Is Wall Top 5 PG?

[thricethefun]

Ummmm batum?
Marvin williams right now is everything we hope morris will become
Courtney Lee is on fire right now
Zeller is getting big minutes finally and he's playing well

3 of their 5 starters is up for free agency next year....big al is the only one that's over 30...that's a nicely built team and they're coached well...this is Kimba best season by a longshot...replace him with wall that team gets better....is he even considered better than batum??

Please. Since when is Batum a star? Batum wouldn't have registered as a top 75 player a year ago, and now you are attributing Charlotte's turnaround to him? Charlotte is 7 games better than Washington because of Nicolas freaking Batum? The guy is averaging 14 points per game with an ORtg of 102. Gortat is easily a better player.

And the rest of those guys you mentioned: Williams and Lee, they're journeymen who signed for less than $7M a year. Williams didn't start last year and Lee hasn't started for most of this year.

It's not Charlotte's individual players that are better than Wall's supporting cast, it's their superior offensive and defensive systems and much better coaching that puts Kemba in a much better position to succeed this season than Wall.

[tontoz]

Pretty sure Randy's offense doesn't call for Wall to make careless passes or shoot pullup Js before anyone else touches the ball, two things that kill his efficiency.

[CobraCommander]

Pretty sure Randy's offense doesn't call for Wall to make careless passes or shoot pullup Js before anyone else touches the ball, two things that kill his efficiency.

Yes...but I have league pass...walls flaws are NBA flaws...all of the point guards that force the issue have a lot of turn overs. I think Wall is top 5 but who cares if wiz are not top 8 in East?

[tontoz]

Pretty sure Randy's offense doesn't call for Wall to make careless passes or shoot pullup Js before anyone else touches the ball, two things that kill his efficiency.

Yes...but I have league pass...walls flaws are NBA flaws...all of the point guards that force the issue have a lot of turn overs. I think Wall is top 5 but who cares if wiz are not top 8 in East?

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

[CobraCommander]

Pretty sure Randy's offense doesn't call for Wall to make careless passes or shoot pullup Js before anyone else touches the ball, two things that kill his efficiency.

Yes...but I have league pass...walls flaws are NBA flaws...all of the point guards that force the issue have a lot of turn overs. I think Wall is top 5 but who cares if wiz are not top 8 in East?

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

[CobraCommander]

http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2016/3/15/11242406/john-wall-special-olympics-referee-wizards


He may not be top ten in basketball but he is number 1 in our hearts

[deneem4]

Yes...but I have league pass...walls flaws are NBA flaws...all of the point guards that force the issue have a lot of turn overs. I think Wall is top 5 but who cares if wiz are not top 8 in East?

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

I think our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team...I hope we don't start back trading top picks for foyes and miller's because of what the stats say....

[tontoz]

Yes...but I have league pass...walls flaws are NBA flaws...all of the point guards that force the issue have a lot of turn overs. I think Wall is top 5 but who cares if wiz are not top 8 in East?

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

All players have flaws but that isn't the topic of the thread. Wall isn't the Wizards problem but that isnt the topic of the thread either.

Wall hasn't played like a top 5 pg this year. He has been too turnover prone with poor shooting/shot selection.

[montestewart]

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

I think our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team…I hope we don't start back trading top picks for foyes and miller's because of what the stats say….

OK you should just stop using that word, analytics, because you don't understand what it means. All teams are analytics teams. The score at the end of the game, the W-L record, the starters' minutes, that's analytics. Maybe a little basic, but hey, you have to start somewhere. You know who made that Foye/Miller trade? Someone who doesn't use a lot of analytics. And seriously, "our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team"? Does that mean you are part of the problem, or you are a member of the team? Can I have your autograph?

Basketball fans who reflexively reject numbers are confounded by the homoerotic subtext of their fandom, and when one drips dip on his khaki's at the sports bar and you innocently ask, "Semen?" he frowns and looks away, but inside his soul is screaming, "No, he was a landlubber, but he had a huge harpoon!" Thar she blows.

Analytics. I think it's the word itself. If people could just get past that. It's like Smokey the Bear.

[deneem4]

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

I think our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team…I hope we don't start back trading top picks for foyes and miller's because of what the stats say….

OK you should just stop using that word, analytics, because you don't understand what it means. All teams are analytics teams. The score at the end of the game, the W-L record, the starters' minutes, that's analytics. Maybe a little basic, but hey, you have to start somewhere. You know who made that Foye/Miller trade? Someone who doesn't use a lot of analytics. And seriously, "our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team"? Does that mean you are part of the problem, or you are a member of the team? Can I have your autograph?

Basketball fans who reflexively reject numbers are confounded by the homoerotic subtext of their fandom, and when one drips dip on his khaki's at the sports bar and you innocently ask, "Semen?" he frowns and looks away, but inside his soul is screaming, "No, he was a landlubber, but he had a huge harpoon!" Thar she blows.

Analytics. I think it's the word itself. If people could just get past that. It's like Smokey the Bear.

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

[TheSecretWeapon]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

[AFM]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

First line reads like an intro to a WizD tirade. Man I miss that guy.

[deneem4]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

That's how I feel alot when u post...jus a bunch of blah blah about blah blah

[TheSecretWeapon]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

That's how I feel alot when u post...jus a bunch of blah blah about blah blah

[tontoz]

Time for your regularly scheduled service reminder:

The filter is your friend.

[TheSecretWeapon]

Seems a good place to put this.

[payitforward]

I think our fanbase has turned us into an analytic team...I hope we don't start back trading top picks for foyes and miller's because of what the stats say....

You think statistics or analytics or whatever-ics -- or *any* reasonable thinking? -- would have supported that trade? No.

[payitforward]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

Actually... deneem raises a point here that isn't stupid at all -- but it does reflect a basic misunderstanding of how analytics or any statistical thinking actually works.

Essentially, what he asks is this: if basketball wins and losses and player productivity can all be reduced to numbers, why can't we mathematically predict the winner of every game, or at least of most games?

The answer is actually pretty simple: *statistical* facts let us predict *statistical* results. If I have an accurate metric of how good the players are on a given team -- over time, i.e. overall, i.e. statistically -- I can predict w/ some reliability how good the team will be -- i.e. over time, overall, i.e. statistically (win-loss record for example).

That doesn't mean I can predict the outcome of any single game, but it does mean I can predict the overall results for the season. These are two very different things. And deneem's right that players being human beings not machines their output varies. A guy who is tremendous overall can have a bad night. A team that's tremendous overall can have a bad night. GS had one recently, right?

What the analytical information can tell us is how well that team is likely to do overall, on the season. And even that assumes their best players don't have season-ending injuries, etc.

There's no conflict here, no problem either w/ statistics/analytics nor w/ saying that players are individual human beings and not reliable, same numbers every night machines.

[CobraCommander]

Wall's turnover rate ranks 48th among pgs

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/turnoverRatio

and his TS ranks 50th among pgs.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/statistics/_/position/pg/sort/trueShootingPct/order/true

Those aren't the numbers of a top 5 pg.

Ok...then analyze turn overs for GS, 4th quarter leads lost for OKC, and any other factor you want and you will find most team and players have flaws. I "think" Wall is top 4 and depending on what Lillard or Wall does that week they leap frog each other. I also see Wall as an improving young star in a guard dominated league.

The reality is none of this matters because-

At this point the only thing that matters is the wiz are in 10th place and if you take Wall off wiz I suspect the would be the76ers. Wall might not be the answer but he sure isn't the problem...

All players have flaws but that isn't the topic of the thread. Wall isn't the Wizards problem but that isnt the topic of the thread either.

Wall hasn't played like a top 5 pg this year. He has been too turnover prone with poor shooting/shot selection.

You and I can agree to disagree- Wall has been top 3 and as bad as top 10 like everyone else not named Curry that made the AllStar team. I would take Wall over everyone except Westbrook that plays point guard. Wall isn't gonna wins ring without a significantly better player or two on this team. Same with everyone 2-200 at the point guard position -

[TheSecretWeapon]

Analysis analyst analytics....it all starts with anal...very anal this fanbase...
But if basketball was a complete numbers games...u can mathematically predetermine the winner everytime....
But u cant...why because there's things called variables that doesn't appear on a stat sheet...u know the things who play basketball are human? U know humans aren't mechanical? They're made of things called bones and muscles...those things wear out....did you know they think?, u know they think while they play?
Of course u have the analysis....

Holy crap this is stupid.

Actually... deneem raises a point here that isn't stupid at all -- but it does reflect a basic misunderstanding of how analytics or any statistical thinking actually works.

Essentially, what he asks is this: if basketball wins and losses and player productivity can all be reduced to numbers, why can't we mathematically predict the winner of every game, or at least of most games?

The answer is actually pretty simple: *statistical* facts let us predict *statistical* results. If I have an accurate metric of how good the players are on a given team -- over time, i.e. overall, i.e. statistically -- I can predict w/ some reliability how good the team will be -- i.e. over time, overall, i.e. statistically (win-loss record for example).

That doesn't mean I can predict the outcome of any single game, but it does mean I can predict the overall results for the season. These are two very different things. And deneem's right that players being human beings not machines their output varies. A guy who is tremendous overall can have a bad night. A team that's tremendous overall can have a bad night. GS had one recently, right?

What the analytical information can tell us is how well that team is likely to do overall, on the season. And even that assumes their best players don't have season-ending injuries, etc.

There's no conflict here, no problem either w/ statistics/analytics nor w/ saying that players are individual human beings and not reliable, same numbers every night machines.

Well put.

deneem: Apologies for being obnoxious toward you. We approach the game from very different perspectives, but it's cool.