Bradley Beal - Part III

[payitforward]

deneem4 posted this yesterday:

We have a top 4 starting 5 in the league

http://stats.nba.com/league/lineups/#!/?sort=PLUS_MINUS&dir=1&CF=GP*G*10%7CMIN*G*10&Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular%20Season

Our starting 5 were the 4th best in the league as of yesterday. (They are now the 6th best). I think that solves the conundrum of how Beal, Wall, Porter and Gortat can be pretty darn good yet the team still loses. If games were just 36 minutes long, we might have the 6th best record in the league. Our bench is that bad.

Well, no. What the link confirms is that our starting lineup is 6th best in plus minus. But, because, as you say, "our bench is that bad," our bench plays relatively few minutes. Which means that our starters play lots of minutes. W/o checking, I speculate that our starters play more minutes per game than any other set of starters.

This means that our starters play more minutes against other teams' reserves than any other set of starters.

I imagine that this accounts to some degree for our starting lineup being #6 in plus-minus.

Not only don't we have the 4th best, or 6th best, starting lineup in the league, we don't have even one starter who's 4th best or 6th best at his position:

John Wall is having a very good season, but no he's not producing at the level of Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, the Greek freak, Steph Curry, James Harden, Kyle Lowry, Damien Lillard, Patrick Mills or Kemba Walker.

Otto Porter has @8 SFs who are even better than he is.

Marcin Gortat (Gobert, Drummond, Jordan, Howard, Whiteside, Green, Love, Davis, Capela)

Beal (... oh give me a break)

Morris (he's below average, waaaay below average, among all PFs in the league)

Want the best result? Call Porter a PF and Morris a SF. That way, Otto is #5 in productivity among 4s, and Morris is.... way back somewhere on p.2 of any list.

[payitforward]

...a kind of usefulness continuum of stats across the various sports. Baseball's stats are the most reliable given that most 'interactions' are one on one. Though even the extreme Money Ball folks take it too far. For example, stats alone undervalue the importance of a lock down closer and can't account for the fact that having your 9th inning sorted out helps establish roles for the other relievers helping them perform with certainty night after night....

So, you are saying that having a lock down closer doesn't show itself in any way in a team's stats? It's "important", but has no influence on numbers? Has no influence on numbers but helps a team win more games? Games are won by something other than numbers?

Ditto "having your 9th inning sorted out"? No effect on numbers? Just on wins?

Stats in soccer are pretty useless. The game is too fluid. Everyone's actions, movement and relative success is always highly contingent....

Team stats in soccer don't explain wins/losses? Gee....

Seems to me that you have completely misunderstood statistics. What they are and what they're for. 100%.

Why? -- Because of course, every individual situation is "fluid... actions, movement and relative success is always highly contingent." That's the whole point of statistics, the whole reason statistics was developed in the first place! Because of that fact.

For example: if I flip a coin, that "action", that "movement" is completely "contingent" in just the way you mean. Statistics doesn't help me predict whether this coin-flip will turn up heads or tails. Nor is recent coin-flip history relevant either. Statistics is completely useless for that, in other words. Because, that's not what it's designed for.

Yet, wouldn't you say we learn something quite significant about coin-flipping when we learn that over time the ratio between heads and tails always (always -- and by necessity) approximates 1 to 1?

In a parallel way, lets say a guy shoots threes at a 40% clip. No, that doesn't enable me to predict that 4 out of 10, or 2 out of 5, will go in for him tonight. "Tonight" is "too fluid... movement and relative success is always contingent" tonight.

[payitforward]

Lets look at the 3 numbers that most contribute to team possessions: rebounds, steals & turnovers. Every 48 minutes Carter gets 7 boards, commits 1.5 TOs, and gets 1.5 steals. That's a net of +7 possessions he's delivering to his team. Brad gets 4.3 rebounds, commits 2.3 TOs,and gets 1.3 steals. That's a net of +3.3 possessions from Brad.

Suppose you take those 3.7 possessions that Vince gets but Brad doesn't, and think of them as extra FGAs that Brad takes, misses, and the other team gets the rebound. Obviously, this is a thought experiment -- and an off the cuff one at that -- but lets see what happens when we've evened up the two players on that possessions-delivered issue and moved the deficit to shooting instead.

The result is that Brad now looks significantly below Vince in TS% !

The gaping hole in your analysis is in the assumption that 1 additional rebound equals 1 additional possession. A rebound only equals an additional possession if it's a rebound that the other team would have otherwise gotten. A significant percentage of defensive rebounds are rebounds taken from teammates, not the opposition. Beal leaks out on the fast break often, but that doesn't impact the team's defensive rebounding much because Beal is so dangerous on the break that his counterpart must chase him rather than crash the offensive glass. The end result is less defensive rebounds for Beal, but most of those rebounds simply go to Gortat, Morris or Porter.

Your first point is correct. I was overstating to make a point. But your narrative about why Brad doesn't get rebounds is a classic form of justification for a player's weakness: one simply states that this weakness is not important, doesn't make any difference.

OTOH, the phenomenon about defensive rebounding you describe (1 guy's defensive board just takes a defensive board from his teammate), which is usually called the "diminishing returns" problem, has been critiqued. Indeed, the very article you cite here (with which I was familiar, btw) debunks it.

At the same time the essay undervalues defensive rebounds -- it's an old article, Nate, and has been critiqued thoroughly by Berri and others.

This statistical analysis suggests that each extra marginal defensive rebound from an individual player is only worth about 0.2 additional possessions....

Take a look if you like at https://arturogalletti.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/the-rebounding-myth/, for example, and/or do some googling, though to tell the truth I wonder whether this is really interesting enough to sustain a lot of attention. Probably a better place to start would be w/ economist Dave Berri's book The Wages of Wins. It was a big seller, but it's old enough now that on Amazon $4 gets a copy in your mailbox!

(p.s. -- no, Dat, the fact that I recommend this book doesn't mean I'm a WP48 fan-boy! -- you'd like it too, for that matter)

[long suffrin' boulez fan]

...a kind of usefulness continuum of stats across the various sports. Baseball's stats are the most reliable given that most 'interactions' are one on one. Though even the extreme Money Ball folks take it too far. For example, stats alone undervalue the importance of a lock down closer and can't account for the fact that having your 9th inning sorted out helps establish roles for the other relievers helping them perform with certainty night after night....

So, you are saying that having a lock down closer doesn't show itself in any way in a team's stats? It's "important", but has no influence on numbers? Has no influence on numbers but helps a team win more games? Games are won by something other than numbers?

Ditto "having your 9th inning sorted out"? No effect on numbers? Just on wins?

Stats in soccer are pretty useless. The game is too fluid. Everyone's actions, movement and relative success is always highly contingent....

Team stats in soccer don't explain wins/losses? Gee....

Seems to me that you have completely misunderstood statistics. What they are and what they're for. 100%.

Why? -- Because of course, every individual situation is "fluid... actions, movement and relative success is always highly contingent." That's the whole point of statistics, the whole reason statistics was developed in the first place! Because of that fact.

For example: if I flip a coin, that "action", that "movement" is completely "contingent" in just the way you mean. Statistics doesn't help me predict whether this coin-flip will turn up heads or tails. Nor is recent coin-flip history relevant either. Statistics is completely useless for that, in other words. Because, that's not what it's designed for.

Yet, wouldn't you say we learn something quite significant about coin-flipping when we learn that over time the ratio between heads and tails always (always -- and by necessity) approximates 1 to 1?

In a parallel way, lets say a guy shoots threes at a 40% clip. No, that doesn't enable me to predict that 4 out of 10, or 2 out of 5, will go in for him tonight. "Tonight" is "too fluid... movement and relative success is always contingent" tonight.

To be fair, my "stuff" had it at a 100% certainty that you were going to eviscerate me for that post.

[AFM]

Wait, you read his entire post? Who does that?

Way better tonjust make fun of him...always works for me

[nuposse04]

Yah all I got out of that was the same ol same ol... offensive rebounds= god... I'm honestly wondering if he is berri himself, lol.

That being said, Beal does need to hit the defensive glass some more.. I wonder if he is being told to run out in transition after most sets... Someone should question brooks about it.

Beal had 20 points on 15 shots, on what was seemingly a quiet night for him.Decent play making tonight though.

[WizarDynasty]

Yah all I got out of that was the same ol same ol... offensive rebounds= god... I'm honestly wondering if he is berri himself, lol.

That being said, Beal does need to hit the defensive glass some more.. I wonder if he is being told to run out in transition after most sets... Someone should question brooks about it.

Beal had 20 points on 15 shots, on what was seemingly a quiet night for him.Decent play making tonight though.

i want my shooting guard focusing on getting to the free throw attempts versus grabbing someone else miss on a offensive possession.
guards advantage are they faster and quicker than a big man. they have more agility and can create an offensive advantage consistently throughout the game. Getting the FTA is the ultimate stat for a shooting guard.

[nuposse04]

Yah all I got out of that was the same ol same ol... offensive rebounds= god... I'm honestly wondering if he is berri himself, lol.

That being said, Beal does need to hit the defensive glass some more.. I wonder if he is being told to run out in transition after most sets... Someone should question brooks about it.

Beal had 20 points on 15 shots, on what was seemingly a quiet night for him.Decent play making tonight though.

i want my shooting guard focusing on getting to the free throw attempts versus grabbing someone else miss on a offensive possession.
guards advantage are they faster and quicker than a big man. they have more agility and can create an offensive advantage consistently throughout the game. Getting the FTA is the ultimate stat for a shooting guard.

FTAs are good. He has improved a bit in that, and he should continue to do so. Defensively i'd rather a guard focus on limiting penetration from oppositions and contesting jumpshots. He should help more on the defensive glass. I don't really care he doesn't gamble for steals... I always prefer sound defense then getting out of position and screwing your teammates over by gambling on defense for steals.

But most importantly, a SG should be able to shoot. If you don't have consistent spacing your offense is screwed for everyone.

[payitforward]

Wait, you read his entire post? Who does that?

Way better tonjust make fun of him...always works for me

Listen to my man, AFM. He is right. Knowledge of the truth is not for everybody. It's too hard. Go easy on yourself. Think of your member ID here: you don't want to overdo it!

[payitforward]

Yah all I got out of that was the same ol same ol... offensive rebounds= god... I'm honestly wondering if he is berri himself, lol.

That being said, Beal does need to hit the defensive glass some more.. I wonder if he is being told to run out in transition after most sets... Someone should question brooks about it.

Beal had 20 points on 15 shots, on what was seemingly a quiet night for him.Decent play making tonight though.

Dude... Offensive rebounds weren't even mentioned!

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bealbr01.html

We're witnessing a better Bradley Beal this season.

Three attempts and FT attempts both up. Slightly higher usage. Much more efficient offensively.

[Dat2U]

deneem4 posted this yesterday:

We have a top 4 starting 5 in the league

http://stats.nba.com/league/lineups/#!/?sort=PLUS_MINUS&dir=1&CF=GP*G*10%7CMIN*G*10&Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular%20Season

Our starting 5 were the 4th best in the league as of yesterday. (They are now the 6th best). I think that solves the conundrum of how Beal, Wall, Porter and Gortat can be pretty darn good yet the team still loses. If games were just 36 minutes long, we might have the 6th best record in the league. Our bench is that bad.

Well, no. What the link confirms is that our starting lineup is 6th best in plus minus. But, because, as you say, "our bench is that bad," our bench plays relatively few minutes. Which means that our starters play lots of minutes. W/o checking, I speculate that our starters play more minutes per game than any other set of starters.

This means that our starters play more minutes against other teams' reserves than any other set of starters.

I imagine that this accounts to some degree for our starting lineup being #6 in plus-minus.

Not only don't we have the 4th best, or 6th best, starting lineup in the league, we don't have even one starter who's 4th best or 6th best at his position:

John Wall is having a very good season, but no he's not producing at the level of Chris Paul, Russell Westbrook, the Greek freak, Steph Curry, James Harden, Kyle Lowry, Damien Lillard, Patrick Mills or Kemba Walker.

Otto Porter has @8 SFs who are even better than he is.

Marcin Gortat (Gobert, Drummond, Jordan, Howard, Whiteside, Green, Love, Davis, Capela)

Beal (... oh give me a break)

Morris (he's below average, waaaay below average, among all PFs in the league)

Want the best result? Call Porter a PF and Morris a SF. That way, Otto is #5 in productivity among 4s, and Morris is.... way back somewhere on p.2 of any list.

A few points of contention.

The Greek Freak is a SF, not a PG. Matthew Delladedova starts at PG for Milwaukee. Patrick Mills is a backup that plays less than 24 minutes a game. Should he be held to the same standard as Wall considering he does most of his damage against other backups?

Draymond Green, Kevin Love & Anthony Davis see the bulk of their minutes at PF.

I'd love to see where Beal ranks when you weed out guys who you list at the wrong position & part time bench players like Vince Carter, Norman Powell, Jeremy Lamb, etc.

[nuposse04]

Yah all I got out of that was the same ol same ol... offensive rebounds= god... I'm honestly wondering if he is berri himself, lol.

That being said, Beal does need to hit the defensive glass some more.. I wonder if he is being told to run out in transition after most sets... Someone should question brooks about it.

Beal had 20 points on 15 shots, on what was seemingly a quiet night for him.Decent play making tonight though.

Dude... Offensive rebounds weren't even mentioned!

So... you don't deny being Berri

[tontoz]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bealbr01.html

We're witnessing a better Bradley Beal this season.

Three attempts and FT attempts both up. Slightly higher usage. Much more efficient offensively.

His turnover % is down a bit too. He is clearly trying to change his game.

[nate33]

Copied from the Trade Thread:

Beal scoring 21.5 PPG is hardly why. How about looking at all the guards in the last 30 years who have averaged 30+ Points per 100 possessions with a TS greater than 56% at 23 or younger. The list is real short, especially when you look at starters (30+ MPG)... how short: 10
CP3
MJ (Twice)
Harden
Arenas
Wade
Irving (Twice)
Parker
Ben Gordon
Eric Gordon
.... And Beal

The 9 players named with Beal are all HOF players except Ben Gordon. Arenas and Eric Gordon were well on their way except for Injuries.

2 things occur when you increase the age from 23 or under to 25.
1) You see the same people above listed again and again, which tells me that guys who can do this offensively at that age continually do it.
2) You see other Great player pop up and Beal is still younger than them. I.E. Steph, Ray Allen, Penny, Drexler, Reggie Miller, and Klay Thompson.

The only guys who appear who werent great players are players that couldnt shoot like Beal, so they had trouble as they got older. (I.E Paxson and Sidney Moncrief)

The two players that did this and could shoot like Beal were Ben Gordon and Kevin Martin. So, there is a chance he becomes one of them..but, Ben Gordon was smaller (2.5 inches shorter and 10 pounds lighter at the draft even though Beal was 19 and Gordon was 21). And Kevin Martin never appeared to have the Drive Beal does. I mean, just look at his diet/weight loss. He is quiet, but extremely driven.

So with that said...Im going roll with this Beal thing for another year or so.

[stevemcqueen1]

Sidney Moncrief was a great player. He was the only SG in the game that could hang with a young Jordan before Dumars came along. In between George Gervin and MJ he was probably the best SG in the game. Jim Paxson was really good for a hot minute around the same time in the early 80's. Don't know what happened there.

Beal has more upside than those guys. I think he can have a career similar to Ray Allen.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[nate33]

In the 16 games since coming back from the hamstring injury, Beal is averaging 26 points per game with a TS% of just over 62%. That's legit, first tier superstar level scoring. I'm a little skeptical that he can maintain this efficiency without more free throws, but even if he finishes the season averaging 23 points with a TS% of .580 or so, I'd be ecstatic. Also, his assists are up and his turnovers are down relative to his career averages.

[payitforward]

He's playing terrific. Above all, he's playing better than he's ever played in the past. And he's done it for long enough that maybe we can have some confidence that he's established himself at a new level.

It's less important (to me at least) exactly where that "new level" ranks him among NBA SGs right now. Improvement is the single hardest thing to achieve as a player, and it's the single best predictor of more improvement in the future. We should be very very happy about this. Lets see how far it goes!

[tontoz]

It should also be noted that he is shooting 10% better than last year on 2 pt jumpers. His career best from 10-22 feet was a dismal 37.8%. So far this year he is at 46.7%.

http://bkref.com/tiny/R69r0