out non play off teams and double the emphasis vrs the west's top 8-9. Thats the eye ball. If we can't beat memphis, san ant, GState, Houst, OKC etc with tiny ball, then its needs to be ****canned.
My sample size was based on just a couple of important games against contenders. Watch your stats over the next ten games. Isolate them to that sample size. If McDo is following it too, we will see his and hornys response.

[MrMiyagi]

numbers numbers numbers.....throw out non play off teams and double the emphasis vrs the west's top 8-9. Thats the eye ball. If we can't beat memphis, san ant, GState, Houst, OKC etc with tiny ball, then its needs to be ****canned.
My sample size was based on just a couple of important games against contenders. Watch your stats over the next ten games. Isolate them to that sample size. If McDo is following it too, we will see his and hornys response.

And your "eye test" makes for right now only. We're the 4th youngest team in the NBA right now. Making it to the dance is a damn fine achievement.

We don't need to be shooting off prematurely now, Frank.

[Frank Lee]

????

We are not some punk ass team. There is enough experience here to expect competitive basketball.

We can't beat the top 7-8 teams, then something has to change. Doubt McDo will bank his future on Archie learning to shoot. Doubt a 'Wait till next year' poster is up in Sarver's office.

All I want is the end of TinyBall and to reign in the ChuckWagon. You want to keep it and beat the lesser teams, while losing to the good ones ??? We will see, for the past couple games it appears to me that Hornecek has renewed confidence in our post play...ie, finishing with a true center.

Again... TinyBall = pf playing C, sf/sg playing PF, + 3 squirts

[MrMiyagi]

????

We are not some punk ass team. There is enough experience here to expect competitive basketball.

We can't beat the top 7-8 teams, then something has to change. Doubt McDo will bank his future on Archie learning to shoot. Doubt a 'Wait till next year' poster is up in Sarver's office.

All I want is the end of TinyBall and to reign in the ChuckWagon. You want to keep it and beat the lesser teams, while losing to the good ones ??? We will see, for the past couple games it appears to me that Hornecek has renewed confidence in our post play...ie, finishing with a true center.

Again... TinyBall = pf playing C, sf/sg playing PF, + 3 squirts

I'm confused then. You're arguing against something that seems to be fading out anyways?

Isn't Brandon Wright our move against your definition of TinyBall? Isn't Starting Alex Len over Plumlee? So what exactly are you complaining about?

[Wannabe MEP]

All I want is the end of TinyBall and to reign in the ChuckWagon. You want to keep it and beat the lesser teams, while losing to the good ones ??? We will see, for the past couple games it appears to me that Hornecek has renewed confidence in our post play...ie, finishing with a true center.

Again... TinyBall = pf playing C, sf/sg playing PF, + 3 squirts

Frank, I have a different impression of where the problem lies. We have three main ways we've been playing:

1) Starters
2) Bench+ -- 3-4 guys off the bench + 1-2 starters
3) Small(-sh)-ball -- either 3 PGs or Markieff at the five (occasionally both)

I think #1 and #3 have been solid. We're not doing #3 a ton anyway, but I think it's great as an occasional curve-ball. It's been absolutely perfect in some situations.

#2 can get really ugly. I'm totally fine with each of IT, Green, and Marcus in the right context...but altogether?? All three are negative defenders that are too heavy on the iso.

In my opinion, the biggest problem is Marcus. He shows up at #417 of 456 by defensive RPM: not what you want from an SF/PF.

[kennydorglas]

All I want is the end of TinyBall and to reign in the ChuckWagon. You want to keep it and beat the lesser teams, while losing to the good ones ??? We will see, for the past couple games it appears to me that Hornecek has renewed confidence in our post play...ie, finishing with a true center.

Again... TinyBall = pf playing C, sf/sg playing PF, + 3 squirts

Frank, I have a different impression of where the problem lies. We have three main ways we've been playing:

1) Starters
2) Bench+ -- 3-4 guys off the bench + 1-2 starters
3) Small(-sh)-ball -- either 3 PGs or Markieff at the five (occasionally both)

I think #1 and #3 have been solid. We're not doing #3 a ton anyway, but I think it's great as an occasional curve-ball. It's been absolutely perfect in some situations.

#2 can get really ugly. I'm totally fine with each of IT, Green, and Marcus in the right context...but altogether?? All three are negative defenders that are too heavy on the iso.

In my opinion, the biggest problem is Marcus. He shows up at #417 of 456 by defensive RPM: not what you want from an SF/PF.

Green is even worse than Mook. #454 of 456

[thamadkant]

People talking about the Nash/Marion/Amare Suns as being infinitely better than this squad... Y'all realize our bench was paper thin, right? The 04/05 had LB and Steven Hunter as the only bench players to play in more than half our games. 05/06 had LB, James Jones and Eddie House, although Tim Thomas gave us a late season boost. 06/07 had LB, Kurt Thomas and James Jones. Then 07/08 we got Shaq.

Our best bench player was LB, a tunnel-vision scorer. As much as I loved LB, was he really any better than IT is?

That was always the downfall of those teams in my book. Yeah, they were well-oiled machines, but we had no damn spare parts. If any of our guys on this current squad went down, would we really be in that big of trouble? Not really. That's such an underrated strength of our squad, it's ridiculous.

As for Goran's iso numbers, I got to digging and bigger statheads than me, correct me if I'm wrong, but his Usage % is down from last season and he went from being what was basically a tie for 1st with Bledsoe to being 5th behind Green, IT, Bled and Kieff in that order (using the guys with regular playing time). So it looks like he went from option 1a to option 5. I'd bet that his poor iso numbers comes from trying to do too much when he has the ball. Also his Assist % has plummeted from last season, going from 28% to 19%

So, maybe there is a point to this hero ball talk. (There Frank, some numbers that support you)

Every single Suns game this season, by just watching... You can see the hero ball factor. Stats can put some numbers next to it but by eye test it is clear.

[bigfoot]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/VantageSports/status/556250277796663298[/tweet]

I dont understand how there can be a square at the top of a pyramid. Its physically impossible.

It is the boob of NBA passing