Is Andrew Wiggins Really That Bad?

[iggymcfrack]

It's basically a rudy gay situation when he was being overpaid, he just is not worth the money he is on. He isn't a horrible player he just is not a star player and should not be making over like 10-15 mil a year.

Gay was never really overpaid. That's why he was traded for small positive value twice. On his max deal, which grew a lot slower than the cap, he was somewhere just north of neutral value. You weren't excited about paying him that much, but you could talk yourself into it if your team otherwise struggled to use its cap space productively - like the Kings, the Grizzlies or the pre-Massai Raps. And he earned that money before spacing, and therefore shooting, became such a vital part of a volume scorer's appeal.

Wiggins would have to improve a lot to match what Gay - who wasn't really bad at anything - brought to a team. That's probably his best case scenario.

Disagree, there was a period of a couple of seasons where people laughed at his pay and said he'd be solid if you halved it. But true he isn't as bad at anything as Wiggins is at some things

AD has a better chance of becoming a top 3 player all-time than Wiggins does of ever being as good as Rudy Gay.

[LoveMyRaps]

He's gonna ball out this season.

[KqWIN]

Nope. Thibodeau saw how useless his empty ass stats were and that's why he traded for Jimmy Butler.

No IQ, no ballhandling, no passing, no defense, no rebounding. He only scores so much because he literally has no idea what to do with the ball when he gets it except to shoot it. And because of his poor ballhandling and IQ, he isn't even good at that.


Nah I'm pretty sure that just shows how useless RAPM is. And I'm not sure why you're bringing up his BPM because that is an awful BPM for a minimum guy, let alone a maximum guy. That's literally one of the worst BPMs among rotation players in the league.

RAPM is RAPM. If you think it's useless, no point in trying to convince you if that's your stance, you're not even interested in learning.

I brought up his BPM precisely because it is bad. That was the point of my initial post. People constantly cite Wiggins as a poor analytics player who post ups superficial stats. His BPM, for example, has been brought up more than once.

But not analytics hate him. The one glimmer of hope for Wiggins is his pure RAPM...which is interesting because that's the measure you'd least expect to favor him. It's certainly something that slipped past me.

You can't blindly rely on a metric. It's either a metric that accords well with observation and therefore is useful at the margin because it gives you counterintuitive or unexpected conclusions, or it's a metric whose underlying methodology is so sound you trust it over observation.

Slavishly adhering to a metric doesn't help. Let's say I come up with PAYNE - a metric that tracks how close you are to Cameron Payne. It's going to rank a bunch of scrubs really well - this is not unexpected because all it does is measure them against a scrub. I can use a lot of really elaborate math to make the comparison - but it's a dumb metric because it's conceptually flawed.

I'm not blindly or slavishly relying on a metric. You see, I actually know what RAPM is. I know how it's calculated, it's pitfalls, and how it can be useful. RAPM is not conceptually flawed. In fact, it is the "correct" analytical approach. Now, that doesn't mean it's gospel. It is unreliable in smaller sample sizes. But Wiggins also has a very large sample size of not being the replacement player that people make him out to be.

I'm not saying that Andrew Wiggins is good because RAPM says so. But, I do find it interesting that the central complaint and conventional wisdom about Wiggins is not necessarily backed up by the numbers. When metrics don't align with conventional wisdom it should create a new discussion and dialogue. That's what I'm doing here. It shouldn't be a crime to be a little bit higher on a player than the rest. I'm not saying that Wiggins is a great player or anything close to worth his contract. But, we might be a little too hard on him. At the very least, we are hard on him for the wrong reasons.

I evaluate players the same way. Sometimes that aligns with the group think. But if it doesn't, I'm going to stick to my method rather than subscribe to the group think. Forget the numbers. If I said that I'm a little bit higher on Wiggins than the rest because the lineups he's in have performed well relative to the other 9 players on the floor. Would you lecture me about that? I can't speak for you, but I think that is legitimate reasoning that I also factor into my evaluation of every player. It would be hypocritical of me to completely disregard something in this situation that I place a value on in every other situation.

[Lukeem]

I still can't believe I watched this last year. Calling him the 6th best 2 way player in the league.

Watch on YouTube

How did they both state it as fact - I cannot think of a time when anyone considered him in the top 10 2 way sfs

He’s shown potential to be where they stated him to be but never came close to actually being there for more than a minute at a time

[Teen Girl Squad]

Yes, yes he is. Without his pedigree he wouldn't have half the green light to shoot that he does now and be on a minimum contract as a roster filler for a team rolling the dice.

[KqWIN]

Sure, but statistics are not here to read like gospel. You should always consider the context, and this is the context. Wiggins has stats that indicate that he's a very poor player...but his lineup data is actually not bad. This is the opposite story of what people put into his narrative.

It's interesting, that's all.

It's really not. If he was, like, top-10 in RAPM for some crazy reason, that would be interesting. Going from, say, top-250 or so in one stat to top-150 or so in a different stat is just noise.

You really wanna blow $30million a year for the next four years on that one stat that still isn't actually even that good? Really? Tim Hardaway Jr. is waaaay above him. He's up there with Horford and Beal. You wanna trade for him too? Maybe throw a max offer sheet to Raul Neto? Of course not.

I can't tell you what to find interesting, that's up to you. But for personally, I think most situations where the statisics disagree with conventional wisdom is interesting.

As to your second point, this whole time I've suggested that Wiggins is a negative value. I would not suggest negative assets in a trade for him if I did also not think he was a negative asset. I am not saying that I want to spend $30M on Andrew Wiggins. I am saying that I may want to spend $30M on Andrew Wiggins more than the consensus.

Your opinion of a player can be low and still be an opportunity because it is not as low as others. It works the other way too. You can be high on a player, but not as high as everyone else and see it as an opportunity to move him. The Clippers just did this Tobias Harris. Every player has a value. If you value someone higher than the others, it should be seen as an opportunity. It doesn't matter how bad the player is, because you should receive an incentive for that player if he's negative.

If I'm a bad team that wants to tank anyways with bad contracts, maybe CHO or OKC, I'd think about making a move.

[abark]

RAPM is RAPM. If you think it's useless, no point in trying to convince you if that's your stance, you're not even interested in learning.

I brought up his BPM precisely because it is bad. That was the point of my initial post. People constantly cite Wiggins as a poor analytics player who post ups superficial stats. His BPM, for example, has been brought up more than once.

But not analytics hate him. The one glimmer of hope for Wiggins is his pure RAPM...which is interesting because that's the measure you'd least expect to favor him. It's certainly something that slipped past me.

You can't blindly rely on a metric. It's either a metric that accords well with observation and therefore is useful at the margin because it gives you counterintuitive or unexpected conclusions, or it's a metric whose underlying methodology is so sound you trust it over observation.

Slavishly adhering to a metric doesn't help. Let's say I come up with PAYNE - a metric that tracks how close you are to Cameron Payne. It's going to rank a bunch of scrubs really well - this is not unexpected because all it does is measure them against a scrub. I can use a lot of really elaborate math to make the comparison - but it's a dumb metric because it's conceptually flawed.

I'm not blindly or slavishly relying on a metric. You see, I actually know what RAPM is. I know how it's calculated, it's pitfalls, and how it can be useful. RAPM is not conceptually flawed. In fact, it is the "correct" analytical approach. Now, that doesn't mean it's gospel. It is unreliable in smaller sample sizes. But Wiggins also has a very large sample size of not being the replacement player that people make him out to be.

I'm not saying that Andrew Wiggins is good because RAPM says so. But, I do find it interesting that the central complaint and conventional wisdom about Wiggins is not necessarily backed up by the numbers. When metrics don't align with conventional wisdom it should create a new discussion and dialogue. That's what I'm doing here. It shouldn't be a crime to be a little bit higher on a player than the rest. I'm not saying that Wiggins is a great player or anything close to worth his contract. But, we might be a little too hard on him. At the very least, we are hard on him for the wrong reasons.

I evaluate players the same way. Sometimes that aligns with the group think. But if it doesn't, I'm going to stick to my method rather than subscribe to the group think. Forget the numbers. If I said that I'm a little bit higher on Wiggins than the rest because the lineups he's in have performed well relative to the other 9 players on the floor. Would you lecture me about that? I can't speak for you, but I think that is legitimate reasoning that I also factor into my evaluation of every player. It would be hypocritical of me to completely disregard something in this situation that I place a value on in every other situation.

So what makes RAPM superior to BPM, WS/48, VORP, and other metrics that say that he is a garbage player?

He was the only top 100 scorer to have a sub 50% TS, he is a poor rebounder and playmaker, and he is an awful defender.

I'm honestly at a loss to find an aspect of his game that he doesn't have a negative contribution to the team. How can any legitimate advanced stat not rate him as a terrible player last season?

[KqWIN]

So what makes RAPM superior to BPM, WS/48, VORP, and other metrics that say that he is a garbage player.

He was the only top 50 scorer to have a sub 50% TS, he is a poor rebounder and playmaker, and he is an awful defender.

I'm honestly at a loss to find an aspect of his game that isn't a negative contribution to the team. How can any legitimate advanced stat not rate him as a terrible player last season?

It's not...Well, I would it's better than WS/48. But I maintain that no stat is inherently bad, people using them incorrectly is what's bad. BPM and VORP is the same thing BTW. RAPM is legitimate, even if it rates Wiggins as ok, because of how it's calculated. And again, I know how it's calculated and I know why it's calculated. I'm not simply looking at a list and making my entire judgement based off of it.

I do consider it in evaluation of every player. I think it's important to consider how lineups perform, relative to the other players, when they are on the court. I'm not going to make it my only consideration, but I'm not going to ignore it. It's worth bringing up and discussing. How bad can Andrew Wiggins be if the lineups perform this well with him on the court? My answer is bad, but not as bad as some may think.

In the same way, I would not ignore a player with (relatively) strong box score indicators, but had poor lineup results. D'Angelo Russell is an example of this.

[Klomp]

Gay was never really overpaid. That's why he was traded for small positive value twice. On his max deal, which grew a lot slower than the cap, he was somewhere just north of neutral value.

This is actually wrong. The major cap spike didn't happen until after Gay's deal was up.

2010-11
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $13,603,750 (23.4%)

2011-12
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $15,032,144 (25.9%)

2012-13
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $16,460,538 (28.3%)

2013-14
Salary Cap: $58,679,000
Gay salary: $17,888,931 (30.4%)

2014-15
Salary Cap: $63,065,000
Gay salary: $19,317,325 (30.6%)

Meanwhile, Wiggins' deal is staying pretty steady so far at 25%, both for this year and with the current cap projection for next year which is already the third year of his deal.

[gorz]

Overpaid? Yes, very much so.


Will he ever live up to his billing/hype? Unlikely.



Is Wiggins as bad as some are making him out to be? No, thats a stretch even with all of his flaws.

[Prospect Dong]

Gay was never really overpaid. That's why he was traded for small positive value twice. On his max deal, which grew a lot slower than the cap, he was somewhere just north of neutral value.

This is actually wrong. The major cap spike didn't happen until after Gay's deal was up.

2010-11
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $13,603,750 (23.4%)

2011-12
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $15,032,144 (25.9%)

2012-13
Salary Cap: $58,044,000
Gay salary: $16,460,538 (28.3%)

2013-14
Salary Cap: $58,679,000
Gay salary: $17,888,931 (30.4%)

2014-15
Salary Cap: $63,065,000
Gay salary: $19,317,325 (30.6%)

Meanwhile, Wiggins' deal is staying pretty steady so far at 25%, both for this year and with the current cap projection for next year which is already the third year of his deal.

Good point, thanks

[Zeitgeister]

RAPM is RAPM. If you think it's useless, no point in trying to convince you if that's your stance, you're not even interested in learning.

I brought up his BPM precisely because it is bad. That was the point of my initial post. People constantly cite Wiggins as a poor analytics player who post ups superficial stats. His BPM, for example, has been brought up more than once.

But not analytics hate him. The one glimmer of hope for Wiggins is his pure RAPM...which is interesting because that's the measure you'd least expect to favor him. It's certainly something that slipped past me.

You can't blindly rely on a metric. It's either a metric that accords well with observation and therefore is useful at the margin because it gives you counterintuitive or unexpected conclusions, or it's a metric whose underlying methodology is so sound you trust it over observation.

Slavishly adhering to a metric doesn't help. Let's say I come up with PAYNE - a metric that tracks how close you are to Cameron Payne. It's going to rank a bunch of scrubs really well - this is not unexpected because all it does is measure them against a scrub. I can use a lot of really elaborate math to make the comparison - but it's a dumb metric because it's conceptually flawed.

I'm not blindly or slavishly relying on a metric. You see, I actually know what RAPM is. I know how it's calculated, it's pitfalls, and how it can be useful. RAPM is not conceptually flawed. In fact, it is the "correct" analytical approach. Now, that doesn't mean it's gospel. It is unreliable in smaller sample sizes. But Wiggins also has a very large sample size of not being the replacement player that people make him out to be.

I'm not saying that Andrew Wiggins is good because RAPM says so. But, I do find it interesting that the central complaint and conventional wisdom about Wiggins is not necessarily backed up by the numbers. When metrics don't align with conventional wisdom it should create a new discussion and dialogue. That's what I'm doing here. It shouldn't be a crime to be a little bit higher on a player than the rest. I'm not saying that Wiggins is a great player or anything close to worth his contract. But, we might be a little too hard on him. At the very least, we are hard on him for the wrong reasons.

I evaluate players the same way. Sometimes that aligns with the group think. But if it doesn't, I'm going to stick to my method rather than subscribe to the group think. Forget the numbers. If I said that I'm a little bit higher on Wiggins than the rest because the lineups he's in have performed well relative to the other 9 players on the floor. Would you lecture me about that? I can't speak for you, but I think that is legitimate reasoning that I also factor into my evaluation of every player. It would be hypocritical of me to completely disregard something in this situation that I place a value on in every other situation.

So I love RAPM, I think it's generally the best metric we have and I've watched most of Wiggins career and I don't think those numbers are representative of his play at all, Wiggins is bad. If someone is generally bucking the perception of their box score stats I think its pretty immediately clear for those who are familiar with these things. In fact, the Wolves kind of have another player where that is the case, or at least they did have, and that was Tyus Jones. There's more information to suss out in the finer details of the box score numbers but also by watching Tyus play that make it more obvious. He's at times been quite good at having an impact in team defense. He can get a lot of steals, deflections, he'll take a charge, he'll sprint out and prevent an easy fast break. While on the offensive end he pushes the ball, he always keeps the ball moving, he NEVER turns the ball over and especially when his three ball is dropping, he's having a real noticeable impact on the game. That's the thing with Tyus too, is he'll be like the only player on the bench that is having a real positive impact and its clear why.

With Wiggins on the other hand, I do think it's either something residual because he plays with Towns and played with Butler, he benefits somewhat in the plus/minus department from that. There's also something else that might be interesting, I can't really prove it so maybe it's wrong but it would seem like the general perception that the average NBA player has of Wiggins as a scorer seems to have some inherent benefit to how they collapse at him or warp to some degree to what he's doing. Where do you have RAPM data for this year though, I haven't seen that and I'm kind of curious to know because it would seem that as Wiggins reputation changes over how poorly he's been scoring the past couple years it might affect his RAPM numbers too.

I don't know, it's otherwise hard to pin down because Wiggins disappears from games in ways you wouldn't think were possible for someone with his physical tools. It's not like he's doing all of these little interesting things that the box score fails to track, you'll never get that impression when watching Wiggins play.

[PlatinumState]

I can see him gaining experience and having Jason Richardson type career

Dont disrespect Jason Richardson like that. That comparison is wayyy off

[Klomp]

I know people don't want to admit it, but he is improving with his shot selection. His percentage of shots being 3s has improved every season and his percentage of long 2s has been declining the last two years.

[HoopsterJones]

He’s bad because his performance does not align with his contract. Not even close.

Still he’s 24 (a year younger than Siakam). Maybe he can finally put it together and work being great at one aspect of his game at a time.

[taikibansei]

I know people don't want to admit it, but he is improving with his shot selection. His percentage of shots being 3s has improved every season and his percentage of long 2s has been declining the last two years.

Last season, Wiggins was ranked 427 in the league in eFG% and 421 in TS%. Not sure if this is "improvement" I'd want to admit to....

[Klomp]

I know people don't want to admit it, but he is improving with his shot selection. His percentage of shots being 3s has improved every season and his percentage of long 2s has been declining the last two years.

Last season, Wiggins was ranked 427 in the league in eFG% and 421 in TS%. Not sure if this is "improvement" I'd want to admit to....

Shot SELECTION. I'm aware he has to be better at making those shots, but I'm just pointing out he's been taking smarter ones. Everyone always blabs on and on about his long 2s, but they've become less and less a part of his game.

[taikibansei]

I know people don't want to admit it, but he is improving with his shot selection. His percentage of shots being 3s has improved every season and his percentage of long 2s has been declining the last two years.

Last season, Wiggins was ranked 427 in the league in eFG% and 421 in TS%. Not sure if this is "improvement" I'd want to admit to....

Shot SELECTION. I'm aware he has to be better at making those shots, but I'm just pointing out he's been taking smarter ones. Everyone always blabs on and on about his long 2s, but they've become less and less a part of his game.

I know, I'm just teasing you!

[wutevahung]

I know people don't want to admit it, but he is improving with his shot selection. His percentage of shots being 3s has improved every season and his percentage of long 2s has been declining the last two years.

He also has taken a lot less lay ups and drawing less fouls though, so I can't really say his shot selections are getting better.

career low in % of shots from 0-3 feet (0.229 and 0.264), both lower than his rookie year (0.307)
He is dunking a lot less (58 and 39 successful dunks), significantly lower than his rookie year (79)
Also career lows in FT attempt per 100 (5.3 and 5.6), down from his rookie year (8)
Career low in TS% (0.505 and 0.493), lower than his rookie year (0.517)

[wolves_89]

I think Thibs ended up being just about the worst coaching choice the team could have made in terms of getting the most out of Wiggins, and trading for Butler made the situation significantly worse. This is likely the final make or break year for Andrew since he will have a coach he likes and offensive/defensive systems more aligned with his abilities. If he can't find success this season it's hard to see it happening.

If Wiggins just returns to his pre-Thibs offensive profile he'd be a decent offensive player. If he improved his shot selection as well (something it sounds like the current Wolves front office/coach are really stressing), he could be a very good second option for the offense.

His defense has never been good, but he's shown incremental improvement and with a more standard defensive approach (i.e. more switching instead of forcing him to constantly chase his guy over picks) I could see him being an average defender this season. Add in the fact that the team made a clear choice to add defense when adding players and I'm hopeful that the Wolves will take a big leap on the defensive end.