pandrade83 wrote:trex_8063 wrote:dhsilv2 wrote:Is it worth discussing the impact on a team to have a player who is constantly hurt? Isn't that as big a problem (all be it not the person hurt's fault) as some of the trouble makers we've discussed?
It's a fair question to ask. Aside from it simply leaving value on the table (from not playing), it's a fair question.trex_8063 wrote:
Fair enough, and fwiw I agree they add a little value. But not enough to make a HUGE difference in his career value. imo, those two seasons [each] are worth roughly what Kawhi Leonard's rookie year is worth (that is: collectively worth ~2x Kawhi's rookie season); they're LESS than what Kawhi's first two seasons would be worth, imo.
With dhsilv2's question in mind, I'm going to kind of expound on my prior comment in a further comparison of career value---Kawhi vs Walton----by doing something a touch different and sort of sectioning their respective careers into chunks that seem of similar value to me.
I think Walton's entire tenure in a Clippers uniform + his rookie season (a mere 35 games) equal in total value what Kawhi provided in his first two seasons. The specified Walton seasons comprise 5,712 rs minutes as an average 18.6 PER, .101 WS/48, +3.3 BPM player with ZERO playoff minutes to speak of. "Luck" applies here, though is arguably counter-balanced by the "damage" dhsilv2 is referring to (before we even talk about salary).
Kawhi's first two seasons comprise 3,344 rs minutes as a 16.5 PER, .168 WS/48, +4.1 BPM player; plus 1,154 playoff minutes.
Next I want to look at '77-'78 Walton vs '16-'17 Kawhi. I think there's little question that Walton peaked higher as a player (by a solid margin, imo)----I say this despite the fact that box-based metrics favor Kawhi by a handy margin (and he was top 5 or 6 in RAPM both years, too); so I allow others could disagree with me.
But otoh, Walton also again missed substantial time in these two seasons. Whereas Kawhi missed 18 TOTAL rs games between those two years, Walton missed 17 one year and 24 the other. Place however much value you choose on those 23 additional missed games, but it's not irrelevant imo: that's more than a quarter of a season; that can seriously hurt a playoff seeding some years.
Walton also missed most of the playoffs in '78. One might try to counterpoint that Kawhi missed playoff time in '17, too. But it's not nearly the same: Walton played limited minutes (of limited effectiveness) in just TWO of the six games of the Blazer's opening series (and had the Blazers managed to advance without his help, he'd have missed any subsequent playoff games). Kawhi played in 12 of the Spurs' 16 playoff games in '17, and they frankly likely would have lost to the juggernaut Warriors anyway. Most of his missed time was sort of flukey (after getting "Zaza'd") too, fwiw.
So overall, I probably put slightly more value on '77-'78 Walton, but it's a REALLY tight margin, imo. That missed playoffs in '78 in particular, hurts.
Thus, so far, I'm assessing '75, '77-'78, '80, '83-'85 Walton as providing just slightly more career value than '12-'13, '16-'17 Kawhi.
What remains is '76 and '86 Walton ('87 is irrelevant), vs '14-'15 Kawhi.
In '76, Walton is playing very well and is a formidable player (though not yet up to peak form)......but he again misses 31 games and again has no playoff sample to speak of (and in this particular instance, his missing time may well have been the reason they didn't make the post-season). In '86, he's healthy, though so far declined as to be a role player. Overall, he played 3,233 total rs minutes in those two years (avg 18.3 PER, .132 WS/48, +3.3 BPM).
'14-'15 Kawhi played 3,956 minutes (>22% more minutes) as an avg 20.7 PER, .199 WS/48, +5.9 BPM [i.e. a clearly better player than the avg of '76 and '86 Walton]; also with more playoff minutes (which include a title and FMVP).
And while Walton's off-box impact is always hinted at, it's not like these box-based stats are "empty" for Kawhi: in '14 he was 7th in the league in NPI RAPM; in '15 he was 5th in PI RAPM (behind only Lebron, Curry, CP3, and Draymond).
'14-'15 Kawhi hold such a substantial edge over '76/'86 Walton that imo it swings the needle back in his favor in terms of overall career value, by a small but clear margin.
I think this is reasonable - the only thing I disagree with is the healthy clipper years vs. Kawhi's 1st two years - partially because the fact Kawhi made the playoffs in those years by function of being on the Spurs isn't that value add to me - but also:
Per 36:
Walton: 16-12-4, 3.7 blk + steals, 57% TS
Kawhi: 13-7-2, 2.6 blk + steals, 58% TS
Now, Kawhi does have a meaningful advantage in TO's (4 to 1.1) - but some of that is a function of team responsibilities - Kawhi isn't asked to do much with the ball in general. Walton's per minute production seems more comparable to Manu's career per 36:
19-5-5, 58% TS, 2.8 TOV, 2.3 blk + steals
When I couple that with Walton's with/without impact - I actually do give the edge to Walton during those healthy Clipper years.
Meaningful ... if there was circa 4x gap in points or any other stat would you call it just "meaningful". It's huge. Enormous. It's a vast cavernous gap. The equivalent ratio (not value, to be fair, but ratio) in scoring would be more than the difference between Ben Wallace's career scoring (7 points per 36) and Shaq (24.6 per 36) - heck it's not so far off the gap between Wallace and all time points per minute leader Jordan (28.3 per 36) [Jordan leads assuming you don't count only the NBA part of Travis "Machine Gun" Grant's, career - all 159 minutes of it]. [This all assumes the roundings are correct in the prior post]. So whilst you posit that the boxscore supports an edge to Walton ... I'd disagree. When it's weighing individual seasons with different criteria (and an x factor like Walton's injuries) there's scope for reasonable disagreement. Purely on the boxscore side the metrics lean Kawhi (PER overvaluing usage leans Walton, WS overvaluing team performance goes heavily for Kawhi and fwiw, BPM leans Kawhi). Now I can see overall in light of impact stuff (depending on confidence in it) going Walton, but he wasn't a Manu level boxscore guy.
Then too, as much as I love per minute metrics, and think for too long this perspective was ignored ... there's still the fact of how long you can be on the court for that matters. And (especially if it's nowadays and) people are getting rested for the playoffs (or tanking purposes or whatever) then it's hard to ding them for that. But Walton ... you know that you can't scale up those minutes (e.g. in the playoffs). Indeed on any would be contender you would quite likely have to carry [and pay] three rotation level centers (an adequate starter and backup) or else reduce Walton's minutes further to mitigate the risk of injury (Boston had him just below 20mpg).
Ultimately though, if I were doing a list, these marginal seasons probably wouldn't come into much at this point to me. Walton is a bit of lottery ticket, if you get the circustances alligned right for his best season I think he really moves the needle (am a bit more skeptical than many on his peak - I like boxscore stuff, but then WoWY stuff suggests huge impact) and I don't know how to properly, fairly interpret '78. But versus say a Shawn Kemp with 7 meaningful seasons (and fwiw, strong playoff numbers) or Marques Johnson or Gus Williams or Jeff Hornacek or Chet Walker or Bellamy, Johnston, Divac, Howell, Cummings, Eddie Jones, Schrempf, Cassell ... or whomever you pick out of the pack ... You're looking at around 7 meaningful, really needle moving [healthy] seasons peaking at all-NBA (say Kemp, Johnson otoh) or 10 such seasons peaking at really good 3rd option/All-Star (Hornacek, Schrempf otoh). For me, I don't think Walton can compete with that.
