2016 Offseason Thread -- Not (just) #KD2DC

[gambitx777]

I'd see if we could pry away T. Jones from Hou.. he was pretty good initially.. this last season tho... injury risk... but perhaps attainable? Plus he actually is young...

Might keep his price down! Maybe! people might be more weary as of late with the wes mathews deal and others blowing up in teams faces.

[Ruzious]

Well, I just can't see why anyone would be interested in Thaddeus Young at this point -- and especially not at $40m for the next 3 seasons. But I'm not going to argue about it.

Lou Williams is more interesting. Thing is, however, that practically speaking there is no set of veterans we can acquire with cap space that will make the Wizards a really good team. Hence, pursuing that path only locks in more and more years of mediocrity -- at best.

At this point there is only one significant off-season move, as far as I can see -- fire Ernie Grunfeld. Since it seems that ain't happening, it's hard to see a positive direction for us in the near future.

But, hey... I've been wrong before. Who knows? Maybe Kevin Durant will descend from the sky in an aegis and save us. No. He won't

Yeah, I think acquiring players/contracts like Thaddeus Young and Lou Williams do lock in mediocrity - and they were together - with quality players like Brand and Iggy at Philly without winning a thing. Thad's an enigma, because he's very talented, but at a hair under 6'7 and about 220 with bricks in each pocket. He could have been a great 3 imo, but his length allowed him to be an effective inside scorer, and he's never developed the 3 point shot that he probably would have if he stayed at the 3. He could still reinvent himself as a stretch 4 (see Marvin Williams), but it seems unlikely at this stage of his career.

Williams is an effective bench scorer, but that's all he does. He dominates the ball when he's in the game and freezes out his teammates. I'd hate to play with him. And defensively, how does he match up with anyone?

[80sballboy]

http://www.netsdaily.com/2016/6/10/11902964/thomas-robinson-to-opt-out-of-brooklyn-nets-contract

Any interest in a local guy with athletic ability?

[I_Like_Dirt]

It's definitely the rebounds and assists that hurt Beal. For example, the difference between Derozan's 113 ortg and Beal's 103 ortg is largely accounted for in the assists column, from what I can tell. I find this a bit interesting, too, because Beal's strengths in college were his non-scoring stats, which makes it questionable whether or not role is coming into play a bit. Still, I get what you're saying about no evidence that ortg would be affected in changing teams. I just don't see evidence that it does, either, which makes me want to support it with more numbers/context.

[tontoz]

It's definitely the rebounds and assists that hurt Beal. For example, the difference between Derozan's 113 ortg and Beal's 103 ortg is largely accounted for in the assists column, from what I can tell. I find this a bit interesting, too, because Beal's strengths in college were his non-scoring stats, which makes it questionable whether or not role is coming into play a bit. Still, I get what you're saying about no evidence that ortg would be affected in changing teams. I just don't see evidence that it does, either, which makes me want to support it with more numbers/context.

Derozen also had a lower turnover rate even though he gets to the foul line over twice as often as Beal.

[TheSecretWeapon]

It's definitely the rebounds and assists that hurt Beal. For example, the difference between Derozan's 113 ortg and Beal's 103 ortg is largely accounted for in the assists column, from what I can tell. I find this a bit interesting, too, because Beal's strengths in college were his non-scoring stats, which makes it questionable whether or not role is coming into play a bit. Still, I get what you're saying about no evidence that ortg would be affected in changing teams. I just don't see evidence that it does, either, which makes me want to support it with more numbers/context.

In my alternate ortg, Derozan is at 110; Beal at 105 last season. The difference between them comes from free throws and assists. Beal shot better from the floor, but Derozan had more than double the FTA per 100 team possessions, and he shot them MUCH better (.850 to .767). He also got 1.2 assists per 100 team possessions more than Beal. Turnovers per possession were the same.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Derozan gets to the line more, but the TS%s were remarkably close: .554 for Derozan and .547 for Beal. Derozan's rookie year aside when his role and usage were significantly smaller, that was a career high for both players, too. To me, that says that, free throws included, their scoring measures were largely pretty similar. Demar got more FTs, but Beal balanced that out with 3-pointers and not taking nearly so many long 2s. As you say, turnovers were the same. It really is just assists as a difference there as a difference between them. I'd maybe suggest that Derozan is better suited for regular season success as drawing fouls on opposing players comes with a bit of added value over a long enough sample size, while Beal's game is probably a bit more suited to the playoffs where he doesn't need to rely on touch fouls being called nearly as much as Demar.

That said, at the very least Demar isn't rating higher for you, too. I'm not particularly wowed by either Demar or Beal and feel they should be in the same boat, but given how close they are, I'd suggest that Beal will be significantly cheaper and younger although the health concerns are real, and Demar isn't going to be the worst contract on the market out there this offseason, either, when he gets his max. Free agency for non-superstars is a different animal than the draft, free agency for minimum players, or free agency for superstars. Ideally it's a place you want to avoid trying to add too much, but at the same time, teams that don't use that particular tool usually don't wind up with any real ways of replacing it - it's more a measure of pre-emptive avoidance than anything, which is where I feel Ernie has dropped the ball badly, because his foresight is not so good.

[payitforward]

http://www.netsdaily.com/2016/6/10/11902964/thomas-robinson-to-opt-out-of-brooklyn-nets-contract

Any interest in a local guy with athletic ability?

Well, Robinson has one outstanding skill; he rebounds the ball, and he's an especially good offensive rebounder. But, he fouls a lot, turns it over a lot, doesn't shoot the 3, can't shoot the 2 efficiently, and can't shoot FTs either.

All the same, though he has never come close to living up to his draft position, he's a lot better than Markieff Morris.

I'm guessing that if he's opting out his agent must have some under the table opportunities for him, but if the price is right (very low) he might fit on our roster.

[verbal8]

http://www.netsdaily.com/2016/6/10/11902964/thomas-robinson-to-opt-out-of-brooklyn-nets-contract

Any interest in a local guy with athletic ability?

Well, Robinson has one outstanding skill; he rebounds the ball, and he's an especially good offensive rebounder. But, he fouls a lot, turns it over a lot, doesn't shoot the 3, can't shoot the 2 efficiently, and can't shoot FTs either.

All the same, though he has never come close to living up to his draft position, he's a lot better than Markieff Morris.

I'm guessing that if he's opting out his agent must have some under the table opportunities for him, but if the price is right (very low) he might fit on our roster.

His deal was a vet minimum deal. Ballpark I would expect him to sign in the $3 to $4 million range. If he is a fill-in bottom of the rotation guy - that seems like a pretty good deal. Something similar to Hump in 2014-5.

[Dat2U]

http://www.netsdaily.com/2016/6/10/11902964/thomas-robinson-to-opt-out-of-brooklyn-nets-contract

Any interest in a local guy with athletic ability?

Well, Robinson has one outstanding skill; he rebounds the ball, and he's an especially good offensive rebounder. But, he fouls a lot, turns it over a lot, doesn't shoot the 3, can't shoot the 2 efficiently, and can't shoot FTs either.

All the same, though he has never come close to living up to his draft position, he's a lot better than Markieff Morris.

I'm guessing that if he's opting out his agent must have some under the table opportunities for him, but if the price is right (very low) he might fit on our roster.

I would strongly disagree. But I also disagree with the suggestion that Hump is somehow better than Kieff as well. I wince when either you or TSW say as much.

The biggest difference b/w them all IMO is defensively. I view Kieff as a plus defender when he's engaged. I admit, Kieff was brutal before he got traded (to the point where I wouldn't have acquired him at all). However Robinson is train wreck on both sides of the ball right now and outside of the occasional jumper the same can be said about Hump. Literally the only thing Robinson does at an NBA level is rebound. I see both Robinson & Hump as playing in the wrong era. Low skilled brutes with little utility outside of rebounds. Neither can defend their shadow in space. Neither has a shot in hell of defending the pick & roll. The biggest outrage of last season to me was that the front office somehow thought we could actually start a guy like Kris Humphries at the PF spot and make a conference finals run. And a guy like Robinson shouldn't be in anyone's rotation. Considering the lineups the Nets were trotting out to end last year I'm not sure how anyone can put weight into his counting statistics (and it's not like they were overly impressive either).

[Ruzious]

I always liked Withey better than TRob when they were teammates. Hmm, I think they and the Morris' were all teammates together one year in college - could be wrong. Still waiting for Withey to get a chance to be a rotation player.

[fishercob]

I always liked Withey better than TRob when they were teammates. Hmm, I think they and the Morris' were all teammates together one year in college - could be wrong. Still waiting for Withey to get a chance to be a rotation player.

He was excellent when Gobert was out this year: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/witheje01/gamelog/2016/#104-125-sum:pgl_advanced

I have no idea why we didn't sign him last summer. He's signed for a million bucks this year.

[Dat2U]

Here's my little free agency primer considering it's a given Beal re-signs with us.

Plan A - Sign a franchise player.

1. SF Kevin Durant - Obviously he's the only one to consider (LeBron ain't even looking this way) and the odds are probably sub 1% at this point but one can dream.

Plan B - Sign an upgrade in the front court. Likely this would be followed or precipitated by a trade of Marcin Gortat.

This is far more realistic than Durant but honestly still a long shot. I see three viable candidates as upgrades from Marcin. All three have inherent risks.

1. FC Al Horford - IMO he's the next best option after Durant but I'm not sure why he'd come here when 15-20 teams will be wanting his services including teams like San Antonio, Houston & possibly Boston. He could also stay in Atlanta.

2. CE Pau Gasol - I like him more than many despite his age. I thought he really played well for Chicago last season after being moved back to C where he should be full time. Can help quarterback a half court offense with his skill in the high post area. An underrated defender who's always in the right spot. He'd be a short term solution but I think he offers far more offensive skill than Gortat. Gasol may choose a contender over salary so we may not have a realistic shot to get him but if we did, I'd be very interested.

3. CE Hassan Whiteside - The riskiest of the three but the highest upside. A game changing shot blocker who doesn't like to step up on P&Rs which frustrated his Miami coaches greatly. Defended it better as the season went along but how much was that him wanting to get paid? I don't see him taking any discounts as Miami hoping he does so I assume he's a goner. His market may not be as strong as expected due to his immaturity and past issues. He's a long shot signee but I believe he'd like to play with a PG like Wall and I put the odds at about 25%.


Plan C - Don't throw max money at anyone. Like Mark Cuban said some of the best deals are the ones you don't make.

Just say no to throwing max salaries at guys like Nicolas Batum or Harrison Barnes. Hell no to Dwight Howard, Ryan Anderson, Kent Bazemore or Chandler Parsons. I'm not sure why so many have us upgrading the SF position when it's not a need IMO and the guys being suggested are not upgrades or marginal ones at best. I'm very happy with Otto as our starter there (unless KD2DC happens) and Oubre developing behind him. I think we need only depth there to present a veteran challenge to Oubre in case he's not ready for a rotation spot.

Instead, add value free agents to the roster to give us quality depth and potentially set up a move down the road. Guys that aren't too expensive that can easily be moved later on with little pain if an opportunity to add a star comes along later.

Signing a backup PF.

IMO Markieff is our weakest link but of course there are no available stars at the position on the market. Here are some names I'd strongly consider - Getting one for a reasonable price would be of utmost importance and likely determine my true preference.

FC Amir Johnson - I know he's not a stretch 4 but he's a very good player and a solid locker room add. He's got a little wear & tear but for 20 minutes a night your not going to find a more effective post defender and smarter guy than Johnson. He knows his role and does it well.

PF Loul Deng - He worked really well as a playmaking 4 when Chris Bosh went down in Miami. I think his play has slipped at the 3 spot but he had a bit of a re-birth at power forward. Like Amir, he has veteran savvy and is a solid locker room influence. I think he could be very helpful either starting or off the bench.

PF Marvin Williams - Was a key component in Charlotte's run last year. Defended 4s at a high level and offered spacing offensively. You notice a trend of wanting quality hard working vets who are high IQ guys and know their role?

PF Jared Dudley - I may be in the minority but I think Dudley did well as a stretch 4. He was just asked to do too much to be placed in a starting role and struggled mightily when paired with Sessions off the bench. He may have worn down as well. Wouldn't be my first choice to bring back but if other preferred choices fall through then I'd be open to it.

PF Trevor Booker - I never thought I'd want him back but the main reason I'd consider it is that his P&R defense has improved a great deal (maybe coaching helped?). Plus he can likely be had on the cheap.

PF Brandon Bass - arguably the Lakers most effective guy last year. Another smart, heady veteran.

Signing not one, but two backup guards (maybe even three guards because quality depth behind Beal is a must)

SG Tomas Satoransky - I think it's a given he's coming over. Seems like a good move considering the FA options at the 2. I think he's much more of a playmaking 2 than an actual PG. But the good part about that is he gives you flexibility to add a scoring PG to go along with him off the bench.

PG Seth Curry - We need shooting in the worst way and while his defense leaves much to be desired, he may quietly be the best available shooter in FA and he won't cost an arm and a leg.

PG Nando de Colo - I like Ruz's guy as well for the same reason I like Curry. He's a shooter and he can likely be had at a very affordable price.

SG Garrett Temple - I'd like to see Temple back. Especially at $3-4 mil per. I think he's better than given credit for and there's still a need for a defensive guard off the bench.

PG Langston Galloway. Not a PG but definitely a gunner and a scorer. Depending on the price, if others fall through he makes sense.

PG Mario Chalmers - Not a huge fan but it's a thin market for backup PGs. Good defender and ok spot up shooter. Won't kill you on the floor.

PG Tyler Johnson - Miami is likely keeping him but if they don't it would make sense to kick the tires. He's a tireless worker that forced his way into Miami's rotation with his slashing ability.

PG Matthew Delladedova - I like his tenacity on the defensive end & his shooting ability offensively. Not much of a playmaker though. Likely will be one of the more expensive backup PG options so he's not too high on my list.

PG Devin Harris - If we get to this point, were pretty desperate but he won't kill you on the floor as much as many of the other backup PG options.

Adding a quality backup C.

CE Boban Marjanovic - He's sort of my under the radar guy who could become a steal in free agency. Didn't play a ton minutes but was wildly effective during his time. But Pop wasn't pushing his vets in Duncan, Aldridge, West & Diaw out of the way to make room for Boban. He's really a skilled guy offensively and fun to watch.

CE Cole Aldrich - Has played very well in limited minutes the last few years and another under the radar type. He simply gets it done defensively. I think he could be had on the cheap and I wouldn't be against signing both Boban & Cole. You can never have too much quality depth.

FC Jared Sullinger - His injuries & weight issues will likely cool his market but he's played well when he's been on the floor. Skilled in the post out to 20 ft and is a solid position defender. For the right price he would be a good pickup although risk is involved. Boston may not keep him either.

CE Ian Mahinmi - I don't know what Indy's plans are this offseason but Mahinmi was a defensive force for them this year. He potentially could fall through the cracks as teams focus on bigger names or younger players but he'd arguably be one of the best backup Cs in the league if he's available.

CE Joakim Noah - I know he's a long shot and probably wants to start but I'd love him for 20-25 minutes a night as my C. No one has more heart & cares about winning than Joakim. But I wonder how many starting roles are out there for him now. He's not going back to Chicago.

Wing depth to challenge Kelly Oubre for a rotation spot behind Otto. Whoever it is must be okay with riding the bench if Oubre beat him out.

SF Wesley Johnson - I thought he really grew into a solid wing defender the past two years. He also shouldn't be too expensive considering his limitations offensively.

GF Alan Anderson - I like his personality, he fits well with the team on the bench and in the locker room. A coach on the floor. I personally thought he played well for the Nets. If his injuries check out, he could likely be re-signed for dirt cheap.

GF Reggie Bullock - A 3 & D type who probably could be had pretty easily plus he's fairly young.

[Ruzious]

2. CE Pau Gasol - I like him more than many despite his age. I thought he really played well for Chicago last season after being moved back to C where he should be full time. Can help quarterback a half court offense with his skill in the high post area. An underrated defender who's always in the right spot. He'd be a short term solution but I think he offers far more offensive skill than Gortat. Gasol may choose a contender over salary so we may not have a realistic shot to get him but if we did, I'd be very interested.

Gasol's actually had his 2 best rebounding and shot-blocking seasons his 2 years with Chicago. He's a freak for a 35 year old with tons of mileage. He should fire his agent for the contract he signed with Chicago, thought it did let him opt out. Still, at 35, I don't think he's going to get any great offers, so he might "settle". He's a good enough shooter that he can play with Gortat. You could say that teams would run on Pau and Gortat, but Gortat actually runs the court very well, and the're both excellent rebounders with length, so I think they could last 2 years pretty well. Better than nothing. That should be the off-season slogan.

[payitforward]

http://www.netsdaily.com/2016/6/10/11902964/thomas-robinson-to-opt-out-of-brooklyn-nets-contract

Any interest in a local guy with athletic ability?

Well, Robinson has one outstanding skill; he rebounds the ball, and he's an especially good offensive rebounder. But, he fouls a lot, turns it over a lot, doesn't shoot the 3, can't shoot the 2 efficiently, and can't shoot FTs either.

All the same, though he has never come close to living up to his draft position, he's a lot better than Markieff Morris.

I'm guessing that if he's opting out his agent must have some under the table opportunities for him, but if the price is right (very low) he might fit on our roster.

I would strongly disagree. But I also disagree with the suggestion that Hump is somehow better than Kieff as well. I wince when either you or TSW say as much.

The biggest difference b/w them all IMO is defensively. I view Kieff as a plus defender when he's engaged. I admit, Kieff was brutal before he got traded (to the point where I wouldn't have acquired him at all). However Robinson is train wreck on both sides of the ball right now and outside of the occasional jumper the same can be said about Hump. Literally the only thing Robinson does at an NBA level is rebound. I see both Robinson & Hump as playing in the wrong era. Low skilled brutes with little utility outside of rebounds. Neither can defend their shadow in space. Neither has a shot in hell of defending the pick & roll. The biggest outrage of last season to me was that the front office somehow thought we could actually start a guy like Kris Humphries at the PF spot and make a conference finals run. And a guy like Robinson shouldn't be in anyone's rotation. Considering the lineups the Nets were trotting out to end last year I'm not sure how anyone can put weight into his counting statistics (and it's not like they were overly impressive either).

I don't disagree about Robinson -- what I bolded from you is what I said above. He's not good at all, and I didn't say he was good. I just said he was better than Markieff Morris -- big difference between "good" and "better than Markieff Morris."

Humphries is also better than Markieff Morris. Now... you may have the special skill, the third eye, the whatever... that gives you a way to see through bad play to some reason the guy doing the bad playing is good all the same. But, I still want actual good playing.

Main point tho -- we ain't going anywhere if our choices at PF are Robinson, Morris or Humphries.

[Dat2U]

Well, Robinson has one outstanding skill; he rebounds the ball, and he's an especially good offensive rebounder. But, he fouls a lot, turns it over a lot, doesn't shoot the 3, can't shoot the 2 efficiently, and can't shoot FTs either.

All the same, though he has never come close to living up to his draft position, he's a lot better than Markieff Morris.

I'm guessing that if he's opting out his agent must have some under the table opportunities for him, but if the price is right (very low) he might fit on our roster.

I would strongly disagree. But I also disagree with the suggestion that Hump is somehow better than Kieff as well. I wince when either you or TSW say as much.

The biggest difference b/w them all IMO is defensively. I view Kieff as a plus defender when he's engaged. I admit, Kieff was brutal before he got traded (to the point where I wouldn't have acquired him at all). However Robinson is train wreck on both sides of the ball right now and outside of the occasional jumper the same can be said about Hump. Literally the only thing Robinson does at an NBA level is rebound. I see both Robinson & Hump as playing in the wrong era. Low skilled brutes with little utility outside of rebounds. Neither can defend their shadow in space. Neither has a shot in hell of defending the pick & roll. The biggest outrage of last season to me was that the front office somehow thought we could actually start a guy like Kris Humphries at the PF spot and make a conference finals run. And a guy like Robinson shouldn't be in anyone's rotation. Considering the lineups the Nets were trotting out to end last year I'm not sure how anyone can put weight into his counting statistics (and it's not like they were overly impressive either).

I don't disagree about Robinson -- what I bolded from you is what I said above. He's not good at all, and I didn't say he was good. I just said he was better than Markieff Morris -- big difference between "good" and "better than Markieff Morris."

Humphries is also better than Markieff Morris. Now... you may have the special skill, the third eye, the whatever... that gives you a way to see through bad play to some reason the guy doing the bad playing is good all the same. But, I still want actual good playing.

Main point tho -- we ain't going anywhere if our choices at PF are Robinson, Morris or Humphries.

I think where we disagree is I view Morris as a serviceable rotation player. On the other hand, Humphries & Robinson are basically unplayable IMO mainly to what your favored production tool is piss poor at measuring, defensive impact. Morris is not an ideal starter and he IMO is the weak link in the starting lineup but I think he's solid enough defensively to give you 20 minutes a night while Hump & Robinson literally hurt your team's performance every time they step on the floor, especially Robinson.

[80sballboy]

I would strongly disagree. But I also disagree with the suggestion that Hump is somehow better than Kieff as well. I wince when either you or TSW say as much.

The biggest difference b/w them all IMO is defensively. I view Kieff as a plus defender when he's engaged. I admit, Kieff was brutal before he got traded (to the point where I wouldn't have acquired him at all). However Robinson is train wreck on both sides of the ball right now and outside of the occasional jumper the same can be said about Hump. Literally the only thing Robinson does at an NBA level is rebound. I see both Robinson & Hump as playing in the wrong era. Low skilled brutes with little utility outside of rebounds. Neither can defend their shadow in space. Neither has a shot in hell of defending the pick & roll. The biggest outrage of last season to me was that the front office somehow thought we could actually start a guy like Kris Humphries at the PF spot and make a conference finals run. And a guy like Robinson shouldn't be in anyone's rotation. Considering the lineups the Nets were trotting out to end last year I'm not sure how anyone can put weight into his counting statistics (and it's not like they were overly impressive either).

I don't disagree about Robinson -- what I bolded from you is what I said above. He's not good at all, and I didn't say he was good. I just said he was better than Markieff Morris -- big difference between "good" and "better than Markieff Morris."

Humphries is also better than Markieff Morris. Now... you may have the special skill, the third eye, the whatever... that gives you a way to see through bad play to some reason the guy doing the bad playing is good all the same. But, I still want actual good playing.

Main point tho -- we ain't going anywhere if our choices at PF are Robinson, Morris or Humphries.

I think where we disagree is I view Morris as a serviceable rotation player. On the other hand, Humphries & Robinson are basically unplayable IMO mainly to what your favored production tool is piss poor at measuring, defensive impact. Morris is not an ideal starter and he IMO is the weak link in the starting lineup but I think he's solid enough defensively to give you 20 minutes a night while Hump & Robinson literally hurt your team's performance every time they step on the floor, especially Robinson.

Agree Dat. Not sure if people forget how poor Hump was defensively and Morris is at least solid and can be very effective when he's motivated. I was the one that put Robinson out there just as an intriguing guy because he just burst out in the last 15 games when he got 30+ minutes per game. Whether he can be an effective defender and rebounder in 15mpg is another story, but I do like his rebounding and athleticism. He wouldn't be my first or fifth choice for a backup big but he should at least be cheap.

[fishercob]

De Colo is staying in Russia.

[payitforward]

I think where we disagree is I view Morris as a serviceable rotation player. On the other hand, Humphries & Robinson are basically unplayable IMO mainly to what your favored production tool is piss poor at measuring, defensive impact...

Leave Humphries aside....

Do I want to be in the position of defending Thomas Robinson? No.... But, vs. Markieff it's not hard, so here goes.

First off, I assume you're referring to wp48 as my "favored" metric. I have no favorite metric. Would you agree that a metric which correlates to actual win-loss records of a team would be the most useful one? If so, great -- wp48 is at 94%; if you have a better one I'm all for using it. If not -- there's nothing to discuss on the subject. I'm only interested in a player's impact on wins and losses.

Btw, I didn't look at either players wp48 before my comparison. I just looked at what was easy to see: box score stats.

Now, if there's something you can tell me or point me to that quantifies "defensive impact," and it shows Markieff with a plus there, that would count against my simple-minded look at box score numbers. But, if you can't -- i.e. if it's just you looking at them as defenders and concluding that one is better than the other, then there's nowhere to go with it even if you are right: how would one know how many points that defensive superiority is worth? If you can't know that, you can't provide a basis of judgement. At least that's how it seems to me; what am I missing?

Just looking at Robinson's numbers last year and Morris's as well (but only his numbers with us -- not saddling him w/ his Phoenix season), I see Robinson getting 9.7 defensive boards every 40 minutes vs. Morris's 7.2. Surely those 2.5 boards have some value in re: defensive impact. He also blocks 1.6 shots vs. Markieff's 1 -- again, that has to have some defensive impact even if not a lot. No?

Defense starts when the opponent gets the ball, and you're at some disadvantage if the opponent got the ball by rebounding a missed shot of someone on your team, right? As opposed to if you made a shot and they're taking it out under the basket. Well... Markieff got 1.7 offensive boards -- preventing that disadvantage on defense -- every 40 minutes. Robinson got 5.9. In other words, every 40 minutes Robinson prevented his team from being at that disadvantage 4.2 more times than Morris. Again... this has to fit somewhere in measuring the value of Robinson to his team's defense -- even though it's not particularly about his own 1 on 1 defensive abilities.

IOW, you may see Morris playing defense and he looks good, better than Robinson, and you think it's a lot better than if Robinson were out there. But on a bunch of those situations, w/ Robinson we still have the ball! We're not playing defense. Just a fact... and it does jump out of the numbers, no?

Now, Morris was by far the more productive shooter -- he took 3.4 more shots than Robinson every 40 minutes, and those shots netted his team 5.1 more points -- i.e. he's shooting 75% on those extra shots! -- but that's not where you said Morris was better than Robinson. (Not that Morris was an efficient scorer for a pf: slightly below average for all players at the 4 last year.)

So there you are. Robinson isn't a good NBA PF, just a better one than Markieff Morris.

[Dat2U]

I think where we disagree is I view Morris as a serviceable rotation player. On the other hand, Humphries & Robinson are basically unplayable IMO mainly to what your favored production tool is piss poor at measuring, defensive impact...

Leave Humphries aside....

Do I want to be in the position of defending Thomas Robinson? No.... But, vs. Markieff it's not hard, so here goes.

First off, I assume you're referring to wp48 as my "favored" metric. I have no favorite metric. Would you agree that a metric which correlates to actual win-loss records of a team would be the most useful one? If so, great -- wp48 is at 94%; if you have a better one I'm all for using it. If not -- there's nothing to discuss on the subject. I'm only interested in a player's impact on wins and losses.

Btw, I didn't look at either players wp48 before my comparison. I just looked at what was easy to see: box score stats.

Now, if there's something you can tell me or point me to that quantifies "defensive impact," and it shows Markieff with a plus there, that would count against my simple-minded look at box score numbers. But, if you can't -- i.e. if it's just you looking at them as defenders and concluding that one is better than the other, then there's nowhere to go with it even if you are right: how would one know how many points that defensive superiority is worth? If you can't know that, you can't provide a basis of judgement. At least that's how it seems to me; what am I missing?

Just looking at Robinson's numbers last year and Morris's as well (but only his numbers with us -- not saddling him w/ his Phoenix season), I see Robinson getting 9.7 defensive boards every 40 minutes vs. Morris's 7.2. Surely those 2.5 boards have some value in re: defensive impact. He also blocks 1.6 shots vs. Markieff's 1 -- again, that has to have some defensive impact even if not a lot. No?

Defense starts when the opponent gets the ball, and you're at some disadvantage if the opponent got the ball by rebounding a missed shot of someone on your team, right? As opposed to if you made a shot and they're taking it out under the basket. Well... Markieff got 1.7 offensive boards -- preventing that disadvantage on defense -- every 40 minutes. Robinson got 5.9. In other words, every 40 minutes Robinson prevented his team from being at that disadvantage 4.2 more times than Morris. Again... this has to fit somewhere in measuring the value of Robinson to his team's defense -- even though it's not particularly about his own 1 on 1 defensive abilities.

IOW, you may see Morris playing defense and he looks good, better than Robinson, and you think it's a lot better than if Robinson were out there. But on a bunch of those situations, w/ Robinson we still have the ball! We're not playing defense. Just a fact... and it does jump out of the numbers, no?

Now, Morris was by far the more productive shooter -- he took 3.4 more shots than Robinson every 40 minutes, and those shots netted his team 5.1 more points -- i.e. he's shooting 75% on those extra shots! -- but that's not where you said Morris was better than Robinson. (Not that Morris was an efficient scorer for a pf: slightly below average for all players at the 4 last year.)

So there you are. Robinson isn't a good NBA PF, just a better one than Markieff Morris.

Ugh, I don't know where to begin. I find the whole nonsense about wp48 correlating to wins/losses a bit silly considering the stat basically takes a box score, summarizes the efficiency of it and assigns an allotted piece to each player. Well duh, we don't need wp48 when we can see who scored what and efficiency of each team's possession. That alone explains wins. But how in the world can defense be explained utilizing only defensive rebounds? There's a huge piece of the puzzle missing there that your simply making assumptions on.

Lets include Humphries in the conversation and look at the effectiveness of each on the court. I find Robinson's on/off numbers quite troubling considering that entire roster was a complete mess. And despite Robinson being such a great rebounder, he significantly hurt them on the defensive board when he played.

2015-16 Real Plus-Minus - Power Forwards - 100 Results (ranked by DRPM)

Code: Select all

RK NAME                       GP MPG  ORPM  DRPM  RPM    WINS
40 Markieff Morris PHX/WSH    64 25.5 -1.43  0.90 -0.53  2.75
77 Kris Humphries ATL/PHX/WSH 53 15.8 -1.36 -0.46 -1.82  0.72
89 Thomas Robinson BKN        71 12.9 -3.06 -1.21 -4.27 -0.66

2014-15 Real Plus-Minus - Power Forwards - 82 Results (ranked by DRPM)

Code: Select all

RK NAME                       GP MPG  ORPM  DRPM   RPM    WINS
6 Markieff Morris PHX         82 31.5  0.40  3.03   3.43  9.49
52 Thomas Robinson PHI/POR    54 14.8 -2.23 -0.18  -2.41 -0.03
55 Kris Humphries WSH         64 21.0 -2.46 -0.24  -2.70 -0.28

Markieff Morris On Court / Off Court stats (2015-16 Wizards)

Code: Select all

Stat                    ON Court OFF Court  Net
Minutes                      711      3238  18%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 107.8     106.1 +1.6
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 105.9     107.5 -1.5
Net Points per 100 Poss.    +1.9      -1.3 +3.2
Offensive Rebounding       25.8%     23.2% +2.6%
Defensive Rebounding       77.1%     74.3% +2.8%
Total Rebounding           51.5%     48.8% +2.7%


Kris Humphries On Court / Off Court stats (2015-16 Wizards)

Code: Select all

Stat                    ON Court OFF Court  Net
Minutes                      464      3485  11%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 103.5     106.8 -3.4
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 110.5     106.7 +3.7
Net Points per 100 Poss.    -7.0      +0.1 -7.1
Offensive Rebounding       25.6%     23.4% +2.2%
Defensive Rebounding       75.5%     74.7% +0.8%
Total Rebounding           50.6%     49.1% +1.5%


Thomas Robinson On Court / Off Court stats (2015-16 Nets)

Code: Select all

Stat                    ON Court OFF Court  Net
Minutes                      915      3035  23%
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss. 101.0     105.2 -4.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss. 115.5     110.7 +4.8
Net Points per 100 Poss.   -14.6      -5.5 -9.0
Offensive Rebounding       31.9%     24.9% +7.0%
Defensive Rebounding       68.6%     74.4% -5.8%
Total Rebounding           50.2%     49.7% +0.6%