I used 2019-20 data for all comparisons on purpose. I did it because Porzingis is struggling right now and we still don’t have enough of a sample size this season. Using the current season’s data would be a masochistic exercise that would only add to the current frustrations.
Before diving into the analysis it’s important to understand the data points used. I compared Porzingis to 10 other stars across six categories. Porzingis is such a unique player that it’s hard to define a position for him. He plays like a wing on offense and a big man on defense. This is why I compared him to five big men and five wing players. I selected big men who have a similar ability to shoot the ball from long range.
This is where things get dicey for Porzingis.
Low field goal percentage indicated there is trouble, but a deep-dive into Porzingis’ scoring efficiency exposed real flaws.
Porzingis ranked last among all 11 players in PSA (total points scored per hundred shot attempts), eFG (effective field goal percentage), and TS% (true shooting percentage). PSA, eFG, and TS% are three indicators we typically use to evaluate player’s scoring efficiency.
Porzingis was not an efficient scorer last season. His relatively high usage rate (24%) means he was a high-usage, but low-efficiency second option last year.
Shot creation is another category where Porzingis really struggled. He ranked last among all 11 players in both stats I analyzed in this category.
His 81% ASTD% rate means Porzingis created only 19% of his shots by himself. Porzingis is not a player who will demand the ball and create something when the team needs a bucket. His scoring opportunities are created for him within the offense by his teammates.
Creating your own shot is difficult when you are not comfortable at handling the ball. Porzingis rarely dribbles, most of his field goals last season were shots where he didn’t dribble the ball at all (68% of all shots), or where he did one dribble (10% of all shots). His efficiency dropped significantly on shots where he did more than one dribble, he shot below 34% on those shots. His assist rate was the lowest among all 11 players I analyzed, meaning he isn’t much of a creator for others in the offense.
A big part of the shot creation problem for Porzingis is that he has a limited repertoire of offensive moves.
Porzingis has a reputation of being an excellent shooter, yet his shooting accuracy data doesn’t justify that.
His three-point field goal percentage was the second-worst among all 11 players analyzed. Only Anthony Davis shot worse from behind the arc last season. But Davis’s three-point frequency was among the lowest, while Porzingis’s was among the highest. In his career, Porzingis only had one good three-point shooting season (he shot 41% in 2017-18). In all other seasons, he was in the 34% to 35% range, which is a sign of an average three-point shooter.
Porzingis had the lowest accuracy on mid-range shots among all 11 analyzed players. His 36% on mid-range shots was a career-low, in prior seasons he was in the 40%-43% range. Porzingis started last season shooting poorly from mid-range and improved as the year progressed. This season he is at 43% which is a good sign.
Porzingis is not a great individual defender. He struggles to defend aggressive post scorers and his limited mobility can get him exposed in certain pick and roll situations. We saw this recently in the two matchups against Utah, where the Jazz attacked and punished Porzingis repeatedly. This also happened last season when Damian Lillard scored 61 points against Dallas in the bubble, exposing Mavericks’s drop coverage with Porzinigis planted in the paint.
Based on this analysis Porzingis is the least efficient scorer of all analyzed players. Many fans question if Khris Middleton, Pascal Siakam, or even Paul George are good enough to be a second option on a title-contending team. This analysis shows they were much more efficient scorers than Porzingis was last season.
good article
they coming for his neck
