RealGM Top 25 Player Poll-#22 2019-20

[Colbinii]

How is Mitchell better than Conley, Booker, McCollum, Russell or even Lavine?

He's got a eFG% under 50%, ORPM 1.69(on par with Eric Gordon), PER of 17.2, TS% .537. What am I missing? Are people just projecting him to have a breakout year? Because there are plenty of high volume, low efficiency chuckers that don't get this kind of love.

It's a mystery, he just had one of the worst playoff performances ever. PER of 6.8 and TS% of 0.423

He is just following in Lillards footsteps.

[THE J0KER]

Simmons 17/9/8 on 58 TS%. 4.1 BPM
Mitchell 24/4/4 on 54 TS%, 0.6 BPM

Besides scoring more at league average efficiency (unimpressive), he literally does nothing better than Simmons. There's also a sizeable gap on defense, mostly because Simmons is just bigger and more versatile. Mitchell also completely fell apart in the playoffs while Simmons only kinda played worse.

I stand by it. Simmons was significantly better. Sure, Mitchell can have a jump, Simmons can stagnate and it can change next year. But like i said before, it's just a weird bet to make when Simmons is the younger player.

You (and many others here) use whole 2018-19 season stats, but if you for 2019-20 projections use only their 2019 stats (2nd half of last season, about 45 games), which is IMO more correct for such young sophomores which improved almost on monthly basis, you can see why Donovan Mitchell case against Simmons in the upcoming season is much more legit than you presented:

2019 ONLY (January-April):
Simmons 18/9/8 on 57%TS% net: +2.6
Mitchell 27/5/5 on 56%TS% net: +9.7

I'm not sure how true this. Intuitively it makes sense, but I know that with teams using the second half of the season does not improve predicative ability. You're cutting the sample, making it more random, and the second half of the season can be very noisy due to injuries, load management, and tanking.

For Donovan in particular, the Jazz had a very easy schedule in the second half compared their murderous early schedule. He was also recovering from a significant foot injury during the beginning of the season that was setting him back....but starting him at that 27/5/5 point is probably a little to generous. If that's where he's at this season, I would consider that to be a tremendous development more so than a continuation of his 18-19 season.

It's a good indicator that he can improve nonetheless. I'd say the reports out of Team USA camp are what have me most optimistic about his breakout potential.

Here are official NBA.com stats since January 1st (filter: sophomores only)

In normal circumstances, of course, that whole season was a better indicator, but we talking here about young sophomores where unlike in Simmons case, Mitchell clearly has his breakthrough moment in the 2nd half of the season. For sophomores with much better numbers in 2nd half of the sophomore season, we always have more reasons to say HE IMPROVES in the 2nd half of his second season than he has BETTER 2nd half stats than in 1st half.

You are right about Utah schedule last season, and they scored 7.5 points per game more in 2019 than in 2018, but if you look better how much Mitchell ppg stats raised, you can see IMPROVEMENT!

PPG after January 1st (Utah Jazz, notable players):
+7.5 UTAH JAZZ
+6.4 Donovan Mitchell
+2.1 Royce O'Neale
+1.4 Derrick Favors
+1.4 Rudy Gobert
+0.6 Joe Ingles
+0.2 Kyle Korver
+0.1 Ricky Rubio
-0.6 Jae Crowder
-3.6 Dante Exum

[Duffman100]

rofl i look forward to seeing a top 25 poll with only 1 member of the championship team on it.

Don't you remember Kawhi scoring 104 points per game while guarding all 5 positions at once? I have a distinct memory of that.

[KqWIN]

Here are official NBA.com stats since January 1st (filter: sophomores only)

In normal circumstances, of course, that whole season was a better indicator, but we talking here about young sophomores where unlike in Simmons case, Mitchell clearly has his breakthrough moment in the 2nd half of the season. For sophomores with much better numbers in 2nd half of the sophomore season, we always have more reasons to say HE IMPROVES in the 2nd half of his second season than he has BETTER 2nd half stats than in 1st half.

You are right about Utah schedule last season, and they scored 7.5 points per game more in 2019 than in 2018, but if you look better how much Mitchell ppg stats raised, you can see IMPROVEMENT!

PPG after January 1st (Utah Jazz, notable players):
+7.5 UTAH JAZZ
+6.4 Donovan Mitchell
+2.1 Royce O'Neale
+1.4 Derrick Favors
+1.4 Rudy Gobert
+0.6 Joe Ingles
+0.2 Kyle Korver
+0.1 Ricky Rubio
-0.6 Jae Crowder
-3.6 Dante Exum

He likely improved, especially given the health issues early on, but I guess I'm just saying that I don't believe he's a 27/5/5 player right now.

[mademan]

It's a small sample. Siakam shot 42% from 3 last year post all-star break on nearly 4 attempts per game. I dont think he's anywhere near that good of a shooter

[Alatan]

This experiment has gone of the rails after the 9th place. Simmons a top 25 player? Give me a break. Id rather have Covington than Simmons on my team. Such an overrated player.

[THE J0KER]

He likely improved, especially given the health issues early on, but I guess I'm just saying that I don't believe he's a 27/5/5 player right now.

My point is that comparing Mithell and Simmons 2018-19 stats is unfair because (unlike Simmons) Mitchell clearly improved in 2019, and in 2019-20 should be that 27-5-5 player from 2019. Will he repeat 27-5-5 numbers in 2019-20? I doubt with Utah adding Conley and Bogdanovic to their offense, but in terms of quality, Mitchell will be that same improved guy from 2019! BTW, talking about roster changes, I doubt Simmons rebounds and assists will stay that good after better rebounders and passers Horford and Richardson replaced better scorers Butler and Reddick. Instead of 17-9-8, I think 19-8-7 is a more realistic projection for Simmons upcoming season.

[LoveMyRaps]

This experiment has gone of the rails after the 9th place. Simmons a top 25 player? Give me a break. Id rather have Covington than Simmons on my team. Such an overrated player.

I bet you felt really intelligent typing that out.

[NZB2323]

How is Mitchell better than Conley, Booker, McCollum, Russell or even Lavine?

He's got a eFG% under 50%, ORPM 1.69(on par with Eric Gordon), PER of 17.2, TS% .537. What am I missing? Are people just projecting him to have a breakout year? Because there are plenty of high volume, low efficiency chuckers that don't get this kind of love.

It's a mystery, he just had one of the worst playoff performances ever. PER of 6.8 and TS% of 0.423

In the 2012 Finals, Harden(age 22) scored 12.4 ppg on 36% shooting in the finals.
In the 2013 playoffs, Klay(age 22) had a PER of 10.1 and a TS% of 0.515.
In the 2012 playoffs, Butler(age 22) wasn't even able to earn playing time with the Rose injury.
In the 2014 playoffs, McCollum(age 22) wasn't able to earn playing time.
In the 2009 playoffs, Lowry(age 22) had a PER of 10.5 and a TS% of 0.450.

3rd year players who are 23 usually have breakout years, he's killing it with Team USA, and he'll have more spacing with Conley and Bojan.

I think Simmons is more talented, but he's a weird fit with Embiid.

[mdonnelly1989]

Does anyone find it interesting that these two were the biggest comparisons in the ROTY discussion and now they are tied in the poll?

[JShuttlesworth]

I voted for Mitchell for the sake of this battle.

For the record KD / Klay / Dipo should all be on the board if they were healthy.

[dorkestra]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

[KqWIN]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

Every +/- metric has Mitchell ahead. No matter which way you look at it (box score, adjusted +/-, adjusted +/- with box score, luck adjustment), Mitchell is the better player on paper. There's a value to being an average to above average defender versus being one of the worst defenders in the league.

Mitchell also doesn't have the luxury of coming off the bench like Lou. Instead, he's the only shot creator in a starting lineup with 3 non shooters. More than half of Lou's minutes come against 2 or less starters on the court compared to less than a quarter of Mitchell's.

There's also a huge difference in age here. Mitchell is entering his age 23 season, Lou is entering his age 33 season. When it comes to projecting improvement/regression, it's quite easy to see that this is in Mitchell's favor. As pointed out by others, Mitchell was already showing signs of improvement after recovering from a significant injury that slowed him down to start the year. He posted posted 26.5/4.5/4.8 in the calendar year of 2019. Every report out of team USA has indicated that he is the rising star of the group.

[KqWIN]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

[dorkestra]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

As someone who analyzes statistics for a living, I can tell you that while numbers can be fun to discuss, qualitative assessment rightfully takes precendent. Black box investment models are frowned upon. Bottom up fundamental research is the cornerstone of a sound investment philosophy. This is a concept that transcends industry.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Maybe people thought I was just trolling earlier - I wasn't (being a contrarian can be tiresome). Can anyone present a cogent argument to defend Donovan Mitchell being a better player than Lou Williams? Mitchell is an exciting player, but he doesn't belong this early in the conversation.

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

Fair point- I was making generalizations where I probably shouldn't. As someone who weighs impact data very heavily, here's what I will say: Simmons was shoe horned alongside a talented but ill-fitting supporting cast. With Butler in Miami, Ben's role and impact will reflect more positively on him going forward.

[KqWIN]

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

As someone who analyzes statistics for a living, I can tell you that while numbers can be fun to discuss, qualitative assessment rightfully takes precendent. Black box investment models are frowned upon. Bottom up fundamental research is the cornerstone of a sound investment philosophy. This is a concept that transcends industry.

Nice attempt to appeal to authority, but that doesn't work when there are other people here who analyze statistics for a living. You don't need to be a professional to understand these numbers. I know that because I am a professional myself. As I was saying, these numbers have been used in every evaluation of every player thus far. I did not see this lecture for every player in every thread. I'm also not seeing an actual argument as to why the notion that Mitchell is on par with Simmons is blasphemy.

It's not like we're exclusively talking about black boxes anyways. The majority of the statistics I'm citing have completely public methodology. The only "black box" involved is the box score prior in RPM. I have yet to see an informed argument as to why the "black box" is actually a bad thing. That is typically an argument made by those who don't even know what a regression is. The simple fact that RPM's prior is being kept proprietary does not mean it lacks quality or isn't informative.

[KqWIN]

That argument would have to be grounded in defensive impact, which conveniently gets ignored when it comes to pro-Mitchell arguments vs Simmons.

Simmons is better but people don’t like him, and can’t separate emotion from objective assessment. It is what it is.

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

Fair point- I was making generalizations where I probably shouldn't. As someone who weighs impact data very heavily, here's what I will say: Simmons was shoe horned alongside a talented but ill-fitting supporting cast. With Butler in Miami, Ben's role and impact will reflect more positively on him going forward.

It goes both ways. The situation for Mitchell hasn't been ideal either. His two biggest strengths, attacking to the basket and spot up shooting, have been muted by the personnel around him. He was the only shot creator on his team which obviously does not yield many off ball opportunities. When he has the ball, he's not been surrounded by shooters and often finds himself surrounded by 2-3 non shooters.

I too value the impact data and I honestly think it's shame that toxicity has taken over this argument. People against Ben will call him a useless liability or whatever because of his shooting. People against Mitchell will tag him with the low efficiency chucker label. While both of these narratives aren't without reason, it subverts what should be an interesting philosophical discussion. There is a stark contrast between the two and it's not inherently clear which style has greater impact and value.

It's not just interesting as a "right now" discussion, but also going forward in their new situations and potential development paths.

[dorkestra]

On paper, the defensive argument is not as strong for Simmons as one with suspect. Simmons rates out as significantly better by the box score, but Mitchell is also significantly ahead in terms of lineup data. The only +/- metric that has Ben ahead in total is BPM, and that is because of his box score estimated defensive impact. That impact is not backed up by the actual lineup data.

Stats aren't everything, but a a statistical argument is certainly not emotional. These statistics have been used in every discussion of every player, seems appropriate to factor them into this decision as well.

As someone who analyzes statistics for a living, I can tell you that while numbers can be fun to discuss, qualitative assessment rightfully takes precendent. Black box investment models are frowned upon. Bottom up fundamental research is the cornerstone of a sound investment philosophy. This is a concept that transcends industry.

Nice attempt to appeal to authority, but that doesn't work when there are other people here who analyze statistics for a living. You don't need to be a professional to understand these numbers. I know that because I am a professional myself. As I was saying, these numbers have been used in every evaluation of every player thus far. I did not see this lecture for every player in every thread. I'm also not seeing an actual argument as to why the notion that Mitchell is on par with Simmons is blasphemy.

It's not like we're exclusively talking about black boxes anyways. The majority of the statistics I'm citing have completely public methodology. The only "black box" involved is the box score prior in RPM. I have yet to see an informed argument as to why the "black box" is actually a bad thing. That is typically an argument made by those who don't even know what a regression is. The simple fact that RPM's prior is being kept proprietary does not mean it lacks quality or isn't informative.

sorry you took offense to my statement. transparency is great, but that is not the problem with the blackbox model. the problem is the "set it and forget it" nature that does not incorporate human assessment. all of the statistics you talked about are just that - a quantitative measure, but only a mere morsel without the context that actually tells the story.

it's not an attempt to appeal for authority so much as it is a reminder to other people who like statistics to remember their limitations.