Where Are We On John Wall?

[picc]

In terms of all time point guard peaks?

I know we have to wait for the playoffs to play out, but might as well start now.

Season stats:

23/11/4/2/1, 54%TS, 33% 3PT on 4 attempts per game

23 PER, 3.56 ORPM, 2.59 overall RPM

Who has he matched or surpassed, if anybody?

[Dr Spaceman]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

[SideshowBob]

17 Wall vs. peak Rose...thoughts?

[Quotatious]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

I would argue that KJ was an all-timer, at least offensively. He was doing historical stuff like 20+/10+ on 50+% FG (he did that twice for a full season, Magic also did it twice, CP3 once, and that's it, nobody else has done that in NBA history) and leading top 3 offenses in the league. Johnson's prime was fairly short, but I would definitely have him as a top 10 PG all-time in his best years. As a matter of fact, I think the gap between prime Nash and KJ isn't very big (Nash is better, but it should be noted that Johnson, playing in an era when physical defense against little guys like him was allowed more than in mid/late 2000s, probably could've been even more efficient in this era, and Nash a bit worse in the 90s - Mark Price level).

KJ reminds me of Tony Parker and Allen Iverson as far as how they scored, and Iverson's/Parker's efficiency saw a boost after '04, so I would expect KJ to be even more efficient, too (and he was already a 60% TS scorer in the early 90s).

I also remember that KJ looks pretty good in WOWY (not a surprise to me, considering how big of a role he had on offense, on the Suns).

I would put Wall right around peak Kidd level in regular season, but Kidd was excellent in the playoffs, and historically, Wall hasn't been very impressive in the playoffs (although it's a small sample in his case, only 18 games, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and won't call him a poor playoff performer yet).

[Colbinii]

17 Wall vs. peak Rose...thoughts?

Rose won 62 games, not close

John wall has taken a quantum leap as an offensive player.

Career TS%: 51.3
2017 TS%: 54.2

Career OBPM: 1.7
2017 OBPM: 3.8

He is shooting less mid-range jump shots and less long 2's (which the defense will give him), and instead being more aggressive attacking the rim and making plays for his teammates. This is supported extensively with % of shots at the rim, but also with fouls drawn (career high), and points generated from assists. He is being assisted on a career low shots (which correlates to less mid-range shots), yet he is posting career highs in efficiency nearly across the board.

John Wall is making much better passes. Although he has a career high in "lost ball turnovers", he has a career low in bad passes. He is a better playmaker than anyone in the NBA other than Chris Paul (and Ricky Rubio imo, but John Wall's ability to score gives his playmaking an upper-hand to my favorite NBA player, Ricky Rubio). The Wizards have a higher AST% with John Wall in the game, but more importantly, they only have a 13.8 TOV% with Wall in and a poor 16.1 TOV% with Wall on the bench. The Wizards are producing a 114 Offense with Wall on the court, and a poor, sub 105 Offense with Wall on the bench.

I am not sure where he ranks, is he better than Peak Kidd? I need to see him in the post-season, but his ability to create not only others but for himself (something Kidd struggled with) makes me lean towards Wall in that regard. Right now, he does not have a case over Magic, CP3, Robertson, Curry, or Nash; I would likely take Stockton over him as well, but John Wall deserves discussion with any other Point Guard to play the game.

[penbeast0]

17 Wall vs. peak Rose...thoughts?

Rose won 62 games, not close

John wall has taken a quantum leap as an offensive player.

Career TS%: 51.3
2017 TS%: 54.2

Career OBPM: 1.7
2017 OBPM: 3.8

He is shooting less mid-range jump shots and less long 2's (which the defense will give him), and instead being more aggressive attacking the rim and making plays for his teammates....

You are so right; the Wiz board has been hopping up and down screaming this for the last 5 years about both Wall and Beal, this year Coach Brooks seems to be on board (unlike Randy Wittman who loved the open long 2).

[Colbinii]

17 Wall vs. peak Rose...thoughts?

Rose won 62 games, not close

John wall has taken a quantum leap as an offensive player.

Career TS%: 51.3
2017 TS%: 54.2

Career OBPM: 1.7
2017 OBPM: 3.8

He is shooting less mid-range jump shots and less long 2's (which the defense will give him), and instead being more aggressive attacking the rim and making plays for his teammates....

You are so right; the Wiz board has been hopping up and down screaming this for the last 5 years about both Wall and Beal, this year Coach Brooks seems to be on board (unlike Randy Wittman who loved the open long 2).

I have a hunch that the biggest reason for players efficiency increases has to do with shot selection. It is true at every level as well. When I play at the gym I get frustrated when people are chucking 3's, while the team that generally wins in pick-up games is the team with the most layups.

[KTM_2813]

True story:

I am about John's age, and I played against him in high school. I sucked. My team sucked. John obviously did not suck, and neither did his team.

Anyway, it's the third or fourth quarter and we're down by at least 20 points. Our coach calls a timeout and says, "We may not win, but we'll show them that we're not intimidated. Get out there, get in a defensive stance, slap the floor, and yell 'Chargers!'"

Our team walks out, petrified at how stupid we're about to look. Of course I have the responsibility of guarding John. He's bringing the ball up, and so we do our thing. We slap the floor and yell "Chargers!"

The whole gym goes silent. All you can hear is crickets. All of a sudden, some dude off of their bench goes yells, "Hey John! Break that white boy's ankles!"

John looks me dead in the eye and just goes, "Nah". Passes to his teammate. By now I've already **** my pants, but I'm so relieved.

For that, he has always been one of my favorite players. Go Wizards.

[Doctor MJ]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

I had the KJ thought as well, but the thing is, I feel like KJ is in the same tier as that first trio you mentioned, he just lacks the longevity.

It's crazy to me to think about what that means for Wall in the long-term. For a #1 pick who became this good, its crazy how much of an afterthought he is. It's just a really deep time in the history of the league right now where a player can be THIS good and yet still not seem like a Top 5 level player.

[E-Balla]

Better than KJ. Like right above him and Rose. Honestly I'd say he had the 4th best regular season. Offensively he's everything you want and next to GP, Clyde, CP3, and Kidd he's the best defender of the ATG PGs (and I'd say right now he's just as good as Paul was on D).

[picc]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

Why in particular do you have KJ below those guys?

[eminence]

Hmm, not high enough that I've ever really thought about it. He's probably #6 in his own generation (Curry, CP3, Westbrook, Harden, Lowry - and I don't think he's significantly ahead of Lillard). Magic/Oscar/West/Nash/Kidd/Stockton/Payton and probably Frazier seem like pretty easy picks as well. After that there seems to be a whole bunch of guys, somewhere around 15-20 I guess.

[Illmatic12]

Wall's numbers through his first 7 years are historically pretty rare for a point guard his age. He just took a huge leap to start his prime at 26yo, and could very well be on his way to putting together a HOF-level run over the next couple years.

A lot will hinge on his playoff success moving forward, but I think Wall is around the same stage in his career that Jason Kidd was at 26yo, possibly even ahead of that pace. I think he can still become even more refined as a scorer/shooter, and his passing ability with his size is going to age like fine wine.

[bondom34]

Was thinking about him a bit the other day, and I don't really do all time lists but for this season alone I'd have him 5th on my MVP ballot, and I think he's got a shot to move up from there in POY voting.

[Dr Positivity]

As great as he is it definitely deserves consideration that this is a PG's league right now statistically. If you count Harden Wall is somehow only 10th in WS for PGs. He's better than that, but still, I think what the context of the league may make Frazier, KJ, Isiah's peaks better

[Dr Spaceman]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

Why in particular do you have KJ below those guys?

Because theyre more versatile and can make more of an impact defensively. I see them as more portable in terms of taking a smaller on ball role and still making a big impact with shooting/defense etc. I tend to not be a huge believer in small guys who rely on explosive athleticism to get shots, as I think they usually don't last very long and generally have trouble when teams can throw a longer athlete at them.

Although based on the pushback I've received, I'm definitely going to reconsider this one.

[picc]

All time? I think he's about as good as Kevin johnson was in his time. One of the better point guards in the league, All-NBA level, but not an all timer.

He's below the Kidd/Billups/Payton tier for me, and well below the Nash/Paul tier. Probably out of the top ten All time PG peaks, although he may have a decent argument over someone like Frazier based on his explosive scoring.

Why in particular do you have KJ below those guys?

Because theyre more versatile and can make more of an impact defensively. I see them as more portable in terms of taking a smaller on ball role and still making a big impact with shooting/defense etc. I tend to not be a huge believer in small guys who rely on explosive athleticism to get shots, as I think they usually don't last very long and generally have trouble when teams can throw a longer athlete at them.

Although based on the pushback I've received, I'm definitely going to reconsider this one.

That's fair. And Its interesting that you're judging the points on their ability to take a step back and operate not as the head of the snake, but as a scale. I somewhat agree with that viewpoint, but probably for a different reason than you. That being my belief that building around point guards is impractical to begin with.

But its a little confusing why you then have Steve Nash so far ahead of that B group (+KJ) when his maximal value is so contingent on him having free reign over the ball, and his defense is by far the worst of anyone listed. Two things you mentioned as being vital to a point's universal value.

[Dr Spaceman]

Why in particular do you have KJ below those guys?

Because theyre more versatile and can make more of an impact defensively. I see them as more portable in terms of taking a smaller on ball role and still making a big impact with shooting/defense etc. I tend to not be a huge believer in small guys who rely on explosive athleticism to get shots, as I think they usually don't last very long and generally have trouble when teams can throw a longer athlete at them.

Although based on the pushback I've received, I'm definitely going to reconsider this one.

That's fair. And Its interesting that you're judging the points on their ability to take a step back and operate not as the head of the snake, but as a scale. I somewhat agree with that viewpoint, but probably for a different reason than you. That being my belief that building around point guards is impractical to begin with.

But its a little confusing why you then have Steve Nash so far ahead of that B group (+KJ) when his maximal value is so contingent on him having free reign over the ball, and his defense is by far the worst of anyone listed. Two things you mentioned as being vital to a point's universal value.

Re: Nash, it's a good criticism, but I'd answer it pretty simply. Universal value, as you put it, comes into play for me when the overall effectiveness is pretty close. I just see Nash as a much more effective player than anyone on that list.

I'll compare it with how I see things between Nash and Kobe currently. I think Nash, based on what he did in the 05-07 stretch, was more effective on the court than Kobe was at his best. That said, Kobe is bigger, stronger, durable, and his resilience against increasing defensive pressure is probably GOAT. He has advantages that Nash just can't match, and thus it makes more sense to contribute resources to building around Kobe as opposed to Nash, from a practical standpoint. I'm comfortable ranking Kobe above Nash for these reasons.

But then we get into another practical question: Kobe is on Nash's plane as an offensive player, but how many others can make that claim? For my money, less than ten in NBA history. Maybe less than 5, or less than 1 if you're a big believer in impact stats. As such if were comparing Nash to players who can reasonably match his on-court impact, Nash will almost always lose that comparison. But the thing is anyone who can match or supersede Nash's on-court impact is an all time great. Thus practical concerns about building around Nash sort of go out the window for me if we're debating Nash vs a guy like Kidd.

Put another way: Nash has real concerns about fitting into a smaller role in a team context, but it's really not a practical concern, because as long as I don't have a talent on the level of Kobe, Jordan, LeBron, Magic and maybe a couple others, the ROI ongiving Nash the keys just makes this debate irrelevant.

[ardee]

True story:

I am about John's age, and I played against him in high school. I sucked. My team sucked. John obviously did not suck, and neither did his team.

Anyway, it's the third or fourth quarter and we're down by at least 20 points. Our coach calls a timeout and says, "We may not win, but we'll show them that we're not intimidated. Get out there, get in a defensive stance, slap the floor, and yell 'Chargers!'"

Our team walks out, petrified at how stupid we're about to look. Of course I have the responsibility of guarding John. He's bringing the ball up, and so we do our thing. We slap the floor and yell "Chargers!"

The whole gym goes silent. All you can hear is crickets. All of a sudden, some dude off of their bench goes yells, "Hey John! Break that white boy's ankles!"

John looks me dead in the eye and just goes, "Nah". Passes to his teammate. By now I've already **** my pants, but I'm so relieved.

For that, he has always been one of my favorite players. Go Wizards.

Was your coach on drugs?

[picc]

Re: Nash, it's a good criticism, but I'd answer it pretty simply. Universal value, as you put it, comes into play for me when the overall effectiveness is pretty close. I just see Nash as a much more effective player than anyone on that list.

I'll compare it with how I see things between Nash and Kobe currently. I think Nash, based on what he did in the 05-07 stretch, was more effective on the court than Kobe was at his best. That said, Kobe is bigger, stronger, durable, and his resilience against increasing defensive pressure is probably GOAT. He has advantages that Nash just can't match, and thus it makes more sense to contribute resources to building around Kobe as opposed to Nash, from a practical standpoint. I'm comfortable ranking Kobe above Nash for these reasons.

But then we get into another practical question: Kobe is on Nash's plane as an offensive player, but how many others can make that claim? For my money, less than ten in NBA history. Maybe less than 5, or less than 1 if you're a big believer in impact stats. As such if were comparing Nash to players who can reasonably match his on-court impact, Nash will almost always lose that comparison. But the thing is anyone who can match or supersede Nash's on-court impact is an all time great. Thus practical concerns about building around Nash sort of go out the window for me if we're debating Nash vs a guy like Kidd.

Put another way: Nash has real concerns about fitting into a smaller role in a team context, but it's really not a practical concern, because as long as I don't have a talent on the level of Kobe, Jordan, LeBron, Magic and maybe a couple others, the ROI ongiving Nash the keys just makes this debate irrelevant.

The logics consistent. And I'm guessing that, like most, your feeling on Nash primarily comes from the Sun's team ORTG's and Nash's high RAPM marks to coincide.

We don't have the same individual data available for either of KJ or Payton during their peaks (early 90's for KJ, mid 90's for GP). What we do know is their team ORTGS were right there at the top of the league. KJ's Suns were top 2-3 offenses on an annual basis before Barkley arrived. Then reeled off a couple #1 ranked offense seasons with Chuck. All the while, KJ doing serious box score work with consistent 20/10's and reliable defense on the other end.

Payton, same thing. The Sonics produced annual #2 and #3 ranked offenses with him at the head, while also being able to maintain stringent defensive efficiency as a team, unlike the Nash-era Suns and Mavs. In part due to Payton himself.

If I'm handing the keys to my point, building around his talents, and just trying to outscore everyone, I get the argument for Nash. But not only is that a consistent recipe for failure, it's still an inequal comparison in a vacuum, as Payton and Johnson never played in a D'antoni style system. Their teams were averaging 10-15% 3PAr (compared to the Nash-Suns near 30% 3PAr and the current Rockets near 50% 3PAr). They regularly slowed it down to post up bigs. Not apples to apples.

So say I have a point who managed top 2-3 offenses, on equally or more successful teams (vis a vis Nash) that were able to maintain defensive and rebounding efficiency as well. What practical advantage is there to choosing another player whose optimal value comes from unilateral offensive control that produces a top 1 offense and below league average D?

Balance is what wins in the NBA. Touting Nash's team ORTG's as indicator of his general superiority is essentially punishing GP and KJ for playing under more pragmatic coaches. Kidd as well, to a lesser extent. It seems a little unfair.

The argument for Nash's advantage as a #1 does exist. He made those Suns teams great. But its also conditional, and contingent on factors that the majority of the greatest teams -- and greatest players -- have deliberately avoided. Then, he's at a clear disadvantage as a diminished role contributor, especially when dealing with players whose defensive utility drastically outstrips his. Most points this isn't a huge deal with. But with players like Payton, Kidd, KJ -- these are guys who can guard three positions and occasionally shut them down.

Not to imply Nash couldn't have been a big part of a championship team. It isn't like Payton and KJ have won titles either.
But his higher ROI really only materializes when you gear your team toward imbalanced play styles that most successful teams have eschewed.

Which you can do, and it still might work. It just wouldn't be my first or second choice for how to build my team.