lorak wrote:Doctor MJ wrote:
I will say the first thing I looked at is the Hawks' numbers. By Real Plus Minus, Millsap is seen as the top player, however by any actual +/- metric I can find, it seems like it's been Korver...and now Vanilla RAPM agrees. So in the team that's truly shocked the league this and forced us to really think beyond the basic stats that were available before the datable age, Real Plus Minus' existence makes it harder to glean insight into the intangibles.
But that sounds bitter. Really I'm just fascinated by the Hawks and by Korver. What I feel like we're seeing here is a kind of video game extreme in which you can have a really limited player who is just so damn effective at what he does that you can build a scheme that just spreads the defense too far to really work.
The GB has a thread saying Vegas has put the Hawks as NBA champion favorites. I can't imagine they actually win the thing - and in fairness to Vegas, those odds must have everything to do with how unpredictable the West is - but if it did happen based on the Hawks doing their thing as they are now, it would mean that Korver was the best player on an NBA champion. The mind reels...
I'm not sure where is the problem with Korver as the best Hawks player. You are big Reggie fan and know how valuable he was, so imagine that Korver is just like Miller - both extremely good shooters and because of that VERY valuable offensive players. In fact Pacers were kind of similar with a lot of good defenders and Reggie as no. 1 offensive player.
But Korver is NOT the #1 offensive player by traditional measures.
He's only the 4th leading scorer on his team.
His FGA/36 is 13th on his team.
We're literally talking about a guy who does one thing so well...that he barely does that thing. An offense based not on "You can't stop our best shooter" but rather based on "Our shooter is so good, you simply have to commit to stop him, and when you do you can't cover the rest of our guys well."
Reggie, though he seems unusual for an offensive star, was still your #1 scorer, and hence far more of a normal situation.
What I will say is that Atlanta with Korver can be seen as a descendant of Indiana with Miller in terms of a "How far can we push this?" type thing.
PI RAPM is the more important thing to have when trying to understand years and years of NBA basketball.
But NPI RAPM of the current season plus old PI RAPM data is the best judge of the MVP race.
LeBron ranking #1 in the PI data here is just a clear case of the prior causing misinformation. It's not a big deal as long as you realize it though.
I think you are overrating impact of prior years. For example look how good defensively are some young players like Gobert or Nurkic. Or how much Harden improved on defense. I think prior isn't a problem here, it actually helps, because data is more accurate. Look at this that way - NPI has bigger "standard error" than PI and that's why even for single year PI is better.
Well LeBron is pretty far down the list with Real Plus Minus, which is a stat that include a prior as well, so truthfully, it's hard for me to know what exactly is going on, and I should hedge more in my language to make that clear.
Re: Gobert. Dude played 9 MPG last year, and he played only 21 this year. That means:
1) Just on this year, he's playing low minutes, which means I'm hesitant to say much about his numbers.
2) That last year is basically like a single raindrop in a heavy wind. Hell of a lot easier to erase that than erase LeBron's previous year.
Re: Harden's defense. Harden's improvement is driving him toward the mean, not away from it. That essentially means that his defense is simply being given less weight by the algorithm as his results disagree with each other. Doesn't seem weird to me.