Did RW found the triple-double recipe and exposed it to the world?

[bondom34]

Also, did want to say thanks to Doc as well. I'm getting different ideas from different places. On one hand regression is saying something should happen, and I do believe in regression data, but on the other hand looking at on off numbers is telling me he's not having a negative effect. Food for thought, thanks.

[Doctor MJ]

This is my disconnect though Doc. They're on a pace to outrebound teams by 8 per game since the trade. Its clearly not doing what you and others are saying it should be. So why should it be viewed as if it is doing something it clearly isn't?

I notice the word "defensive" appears nowhere in your post. That's probably pretty telling.

Where did I say the problem was in Westbrook's rebounds? Defense.
Where do the Thunder excel in rebounding? Offense - where it should be noted I made a point to praise Westbrook's impact.

So that's the issue. If people want to praise Westbrook's offensive rebounding effect, that's cool, but they need to remember that he only gets 2 offensive boards per game, and that the entire reason for his triple doubles is that he gets a hell of a lot of defensive rebounds. As such, Westbrook himself may not deserve criticism, but those fixating on his triple doubles as proof of rebounding impact are still misguided, and thus overrate what he's doing.

My personal opinion on Westbrook and his rebounds is that they aren't on the whole a bad thing, but that when his approach to going out and getting them is almost certainly an individualist "I'm going to go get everything!" perspective, this is not something I'd particularly want him to be doing for me. I don't think it's worth the energy he's burning up, and in general his biggest weakness is in his tendency to reduce the game to individualist heroics so the last thing I'd want is to encourage him toward something which will give him praise for potentially problematic behavior. But as I say all this, with the injuries the team has, it's not like I think someone other than Westbrook is the team's best player. He's having a very large positive impact on the team, and in many ways I'm quibbling about details here. It's just that while those details might be small relative to his overall impact, the degree to which they cause people to overly fall in love with his play is not only significant in general, but it could not be more relevant to this thread.

Ah, got it. Honestly I'm going to still disagree and I know it may come off as blind homerism. Just looking at on off numbers, and knowing the rebounding numbers the team puts up, I'm inclined to believe its not as detrimental.

Okay, but my point here is not to say they are detrimental taken as a whole, it's to point out to people that there are major issues with taking the rebounds of Westbrook's triple doubles and equate them to some kind of distinct impact.

When I look at Westbrook's numbers here, to me the trend is clear: Everything he's doing is something that helps the offense rather than the defense.

I'll also say I just heard OKC's announcer interviewed by my basketball radio station, and when asked about MVP candidates he made a point to praise all 5 of the major players other than Harden, who he bashed hard based on his weak defense. It's amusing on one level because an OKC employee bashing Harden is clearly not to be taken seriously, but on another level: Harden's Defensive Real Plus Minus is actually better than Westbrook's at this point. And while most people would take that to be a clear sign that the stat is problematic, it's no shock given the stuff I've been pointing out in this thread. Westbrook is a considerably more talented defensive player than Harden, but at this point as a defender, his defense is essentially geared toward generating offense.

[bondom34]

I notice the word "defensive" appears nowhere in your post. That's probably pretty telling.

Where did I say the problem was in Westbrook's rebounds? Defense.
Where do the Thunder excel in rebounding? Offense - where it should be noted I made a point to praise Westbrook's impact.

So that's the issue. If people want to praise Westbrook's offensive rebounding effect, that's cool, but they need to remember that he only gets 2 offensive boards per game, and that the entire reason for his triple doubles is that he gets a hell of a lot of defensive rebounds. As such, Westbrook himself may not deserve criticism, but those fixating on his triple doubles as proof of rebounding impact are still misguided, and thus overrate what he's doing.

My personal opinion on Westbrook and his rebounds is that they aren't on the whole a bad thing, but that when his approach to going out and getting them is almost certainly an individualist "I'm going to go get everything!" perspective, this is not something I'd particularly want him to be doing for me. I don't think it's worth the energy he's burning up, and in general his biggest weakness is in his tendency to reduce the game to individualist heroics so the last thing I'd want is to encourage him toward something which will give him praise for potentially problematic behavior. But as I say all this, with the injuries the team has, it's not like I think someone other than Westbrook is the team's best player. He's having a very large positive impact on the team, and in many ways I'm quibbling about details here. It's just that while those details might be small relative to his overall impact, the degree to which they cause people to overly fall in love with his play is not only significant in general, but it could not be more relevant to this thread.

Ah, got it. Honestly I'm going to still disagree and I know it may come off as blind homerism. Just looking at on off numbers, and knowing the rebounding numbers the team puts up, I'm inclined to believe its not as detrimental.

Okay, but my point here is not to say they are detrimental taken as a whole, it's to point out to people that there are major issues with taking the rebounds of Westbrook's triple doubles and equate them to some kind of distinct impact.

When I look at Westbrook's numbers here, to me the trend is clear: Everything he's doing is something that helps the offense rather than the defense.

I'll also say I just heard OKC's announcer interviewed by my basketball radio station, and when asked about MVP candidates he made a point to praise all 5 of the major players other than Harden, who he bashed hard based on his weak defense. It's amusing on one level because an OKC employee bashing Harden is clearly not to be taken seriously, but on another level: Harden's Defensive Real Plus Minus is actually better than Westbrook's at this point. And while most people would take that to be a clear sign that the stat is problematic, it's no shock given the stuff I've been pointing out in this thread. Westbrook is a considerably more talented defensive player than Harden, but at this point as a defender, his defense is essentially geared toward generating offense.

I likely differ from.the masses of OKC followers, bit I'd give Harden the MVP if I were a voter. Again Doc, thanks, great food for thought.

[Jaivl]

I likely differ from.the masses of OKC followers, bit I'd give Harden the MVP if I were a voter.

So would I.

[Texas Chuck]

If Houston holds on to a top 4 seed considering all the injuries they have dealt with and how mediocre Ariza has played--with all due respect to Mr. Curry I don't see how you could give it to anyone else.

[Doctor MJ]

Just coming back, and wanted to say folks were really classy. I could have said my thoughts with a little less edge. Thanks for bearing with em.

[Doctor MJ]

If Houston holds on to a top 4 seed considering all the injuries they have dealt with and how mediocre Ariza has played--with all due respect to Mr. Curry I don't see how you could give it to anyone else.

Well, I've always personally liked Harden quite a lot, and would be happy to see him get the award, but it would take something pretty drastic for me personally to vote for him over Curry. What Curry is leading in GS is astonishing.

[lorak]

If Houston holds on to a top 4 seed considering all the injuries they have dealt with and how mediocre Ariza has played--

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

[Texas Chuck]

If Houston holds on to a top 4 seed considering all the injuries they have dealt with and how mediocre Ariza has played--

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

I'm talking about Trevor Ariza. I have no idea who you are talking about.

[bondom34]

Just coming back, and wanted to say folks were really classy. I could have said my thoughts with a little less edge. Thanks for bearing with em.

Jerk .

[lorak]

If Houston holds on to a top 4 seed considering all the injuries they have dealt with and how mediocre Ariza has played--

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

I'm talking about Trevor Ariza. I have no idea who you are talking about.

You should watch some Rockets games, so you would know who I'm talking about.

[spearsy23]

I likely differ from.the masses of OKC followers, bit I'd give Harden the MVP if I were a voter.

So would I.

I think Curry will win, based on past criteria.
I think Harden should win based on actual merit.
I want Westbrook to win, based on GOAT.

[spearsy23]

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

I'm talking about Trevor Ariza. I have no idea who you are talking about.

You should watch some Rockets games, so you would know who I'm talking about.

He has been pretty good defensively, but nothing spectacular. And he has been crap offensively. His D-on/off is basically neutral, his DRAPM is good, his opponent PER is pretty good. Overall, I'd say mediocre was a pretty accurate statement.

[Jaivl]

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

You'll probably need more than "watch the games" to make me agree with this. Like... a lobotomy, or something.

Really, Houston doesn't care if Ariza is on the game or not. http://www.basketball-reference.com/tea ... 15/on-off/
Of the 16 players with most minutes for Houston, all have a defensive on/off between -5 and 5. Yeah, I'd say it's a team effort.

[lorak]

I'm talking about Trevor Ariza. I have no idea who you are talking about.

You should watch some Rockets games, so you would know who I'm talking about.

He has been pretty good defensively, but nothing spectacular. And he has been crap offensively. His D-on/off is basically neutral, his DRAPM is good, his opponent PER is pretty good. Overall, I'd say mediocre was a pretty accurate statement.

I don't care much about RAPM anymore, but his DRAPM is excellent (12th overall, top 5 among big minutes players) and on/off doesn't matter if we have DRAPM. Really, look at Rockets, analyze their strengths and weaknesses and you will see that Ariza is the main reason why they are top defensive team despite the fact Dwight missed so much time. Sure, he is bad offensively, but his contribution on defense alone is enough to make him overall valuable player (you brought RAPM, so I guess you know his RAPM is +2.1...) and far from mediocre. It's sad how defense is underrated these days...

[spearsy23]

You should watch some Rockets games, so you would know who I'm talking about.

He has been pretty good defensively, but nothing spectacular. And he has been crap offensively. His D-on/off is basically neutral, his DRAPM is good, his opponent PER is pretty good. Overall, I'd say mediocre was a pretty accurate statement.

I don't care much about RAPM anymore, but his DRAPM is excellent (12th overall, top 5 among big minutes players) and on/off doesn't matter if we have DRAPM. Really, look at Rockets, analyze their strengths and weaknesses and you will see that Ariza is the main reason why they are top defensive team despite the fact Dwight missed so much time. Sure, he is bad offensively, but his contribution on defense alone is enough to make him overall valuable player (you brought RAPM, so I guess you know his RAPM is +2.1...) and far from mediocre. It's sad how defense is underrated these days...

By my count there are 23 guys ahead of him in DRAPM that play 20+ per game, but beyond that it's one stat. His D-on/off is +.1 so he's really making zero difference to the team.

[lorak]

Ariza has played mediocre?! He's probably DPOTY and Rockets are better on defense than on offense.

You'll probably need more than "watch the games" to make me agree with this. Like... a lobotomy, or something.

Really, Houston doesn't care if Ariza is on the game or not. http://www.basketball-reference.com/tea ... 15/on-off/
Of the 16 players with most minutes for Houston, all have a defensive on/off between -5 and 5. Yeah, I'd say it's a team effort.

On/off doesn't say much without context, especially on team like Rockets, where many players missed games and some important roster changes were done.

Anyway, Ariza is bad on offense, yet such analytic team like Houston plays him 35.6 minutes per game (only Harden is close with 36.8). Guess why? And no, injuries aren't the answer here, because his minutes stayed above 35 per game last two months, so when almost all important players except Dwight played, even another forwards like Jones and Brewer and Josh.

4Fs say that Rockets defensive strengths are TOV and FG% (but they are slightly below average in opp 2P% and elite in opp 3P%). Clearly these are Ariza strengths as he is excellent at stealing the ball and defending 3P line. Of course he is not doing it alone, none defender in the NBA is, but he is the most important piece defensively there.

[lorak]

He has been pretty good defensively, but nothing spectacular. And he has been crap offensively. His D-on/off is basically neutral, his DRAPM is good, his opponent PER is pretty good. Overall, I'd say mediocre was a pretty accurate statement.

I don't care much about RAPM anymore, but his DRAPM is excellent (12th overall, top 5 among big minutes players) and on/off doesn't matter if we have DRAPM. Really, look at Rockets, analyze their strengths and weaknesses and you will see that Ariza is the main reason why they are top defensive team despite the fact Dwight missed so much time. Sure, he is bad offensively, but his contribution on defense alone is enough to make him overall valuable player (you brought RAPM, so I guess you know his RAPM is +2.1...) and far from mediocre. It's sad how defense is underrated these days...

By my count there are 23 guys ahead of him in DRAPM that play 20+ per game, but beyond that it's one stat. His D-on/off is +.1 so he's really making zero difference to the team.

What DRAPM are you using (because I'm looking at done by Evan Z)?
And on/off doesn't matter if we have RAPM! (and even if you still want to use it, then you can't make it without context, especially on team like Rockets, where so many roster changes were made!)

[spearsy23]

What DRAPM are you using (because I'm looking at done by Evan Z)?
And on/off doesn't matter if we have RAPM! (and even if you still want to use it, then you can't make it without context, especially on team like Rockets, where so many roster changes were made!)

Of course on/off matters, especially when discussing a statement like 'he's possible dpoy.' If he isn't actually helping his team's defense then there's not a ton of value in his defense. On/off, RAPM and opponent PER all taken together paint a picture of a good defender, not game changing. And with his offensive ineptitude included, yes he has been mediocre.

[lorak]

What DRAPM are you using (because I'm looking at done by Evan Z)?
And on/off doesn't matter if we have RAPM! (and even if you still want to use it, then you can't make it without context, especially on team like Rockets, where so many roster changes were made!)

Of course on/off matters, especially when discussing a statement like 'he's possible dpoy.' If he isn't actually helping his team's defense then there's not a ton of value in his defense.

So you don't understand what on/off is, because it's not as simple (context matters!) and on/off is far inferior to RAPM, so that's why it doesn't make sense to use it when RAPM is available (and PER is totally crap stat, especially used the way you do it, because "opp PER" doesn't measure what you think it does, because it's from play by play, not from optical tracing data).

And what DRAPM are you using?