Official Anthony Edwards Thread

[winforlose]

@theZachattack, I am not going to quote you because the length of text is enormous. I am going to ask some questions and point out some things.

1. Are you aware that if you filter out Ant’s last 6 games his 3% percentage drops to 33.7% for the season? I ask because you can cherry-pick out his rough start and make him look 40%. Ant is on a hot streak (minus the one game where he went 0/6) that is inflating his numbers. If he consistently maintains his efficiency through January then we can talk about Ant being an efficient 3 point shooter.

2. What is Ant’s percentage at the rim? I know we are excluding half court data (his weakest area,) but it is an important question.

3. How many of Ant’s steals and transition points are achieved by gambling? I saw a few times last night when he timed his lunge wrong and gave up easy baskets as a result. Also I have seen plenty of steals created by the work of other Timberwolves (such as V8 harassing a Thunder player after he got a defensive rebound and as he was falling he threw it to Ant who got a quick lay in.) This is not to take away from Ant, but it is worth noting that the team defense and the team turnover creation has really stepped up, and this creates opportunities for Ant.

4. What do you say to people like me who wonder what Jaylen Nowell would be scoring with the same number of shot attempts per game? You are correct that high volume does not always equate to high scoring (see Malik Beasley,) but plenty of role players during the pandemic showed they can take over games if given the chance.

5. Why aren’t we winning more? KAT has been hugely efficient this season. Dlo has not been. All the players you mention that are elite level take over games. Yet Ant almost never steps up and takes over. He ball stops, he turns it over at crucial times, he disappears for 3 of the 4 quarters (last night he hit 5 3s out of 5 attempts and had a layup scoring 17 in the first quarter. He ended with 24, that means he scored 7 points in the other 3 quarters.) Ant has won one game in which Dlo hasn’t played, and that was same game in which KAT didn’t play. If Ant is elite level why isn’t it showing up?

6. You mention shot selection. While it is true that 3s are more efficient than long 2s, do you maybe think you are missing context? For example, a 3 after dribbling for 12 seconds disengages Ant’s teammates and denies the team a better opportunity to find either an open 3 or an easy paint bucket. The offense isn’t necessarily more efficient when Ant shoots more efficient shots. If anything, what Ant’s high volume distance shooting does is put the outcome on his shoulders, which partly explains why we are below .500. The same is true of Dlo and Beasley.

[Battletrigger]

I really love these short and concise posts.

[winforlose]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Lol. How do you respond to a mountain of text?

[Klomp]

Title: Will Anthony Edwards ever become a top 25 player? I'm tired of waiting. Wait, what do you mean Edwards is ALREADY a top 25 player? When did that happen?

If this is plagiarism, stop it!

[Battletrigger]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Lol. How do you respond to a mountain of text?

Was joking mate, It's good to see some post that not are only one or two sentences without any analysis.

[TheZachAttack]

@theZachattack, I am not going to quote you because the length of text is enormous. I am going to ask some questions and point out some things.

1. Are you aware that if you filter out Ant’s last 6 games his 3% percentage drops to 33.7% for the season? I ask because you can cherry-pick out his rough start and make him look 40%. Ant is on a hot streak (minus the one game where he went 0/6) that is inflating his numbers. If he consistently maintains his efficiency through January then we can talk about Ant being an efficient 3 point shooter.

I think what I learned by looking at other volume 3 point shooters is that 3 point shooting is really variable. Edwards numbers aren't really any more inconsistent than the majority of volume shooters who aren't Curry/Lavine and a few others. I think one of the broader points that I made is that pretty much all of these #1 option wings who we think of as good shooters (Harden, Doncic, Booker, Mitchell, Lilliard, and others) pretty much fluctuate around a mean of around 36%. Three point shooting percentages seem to variable even for the best shooters not only game by game but month by month and even season by season. All of these guys have stretches above and below that range from Doncic level (33%) to Harden/Booker/Mitchell level at ~36% to Paul George level at ~38%.

I don't expect Edwards to be a consistent 40% shooter at volume. To me, his stretch since the all star break of almost 600 attempts at 36% suggest that he's proving he's at the same level as that Harden/Mitchell/Booker group. What I would respond is that we think of Edwards as inconsistent as a 3 point shooter, but don't realize that he's not any more inconsistent than other stars. What's more important is that you can get hot from 3 and you can make any shot at any time which forces defenses to respect you.

The difference between Ant's current level and the level you just mentioned is basically if 1 out of his 8-9 attempts rims out or rims in. That's why all of these volume 3 point shooters have variable seasons between 33%-38% because there's a really fine line. It sounds like a huge difference, but it's really not. In fact, I would make a broader argument that that make or miss statistically doesn't have a huge impact on individual games. The bigger impact on individual games is if that player has proven that 1) they can get red hot at any times and force teams to guard them 2) they can create and hit their own shot from anywhere on the floor 3) that player has proven to be able to be in that roughly mean range of 36% at volume that matches other perimeter stars.

All of these other star #1 option volume 3 point shooting wings also fluctuate between stretches of shooting like Ant has recently and stretches where they are in that lower 30% range. To me, those numbers don't mean anything other than show me that Ant's shooting trends mimic other wings like Harden/Mitchell/Booker. I don't think Ant is a Curry/Lavine level shooter, but I think he's an extremely dangerous 3 point shooter in the same way that Harden/Mitchell/Booker group is. Ant will go through stretches at 32-33% and 38-39%, the most important thing is that teams respect his shot to open up spacing for himself and others and that he keeps shooting.

Edwards shooting trends and ebs and flows are no different than the majority of other stars. We analyze our own players in a microscope. Ant not being a Curry/Lavine level 3 point shooter, doesn't mean he isn't trending towards being one of the more valuable perimeter shooters in the league.

2. What is Ant’s percentage at the rim? I know we are excluding half court data (his weakest area,) but it is an important question.

This is an area that Ant needs to improve in. I didn't really get in depth on topics such as this other than to holistically analyze if the totality of the outcome of Ant's 2 point shots equate to meeting the threshold for a #1 wing as defined by the 2 point % output by other star wings. I touched on Edwards shooting much less midrange shots than the majority of this group, this should mean that his 2pt % is higher than the majority of this group.

Ant's FG% at the rim this season is ~66% (inside 3 feet) on basketball reference and 62% inside the restricted area on NBA.com on 6.1 attempts. (59.6% on 5.9 attempts last year)

Booker is at 56% on 2.3 attempts. (Last season 69% on 4.7 attempts 2 seasons ago and 63.1% on 4.1 attempts last season)

Mitchell is at 64.4% on 4.4 attempts (60.6% on 4 attempts last season)

Tatum is at 60.1% on 5.4 attempts (68.1% on 5 attempts last season)

Harden is at 58.3% on 4.4 attempts (63% on 4.8 attempts last season, 64% on 6.3 attempts the year before)

Lavine is at 69.7 on 5.5 attempts (65.5% on 6.7 attempts last season)

Beal is at 68% on 5 attempts

Lebron is at ~77% on 7.3 attempts (75.6% on 6.4 attempts last season, 69% on 8.3 attempts the year before)

George is at 59.8% on ~3 attempts

Derozan is at 59.4% on 3 attempts

Butler is at 70% on 5.5 attempts

Ingram is at 62.6% on 3.6 attempts

Ball is at 57% on 5.2 attempts (51.6% on 5.6 attempts last season)

Giannis is at 80% on 9 attempts

Durant is at 74% on 2.8 attempts this season and was at 78% on 3 attempts last season.

The majority of the scoring guards (Lilliard/Trae/Curry) have been at ~57-61% on 3-5 attempts

Conclusion: Edwards restricted area volume compares favorably to other wings in this group not named Lebron/Giannis (who to me aren't really similar comparables for Edwards). Edwards gets to the rim as much or more than other #1 option scoring wings/guards even looking back historically over the past few years. Edwards FG% at the rim falls at the lower end of the median of the range (60%-70% seems to be roughly the low-end / high-end range for an acceptable range for high-end wings).

Edwards does need to get more efficient at the rim. I would like to see him get closer to 65% at a minimum rather than 62%. However, his current percentages aren't really a problem...it's more of a scenario where it could get better. It appears the majority of #1 wings fluctuate between 60-66% depending on the season.

My argument is that Edwards percentages should improve as he starts to earn more foul calls. Looking at this group the majority of this group started their careers in the Edwards free throw range or lower and then progressed to the 5-6+ range. I think this is probably a combination of starting to get more calls as they were recognized for being great players, but also improvement and learning how to draw more calls. I think Edwards will, without any improvement, start to get more calls. However, I think he also needs to improve his handle and playmaking ability. I think part of the reason he doesn't get calls is because the majority of his attempts at the rim are him going full speed and acrobatically leaping and trying to his his athleticism to finish through traffic. I think as he improves in these areas he will be able to vary his drives into the paint and at times potentially play a little bit more under control which will allow him to potentially bait defenders into contact or put defenders in positions more often to foul.

I don't think Edwards current FG% is a problem as I mentioned. I think natural progression as a #1 scorer in the NBA and some improvement in order to draw more fouls will likely lead to a higher percentage at the rim where he draws fouls on drives where there is a lot of contact making finishing really difficult.


3. How many of Ant’s steals and transition points are achieved by gambling? I saw a few times last night when he timed his lunge wrong and gave up easy baskets as a result. Also I have seen plenty of steals created by the work of other Timberwolves (such as V8 harassing a Thunder player after he got a defensive rebound and as he was falling he threw it to Ant who got a quick lay in.) This is not to take away from Ant, but it is worth noting that the team defense and the team turnover creation has really stepped up, and this creates opportunities for Ant.

I noted that I didn't get into the defensive side of things. I think it's possible that Edwards ability to generate turnovers generates more negative defensive output than it does positive offense output, but I doubt it. There are advanced metrics out there that quantify the value of generating turnovers better than I can, but in a rough sense the value of a steal is worth in a marginal value sense the same as 9 points. That seems in some ways like it's probably something that's overstated from a statistical perspective, but the larger point is that there's a huge positive correlation between generating turnovers like steals to winning.

The reason being is that basketball is really an offensive first league and in many senses even the best defense cannot stop the best offense. The best way to win in basketball is to figure out ways to increase the number of offensive possessions that your team has and decrease the number of offensive possessions that the other team has. To illustrate the point, let's assume that there are 100 total possessions in a basketball game and each team gets 50 possessions. If you can 'take' possesions from the other team by generating turnovers (especially if those turnovers lead directly to a scoring on the other end) than your team has 51 possessions and the other team has 49 possesions. This means that the other team has to use 49 possessions to outscore the other team in 51 possessions meaning that their efficiency in 49 possesions has to be better than average efficiency assuming the other team is scoring at league average efficiency and even more if the team is above that.

The value of turnovers, assuming they lead directly to fastbreak points, increases if you factor in that the best offenses in that assumption probably only score on roughly 50% of those possessions (call it 25 possessions). This means that each possession is worth roughly 0.5 points, so really a turnover that leads to almost guaranteed points is worth the value of 2 additional possessions in a vacuum in this example. Basketball is really a game of 1) trying to figure out ways to make your opponents have less possessions than that baseline of 50 possessions in this example 2) figure out ways to increase the number of possessions that you have (offensive rebounds, generating turnovers) 3) Preventing opponents from increasing the number of possessions that they have.

This is just a rough example and isn't meant to actually equate value other than to show a theory around why turnovers are valuable. Edwards is generating steals at one of the higher rates for a player also carrying a #1 offensive scoring load. It could be true that Edwards gambling sometimes leads to the defense scrambling. However, everytime Edwards scrambles also doesn't lead to points for the other team. I would also argue in a general sense that if Edwards is generating ~6 points per game off of turnovers largely directly as a result from his own efforts that his "gambling" is directly creating the majority of roughly an 8-10 point swing in games in the value of his 5 points off of turnovers. This is because Edwards is directly taking points from the other team from their possessions without using the Wolves possessions that they start a game with. If you don't generate turnovers, than the only way to maximize your own 50 possessions is (other than increasing pace) to increase your efficiency which isn't easy.

In general, I am of the opinion that having aggressive defenses that aggressively push for turnover risking breakdowns at times are entirely worth it. Even when gambling doesn't work and the turnover isn't generating out the negative value of that gambling is only the marginal difference between the points per possession that team would generate if the defense was playing straight up versus the points per possession a team generates with whatever advantage they get from a gamble being unsuccessful.

In my opinion, if that aggressive style is leading to generating a lot of turnovers (for the Wolves it is they are the league leaders or near the league lead with a defense that is vastly improved from any Wolves defense in recent memory) it is VASTLY worth it at the cost of the marginal difference between the opposing teams points per possession if the Wolves weren't playing as aggressive. I don't think the Wolves have a lot of elite defensive players, even if they did I think good offensive players score at a high level even against good defense, and I don't think the marginal difference in the increase in scoring efficiency opposing teams get from the value of the downside of the Wolves defensive scheme is that great and certainly not more than the positive side.

I want to explore, in actual detail and take a look at data in the same way I did on the offensive side, but I am a huge believer in the value of emphasizing forcing turnovers and generating high percentage points off of turnovers and in transition. In my mind, this style of play greatly increases your own teams margin of error in terms of how well (how efficient and how careful with the ball) that your team has to be on a consistent basis because it makes the other team have to outproduce the production that your team generates in more possessions with less possessions.

I think Edwards mentality, whatever you want to call it, and his ability to generate turnovers and be a high-level transition finisher and scorer off of turnovers is the posterchild of this change in Wolves defensive mentality that I think is one of the big driving forces behind their improvement.

4. What do you say to people like me who wonder what Jaylen Nowell would be scoring with the same number of shot attempts per game? You are correct that high volume does not always equate to high scoring (see Malik Beasley,) but plenty of role players during the pandemic showed they can take over games if given the chance.

I think this is an extremely important point. I tried to address this in the sample that I was comparing the data in. The sample of 68 players that I was using when comparing efficiency metrics and other data points basically consisted of two types of player 1) #1/#2 offensive options and 2) Efficient role players. Basically, NBA teams either concentrate their offensive possessions in the hands of a couple of elite scorers with role players playing off of them with smaller roles or they, either because they don't have a player with the talent to be in the #1/#2 role or because of offensive system, spread out that concentrated production among (at least ideally) a group of role players who can operate efficiently within a smaller role being asked to do specific things.

In a general sense, I think there is a threshold where teams shouldn't concentrate volume in a single player if that player isn't scoring efficiently and that role could be spread out between multiple players who can create efficient offense maybe not through creating their own shot but by trying to generate offense through a system that leads to lesser players taking shots that the defense gives them so to speak. However, I have in recent years had a change in viewpoint as it relates to this trade-off. I think that in the regular season generating offense through role players who may not be strong shot creators. The thing with having an offense that doesn't have perimeter players who are elite shot creators is that offense, in some ways, takes a lot of work. In each possession, you need players that can execute a system and sequence together a number of different passes/action that eventually leads to an open shot when it works.

This is great, especially in the regular season and during the majority of possessions in games. However, this style of play works less and less the more that possessions matter (crunch time), the more that games matter, and certainly in the playoffs. In these types of possessions and games, defensive intensity is going to pick up and you're going to likely be facing better defenses as well. Physicality increases, time and space gets smaller, defenses are more focused. Relying on non-elite shotmakers/ballhandlers to execute and sequence together action and passes against this type of intensity with less time and space is a recipe for failure. These teams do well in regular seasons, but they quickly flame out in the playoffs.

The one scenario where this works, and I could buy in, is the idea that you should ask your star players to play that type of basketball that tries to generate open looks instead of the focus of the offense being first to isolate or ask star players to create shots as the emphasis of the offense. Theoretically, the best type of offense would be one that has that type of ball movement and structure, but when things break down or when the intensity of possesions pick up you can simplify things and let star players create offense.

Back to Edwards instead of theory

Edwards efficiency over the past 25 games is at the same level as both the elite shot creators in the league but also the efficiency of the highest efficiency (elite) role players that, in this example, are theoretically the best case scenario of what an offense relying on say Beasley/Nowell to produce in smaller roles to combine to replace Edwards possessions would produce. However, even using Edwards season long efficiency numbers (~51-52% from 2 / 37% from 3 / 78-79% from the line) basically put Edwards in an efficiency range in terms of his scoring output that certainly meets, but probably outproduces the efficiency that a committee approach of even above average role players (assuming Beasley/Nowell are that) could combine to produce. In addition, Edwards offensive production can be counted on in crunch time possesions and in the playoffs where it becomes much harder and riskier to try to create offense by stringing together 7 perfect passes to find the open player.

I think Edwards has reached an efficiency level at the current baseline he's established since the all-star break that puts him at the level (he has just barely reached that threshold) where his volume scoring is worth it to rely on instead of limiting his possessions. This is basically the definition of a 'good' primary scoring option as defined by the baseline in my original post.

If Nowell can produce at that same efficiency at volume against starting NBA players on a consistent basis and consistently when possesions get difficult than Nowell should be given a larger role. However, there are other possessions from other players on the team that I would take before I would take those possessions from Edwards. In addition, Nowell has shown the ability to potentially be a player that in some form can score and create his own shot at a high-level. However, he hasn't shown yet that he can do that consistently when he's being counted on to do it and in games/possessions that matter.


5. Why aren’t we winning more? KAT has been hugely efficient this season. Dlo has not been. All the players you mention that are elite level take over games. Yet Ant almost never steps up and takes over. He ball stops, he turns it over at crucial times, he disappears for 3 of the 4 quarters (last night he hit 5 3s out of 5 attempts and had a layup scoring 17 in the first quarter. He ended with 24, that means he scored 7 points in the other 3 quarters.) Ant has won one game in which Dlo hasn’t played, and that was same game in which KAT didn’t play. If Ant is elite level why isn’t it showing up?

Note: I will respond to this later when I have time to get to it. Definitely worth discussing

6. You mention shot selection. While it is true that 3s are more efficient than long 2s, do you maybe think you are missing context? For example, a 3 after dribbling for 12 seconds disengages Ant’s teammates and denies the team a better opportunity to find either an open 3 or an easy paint bucket. The offense isn’t necessarily more efficient when Ant shoots more efficient shots. If anything, what Ant’s high volume distance shooting does is put the outcome on his shoulders, which partly explains why we are below .500. The same is true of Dlo and Beasley.

Note: I will respond to this later when I have time to get to it. Definitely worth discussing

[fattymcgee]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Lol. How do you respond to a mountain of text?

This isn't a mountain of text.
It's the entire mountain range!!!

Probably could've cut it to a third if he wouldn't have rehashed the same points over and over and over again.
However, there is a lot of good data in here and some good analysis too.

[winforlose]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Lol. How do you respond to a mountain of text?

This isn't a mountain of text.
It's the entire mountain range!!!

Probably could've cut it to a third if he wouldn't have rehashed the same points over and over and over again.
However, there is a lot of good data in here and some good analysis too.

I agree. I also want to respond to his rather large response to me, but I am thinking I will wait until he has time to address issues 5 and 6. I was just saying that I struggle with knowing how much to say when responding to such wide ranging and massive posts.

[TheZachAttack]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Lol. How do you respond to a mountain of text?

This isn't a mountain of text.
It's the entire mountain range!!!

Probably could've cut it to a third if he wouldn't have rehashed the same points over and over and over again.
However, there is a lot of good data in here and some good analysis too.

Thanks this is good feedback. I’m not sure how well my points come across and try to reemphasize key themes after adding additional data to the argument but I think I could be more concise.

[TheZachAttack]

@theZachattack, I am not going to quote you because the length of text is enormous. I am going to ask some questions and point out some things.

1. Are you aware that if you filter out Ant’s last 6 games his 3% percentage drops to 33.7% for the season? I ask because you can cherry-pick out his rough start and make him look 40%. Ant is on a hot streak (minus the one game where he went 0/6) that is inflating his numbers. If he consistently maintains his efficiency through January then we can talk about Ant being an efficient 3 point shooter.

I think what I learned by looking at other volume 3 point shooters is that 3 point shooting is really variable. Edwards numbers aren't really any more inconsistent than the majority of volume shooters who aren't Curry/Lavine and a few others. I think one of the broader points that I made is that pretty much all of these #1 option wings who we think of as good shooters (Harden, Doncic, Booker, Mitchell, Lilliard, and others) pretty much fluctuate around a mean of around 36%. Three point shooting percentages seem to variable even for the best shooters not only game by game but month by month and even season by season. All of these guys have stretches above and below that range from Doncic level (33%) to Harden/Booker/Mitchell level at ~36% to Paul George level at ~38%.

I don't expect Edwards to be a consistent 40% shooter at volume. To me, his stretch since the all star break of almost 600 attempts at 36% suggest that he's proving he's at the same level as that Harden/Mitchell/Booker group. What I would respond is that we think of Edwards as inconsistent as a 3 point shooter, but don't realize that he's not any more inconsistent than other stars. What's more important is that you can get hot from 3 and you can make any shot at any time which forces defenses to respect you.

The difference between Ant's current level and the level you just mentioned is basically if 1 out of his 8-9 attempts rims out or rims in. That's why all of these volume 3 point shooters have variable seasons between 33%-38% because there's a really fine line. It sounds like a huge difference, but it's really not. In fact, I would make a broader argument that that make or miss statistically doesn't have a huge impact on individual games. The bigger impact on individual games is if that player has proven that 1) they can get red hot at any times and force teams to guard them 2) they can create and hit their own shot from anywhere on the floor 3) that player has proven to be able to be in that roughly mean range of 36% at volume that matches other perimeter stars.

All of these other star #1 option volume 3 point shooting wings also fluctuate between stretches of shooting like Ant has recently and stretches where they are in that lower 30% range. To me, those numbers don't mean anything other than show me that Ant's shooting trends mimic other wings like Harden/Mitchell/Booker. I don't think Ant is a Curry/Lavine level shooter, but I think he's an extremely dangerous 3 point shooter in the same way that Harden/Mitchell/Booker group is. Ant will go through stretches at 32-33% and 38-39%, the most important thing is that teams respect his shot to open up spacing for himself and others and that he keeps shooting.

Edwards shooting trends and ebs and flows are no different than the majority of other stars. We analyze our own players in a microscope. Ant not being a Curry/Lavine level 3 point shooter, doesn't mean he isn't trending towards being one of the more valuable perimeter shooters in the league.

2. What is Ant’s percentage at the rim? I know we are excluding half court data (his weakest area,) but it is an important question.

This is an area that Ant needs to improve in. I didn't really get in depth on topics such as this other than to holistically analyze if the totality of the outcome of Ant's 2 point shots equate to meeting the threshold for a #1 wing as defined by the 2 point % output by other star wings. I touched on Edwards shooting much less midrange shots than the majority of this group, this should mean that his 2pt % is higher than the majority of this group.

Ant's FG% at the rim this season is ~66% (inside 3 feet) on basketball reference and 62% inside the restricted area on NBA.com on 6.1 attempts. (59.6% on 5.9 attempts last year)

Booker is at 56% on 2.3 attempts. (Last season 69% on 4.7 attempts 2 seasons ago and 63.1% on 4.1 attempts last season)

Mitchell is at 64.4% on 4.4 attempts (60.6% on 4 attempts last season)

Tatum is at 60.1% on 5.4 attempts (68.1% on 5 attempts last season)

Harden is at 58.3% on 4.4 attempts (63% on 4.8 attempts last season, 64% on 6.3 attempts the year before)

Lavine is at 69.7 on 5.5 attempts (65.5% on 6.7 attempts last season)

Beal is at 68% on 5 attempts

Lebron is at ~77% on 7.3 attempts (75.6% on 6.4 attempts last season, 69% on 8.3 attempts the year before)

George is at 59.8% on ~3 attempts

Derozan is at 59.4% on 3 attempts

Butler is at 70% on 5.5 attempts

Ingram is at 62.6% on 3.6 attempts

Ball is at 57% on 5.2 attempts (51.6% on 5.6 attempts last season)

Giannis is at 80% on 9 attempts

Durant is at 74% on 2.8 attempts this season and was at 78% on 3 attempts last season.

The majority of the scoring guards (Lilliard/Trae/Curry) have been at ~57-61% on 3-5 attempts

Conclusion: Edwards restricted area volume compares favorably to other wings in this group not named Lebron/Giannis (who to me aren't really similar comparables for Edwards). Edwards gets to the rim as much or more than other #1 option scoring wings/guards even looking back historically over the past few years. Edwards FG% at the rim falls at the lower end of the median of the range (60%-70% seems to be roughly the low-end / high-end range for an acceptable range for high-end wings).

Edwards does need to get more efficient at the rim. I would like to see him get closer to 65% at a minimum rather than 62%. However, his current percentages aren't really a problem...it's more of a scenario where it could get better. It appears the majority of #1 wings fluctuate between 60-66% depending on the season.

My argument is that Edwards percentages should improve as he starts to earn more foul calls. Looking at this group the majority of this group started their careers in the Edwards free throw range or lower and then progressed to the 5-6+ range. I think this is probably a combination of starting to get more calls as they were recognized for being great players, but also improvement and learning how to draw more calls. I think Edwards will, without any improvement, start to get more calls. However, I think he also needs to improve his handle and playmaking ability. I think part of the reason he doesn't get calls is because the majority of his attempts at the rim are him going full speed and acrobatically leaping and trying to his his athleticism to finish through traffic. I think as he improves in these areas he will be able to vary his drives into the paint and at times potentially play a little bit more under control which will allow him to potentially bait defenders into contact or put defenders in positions more often to foul.

I don't think Edwards current FG% is a problem as I mentioned. I think natural progression as a #1 scorer in the NBA and some improvement in order to draw more fouls will likely lead to a higher percentage at the rim where he draws fouls on drives where there is a lot of contact making finishing really difficult.


3. How many of Ant’s steals and transition points are achieved by gambling? I saw a few times last night when he timed his lunge wrong and gave up easy baskets as a result. Also I have seen plenty of steals created by the work of other Timberwolves (such as V8 harassing a Thunder player after he got a defensive rebound and as he was falling he threw it to Ant who got a quick lay in.) This is not to take away from Ant, but it is worth noting that the team defense and the team turnover creation has really stepped up, and this creates opportunities for Ant.

I noted that I didn't get into the defensive side of things. I think it's possible that Edwards ability to generate turnovers generates more negative defensive output than it does positive offense output, but I doubt it. There are advanced metrics out there that quantify the value of generating turnovers better than I can, but in a rough sense the value of a steal is worth in a marginal value sense the same as 9 points. That seems in some ways like it's probably something that's overstated from a statistical perspective, but the larger point is that there's a huge positive correlation between generating turnovers like steals to winning.

The reason being is that basketball is really an offensive first league and in many senses even the best defense cannot stop the best offense. The best way to win in basketball is to figure out ways to increase the number of offensive possessions that your team has and decrease the number of offensive possessions that the other team has. To illustrate the point, let's assume that there are 100 total possessions in a basketball game and each team gets 50 possessions. If you can 'take' possesions from the other team by generating turnovers (especially if those turnovers lead directly to a scoring on the other end) than your team has 51 possessions and the other team has 49 possesions. This means that the other team has to use 49 possessions to outscore the other team in 51 possessions meaning that their efficiency in 49 possesions has to be better than average efficiency assuming the other team is scoring at league average efficiency and even more if the team is above that.

The value of turnovers, assuming they lead directly to fastbreak points, increases if you factor in that the best offenses in that assumption probably only score on roughly 50% of those possessions (call it 25 possessions). This means that each possession is worth roughly 0.5 points, so really a turnover that leads to almost guaranteed points is worth the value of 2 additional possessions in a vacuum in this example. Basketball is really a game of 1) trying to figure out ways to make your opponents have less possessions than that baseline of 50 possessions in this example 2) figure out ways to increase the number of possessions that you have (offensive rebounds, generating turnovers) 3) Preventing opponents from increasing the number of possessions that they have.

This is just a rough example and isn't meant to actually equate value other than to show a theory around why turnovers are valuable. Edwards is generating steals at one of the higher rates for a player also carrying a #1 offensive scoring load. It could be true that Edwards gambling sometimes leads to the defense scrambling. However, everytime Edwards scrambles also doesn't lead to points for the other team. I would also argue in a general sense that if Edwards is generating ~6 points per game off of turnovers largely directly as a result from his own efforts that his "gambling" is directly creating the majority of roughly an 8-10 point swing in games in the value of his 5 points off of turnovers. This is because Edwards is directly taking points from the other team from their possessions without using the Wolves possessions that they start a game with. If you don't generate turnovers, than the only way to maximize your own 50 possessions is (other than increasing pace) to increase your efficiency which isn't easy.

In general, I am of the opinion that having aggressive defenses that aggressively push for turnover risking breakdowns at times are entirely worth it. Even when gambling doesn't work and the turnover isn't generating out the negative value of that gambling is only the marginal difference between the points per possession that team would generate if the defense was playing straight up versus the points per possession a team generates with whatever advantage they get from a gamble being unsuccessful.

In my opinion, if that aggressive style is leading to generating a lot of turnovers (for the Wolves it is they are the league leaders or near the league lead with a defense that is vastly improved from any Wolves defense in recent memory) it is VASTLY worth it at the cost of the marginal difference between the opposing teams points per possession if the Wolves weren't playing as aggressive. I don't think the Wolves have a lot of elite defensive players, even if they did I think good offensive players score at a high level even against good defense, and I don't think the marginal difference in the increase in scoring efficiency opposing teams get from the value of the downside of the Wolves defensive scheme is that great and certainly not more than the positive side.

I want to explore, in actual detail and take a look at data in the same way I did on the offensive side, but I am a huge believer in the value of emphasizing forcing turnovers and generating high percentage points off of turnovers and in transition. In my mind, this style of play greatly increases your own teams margin of error in terms of how well (how efficient and how careful with the ball) that your team has to be on a consistent basis because it makes the other team have to outproduce the production that your team generates in more possessions with less possessions.

I think Edwards mentality, whatever you want to call it, and his ability to generate turnovers and be a high-level transition finisher and scorer off of turnovers is the posterchild of this change in Wolves defensive mentality that I think is one of the big driving forces behind their improvement.

4. What do you say to people like me who wonder what Jaylen Nowell would be scoring with the same number of shot attempts per game? You are correct that high volume does not always equate to high scoring (see Malik Beasley,) but plenty of role players during the pandemic showed they can take over games if given the chance.

I think this is an extremely important point. I tried to address this in the sample that I was comparing the data in. The sample of 68 players that I was using when comparing efficiency metrics and other data points basically consisted of two types of player 1) #1/#2 offensive options and 2) Efficient role players. Basically, NBA teams either concentrate their offensive possessions in the hands of a couple of elite scorers with role players playing off of them with smaller roles or they, either because they don't have a player with the talent to be in the #1/#2 role or because of offensive system, spread out that concentrated production among (at least ideally) a group of role players who can operate efficiently within a smaller role being asked to do specific things.

In a general sense, I think there is a threshold where teams shouldn't concentrate volume in a single player if that player isn't scoring efficiently and that role could be spread out between multiple players who can create efficient offense maybe not through creating their own shot but by trying to generate offense through a system that leads to lesser players taking shots that the defense gives them so to speak. However, I have in recent years had a change in viewpoint as it relates to this trade-off. I think that in the regular season generating offense through role players who may not be strong shot creators. The thing with having an offense that doesn't have perimeter players who are elite shot creators is that offense, in some ways, takes a lot of work. In each possession, you need players that can execute a system and sequence together a number of different passes/action that eventually leads to an open shot when it works.

This is great, especially in the regular season and during the majority of possessions in games. However, this style of play works less and less the more that possessions matter (crunch time), the more that games matter, and certainly in the playoffs. In these types of possessions and games, defensive intensity is going to pick up and you're going to likely be facing better defenses as well. Physicality increases, time and space gets smaller, defenses are more focused. Relying on non-elite shotmakers/ballhandlers to execute and sequence together action and passes against this type of intensity with less time and space is a recipe for failure. These teams do well in regular seasons, but they quickly flame out in the playoffs.

The one scenario where this works, and I could buy in, is the idea that you should ask your star players to play that type of basketball that tries to generate open looks instead of the focus of the offense being first to isolate or ask star players to create shots as the emphasis of the offense. Theoretically, the best type of offense would be one that has that type of ball movement and structure, but when things break down or when the intensity of possesions pick up you can simplify things and let star players create offense.

Back to Edwards instead of theory

Edwards efficiency over the past 25 games is at the same level as both the elite shot creators in the league but also the efficiency of the highest efficiency (elite) role players that, in this example, are theoretically the best case scenario of what an offense relying on say Beasley/Nowell to produce in smaller roles to combine to replace Edwards possessions would produce. However, even using Edwards season long efficiency numbers (~51-52% from 2 / 37% from 3 / 78-79% from the line) basically put Edwards in an efficiency range in terms of his scoring output that certainly meets, but probably outproduces the efficiency that a committee approach of even above average role players (assuming Beasley/Nowell are that) could combine to produce. In addition, Edwards offensive production can be counted on in crunch time possesions and in the playoffs where it becomes much harder and riskier to try to create offense by stringing together 7 perfect passes to find the open player.

I think Edwards has reached an efficiency level at the current baseline he's established since the all-star break that puts him at the level (he has just barely reached that threshold) where his volume scoring is worth it to rely on instead of limiting his possessions. This is basically the definition of a 'good' primary scoring option as defined by the baseline in my original post.

If Nowell can produce at that same efficiency at volume against starting NBA players on a consistent basis and consistently when possesions get difficult than Nowell should be given a larger role. However, there are other possessions from other players on the team that I would take before I would take those possessions from Edwards. In addition, Nowell has shown the ability to potentially be a player that in some form can score and create his own shot at a high-level. However, he hasn't shown yet that he can do that consistently when he's being counted on to do it and in games/possessions that matter.


5. Why aren’t we winning more? KAT has been hugely efficient this season. Dlo has not been. All the players you mention that are elite level take over games. Yet Ant almost never steps up and takes over. He ball stops, he turns it over at crucial times, he disappears for 3 of the 4 quarters (last night he hit 5 3s out of 5 attempts and had a layup scoring 17 in the first quarter. He ended with 24, that means he scored 7 points in the other 3 quarters.) Ant has won one game in which Dlo hasn’t played, and that was same game in which KAT didn’t play. If Ant is elite level why isn’t it showing up?

Note: I will respond to this later when I have time to get to it. Definitely worth discussing


Note: I will respond to this later when I have time to get to it. Definitely worth discussing

Responses combined to #5 & 6. I’m not sure I directly responded to everything you said—but my high level discussion on how I would think about Ant because of his current playstyle as well as why the Wolves aren’t better than they are.

I thought that I did address this exact point in my post. Right now, Edwards has developed to the level as a scorer where he can be grouped with other #1 option scorers as I’ve mentioned. However, he is not at that level as a playmaker, ball handler, or decision maker yet. There is a difference between being a player in a #1a/#1b scorer role for a team and a player who is both a primary scorer and playmaker. It is worth saying that there are very few players in the NBA at this level.

Right now, in the Wolves offense, there are basically either Edwards possessions or non-Edwards possessions. Edwards can make some simple plays off of his penetration as the defense collapses, but right now his role is to be a scorer. In that role, the biggest issue that I see is that Edwards isn’t that engaged when the possession isn’t an Edwards possession.

Edwards needs to improve in his ability to be impactful off ball as a cutter and a floor spacer to be a target for the person running the primary action or ball handler. I think he can get better at being more valuable when he doesn’t have the ball when it’s not “his” possessions. However, he has gotten better this season off ball in a few different ways. He’s running much more in transition, he’s over 40% from both of the corners, he has developed some off ball chemistry with Towns running around him on fake hand-offs, and he’s actually at 42% as a catch and shoot 3 point shooter so really he’s not ‘bad’ off ball I think he could just be a little bit more active.

There’s no question that Edwards is not yet ready to have a bigger role in an offense than a #1 or #2 scorer. Edwards is not yet ready to be an initiator the offense. It takes a lot of skills to be an initiator and manage the flow of the game and how/when to run different actions to get others involved. This is especially true, if you are being ALSO asked to be a primary scorer as well. In that case, you also have to balance the flow of the game while getting your shots but making sure teammates stay involved, in rhythm, and get shot attempts in situations that put them in good positions to succeed.

There are only a handful of perimeter players that can do this today, especially so if you talk about wings and not PGs. That list is pretty much limited to Lebron, Doncic, Harden, and Butler is basically it off the top of my head. There are other wings who are given the ball in the half court a lot and get assists off of that usage (Durant, Kawhi, and maybe a few others) as well.

Edwards role is to be the Wolves primary scorer—and his output should be judged by his ability to score the ball. I think the Wolves offense does have some flow problems, but those issues are more related to the Wolves roster construction and lack of having a perimeter who is an elite initiator who can manage the flow of the game. Russell, in my mind, does not do this well and this is the reason he is not ranked higher as a guard in the league. Russell is a good passer/playmaker, but he struggles to balance initiating offense for himself and others in the right way.

There’s a reason that other scoring wings—Lavine, Mitchell, Booker, Tatum—have found success when playing next to players who are really strong initiators. Booker/Lavine’s team success has unsurprisingly coincided with playing with initiators like Paul, Rubio, and Ball to manage this aspect of the game. Mitchell has always played with initiators like Rubio/Conley and Tatum and the Celtics are struggling without a primary initiator despite two great scoring wings in Tatum/Brown.

It would be nice if D Lo would take even more of backseat scoring role in terms of creating his own shot similar to how Harden has for the Nets. In fact, I think even to some extent he has. There’s a reason that D Lo has been an x-factor the Wolves this year even though his shot hasn’t been falling and his usage and attempts are down. However, this is something that the Wolves are missing on offense.

This isn’t really a huge problem though and neither is Edwards efficiency or really playstyle either. To answer your question about winning or lack there of, I think the answer is really simple. The answer is we don’t have enough two way role players who are both above average on defense but also can provide efficient offense (especially perimeter spacing) while playing off of stars. When you compare the Wolves roster to other contenders, the answer is really obvious. The answer isn’t in the offensive production of its stars. Towns/Edwards and also Towns/Edwards/D Lo especially in a world where D Lo is hitting perimeter shots at his career average score as many points at just about as good or better efficiency as any other big 2 or big 3 in the league.

The issue is that the majority of other contenders have rotations around their stars of players who can either space the floor from the perimeter or vertically above the rim as roll/lob threats. There are very few contending rosters that play multiple guard/wing/ball handler role players that don’t space the floor. I made posts about it last year as well, but the reason the Wolves have improved this year isn’t because of how well our big 2 or 3 are scoring or playing. It’s because we’ve improved our rotation and added role players who are productive, at least in someways, at the level those players need to be on contending teams. These teams MIGHT have one player who cannot provide efficient offense but is a great defender in their rotation and they MIGHT have a one other 6th man type player who can create his own shot both at the rim and from the perimeter. The Wolves role players are not at that level.

The reason the Wolves have made a jump from bottom dweller to playoff contender, other than health, is because they have found role players—Beverly, Vanderbilt, McDaniels namely—who are legit above average to elite defensive players. McDaniels has regressed as a spacer this season as well as Beverly from his career averages, but all 3 can also provide competant offense in a specific role (either as a spacer or as a dump off/second chance point/roll big).

I think Beverly/Vanderbilt are legit contending above average rotation level players. I think they both can be role players in a contending starting rotation that can provide efficient offense without high touches. McDaniels is borderline as well given how good he is at defense, but he is an example of the one non-shooting wing that a contending bench can have as a shutdown wing.

In general, the Wolves do not have a backup big who can protect the rim. The Wolves do not have floor spacers from the perimeter that can play off of stars and they do not have a 6th man who can create his own shot. The majority of contenders have a group of non-star rotation players that combine to average 35-40% from 3 while the Wolves are much closer to 30%. The Wolves need to identify role players who can provide shot creation off the bench and spacing at a league average level or better while providing at least passable or better defense.

[TheZachAttack]

I really love these short and concise posts.

Then my posts aren't for you. Feel free to pick our portions. I wrote this while I tried to take a few hours to look at data to learn the way that I feel that I should think about Edwards as he related to other wings in the league based on trying to ground myself on data to not just react to my eye test in watching games, but to try to find out blindspots that I may have about what #1 option wing scoring looks like in the NBA.

I'm sorry for inconveniencing you by adding free content that I thought included interesting information on what expectations should look like from a #1 option wing scorer based on other #1 players in the NBA, how Edwards current production compares to those expectations, and a data perspective on Edwards underlying numbers that I thought revealed interesting takeaways that suggest from a data perspective some differences about Edwards than the way that we generally talk about him.

If you don't like reading long content for free. Feel free not to read my content.

[winforlose]

@theZachAttack, I decided I am going to stagger my responses so as to make the conversation a bit more digestible.

1. Regarding Ant’s 3 point volume. I agree there is a natural variance between games and even seasons for the players you mentioned. But you look at guys like Towns who are capable of shooting at or above 40% on the year and you ask the question why is it more valuable for Ant who shoots between 33-38% to take an extra 5 3s (the difference between 5 and 10 attempts per game,) then for KAT? If KAT takes 5 at between 40-45 % he should roughly 2-2.25. If we double that number KAT taking 10 attempts gets you roughly 4-4.5 makes per game. Also you mention Ant is the 1a or 1b scorer. But Towns is the primary scorer on a given night and as often as not Dlo scores either as much, more, or almost as much as Ant often on fewer shots. That is before we even ask questions about the attempts per game of the players in the class you listed above.

2. As you mentioned Ant is getting steals and turning them into points. The percentages you list include fast breaks, I wonder what his at the rim and in the paint numbers are in the half court. While we agree he needs to improve at the rim, it is also worth noting that his ability to get to the rim is perhaps his best asset. If he can improve his at the rim percentage and increase his drives he would become significantly more valuable and get to the line more. Ant’s lack of whistles could be directly linked to his lack of drives.

3. I understand your argument about the value of possessions. Using your 100 total possessions formula you are correct that 1 steal for 2 points is actually significantly more valuable because of the swing. However, if Ant gives up 6 points in failed attempts and only manages to secure 1 extra possession worth 2 points, now the wolves are -2 at least. It is also worth noting that basketball is a game of confidence and momentum. When lunges and misses he breaks down our defense. Giving opponents open 3s or easier interior dunks/layups. Allowing opposing teams to build momentum is an issue. A lot of current success is in fact because we create such havoc on defense that opposing teams struggle to build their rhythm and therefore go on fewer and shorter runs. Ant is no doubt more defensively productive this year than last, but his steals are not always only his steals and his gambles are not always a net positive.

[TheZachAttack]

1. Regarding Ant’s 3 point volume. I agree there is a natural variance between games and even seasons for the players you mentioned. But you look at guys like Towns who are capable of shooting at or above 40% on the year and you ask the question why is it more valuable for Ant who shoots between 33-38% to take an extra 5 3s (the difference between 5 and 10 attempts per game,) then for KAT? If KAT takes 5 at between 40-45 % he should roughly 2-2.25. If we double that number KAT taking 10 attempts gets you roughly 4-4.5 makes per game. Also you mention Ant is the 1a or 1b scorer. But Towns is the primary scorer on a given night and as often as not Dlo scores either as much, more, or almost as much as Ant often on fewer shots. That is before we even ask questions about the attempts per game of the players in the class you listed above.



1) I would not argue against wanting Towns to take more 3 point attempts. Towns is a better 3 point shooter than Edwards. The first thing I would say is that if you're going to bring that energy at Edwards are you also going to bring it to the majority of the best wings in the NBA as well? Because if you're making that argument then you should think that by definition. If you do that's fine, I've been a proponent of this type of NBA theory in the past. I just want to know because then the conversation shifts from Towns/Edwards to debating NBA theory--which is fun too.

There are only 27 players in the entire NBA who shoot 5.5 or more 3pt FGA per game and make >38%. Some of these are not players who are asked to create primary offense but secondary players who get to benefit from the efficiency increases associated with a lesser shot difficulty.

2)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I would argue that Towns should take more 3 point shots, but he shouldn't take 3 point shots from Edwards. Instead, I would rather have Towns take additional shots from really anyone other than Edwards given that Edwards 3 point shots have the second-highest efficiency on the team behind Towns. However, I would say that's a fallacy to make me choose between Towns & Edwards. To be clear, I am definitely a proponent on having Towns take 10 3's per game. However, there are plenty of shots in a game for Towns to shoot 5 additional shots per game and Edwards to maintain his volume.

The reason that it is valuable (I'm not sure I would say it in the more valuable context) for Edwards to be able to create 8 3's per game is that creating shots is a difficult skill in the NBA that is treated like it isn't. It is HARD to create 8 or 10 looks per game to get your shot off. It's even harder for bigs to generate shots at that volume because they are reliant on someone getting them the ball. Generating volume is a skill as much as a certain number of fans who believe in a certain type of NBA theory might want to believe.

I'm not sure Towns is able to generate 10 3's on average in a given night. I'm really unsure that Towns can create his own shot that many times once defenses know that the Wolves primary game plan is to try to get Towns the ball or Towns is going to try to dribble to get his shot open above the 3 point line. I think that either Towns would have to initiate the ball over halfcourt himself, which would lead to TOs, or the Wolves would have to try to find ways to force balls through defenses that are heavily denying the ball leading to TOs. In addition, to create that many shots Towns would have to be willing to shoot more. Towns is relatively selective with his shot choices, which helps his efficiency. However, he really does not take a lot of contested 3's. In fact, during Towns career ~90% of his 3's have been assisted. Which in a general sense means many of them are catch and shoot or in rhythm 3's--which is fine.

But again, now you're asking something much more difficult when it comes to creating an additional 5 3's for Towns. You're asking how can we get the ball to Towns X amount more times that will lead to scenarios where Towns is open enough to feel comfortable to shoot 5 more 3's. If you're making an argument that why don't we just let players with higher 3 point percentages shoot more? Well are they efficient because they have the luxury of shooting shot types that have a higher expected efficiency? Would they be able to keep that efficiency if they weren't in that scenario?

Do you really think that there aren't a ton of scenarios, especially in games that matter more like the playoffs, where it's really hard to generate open looks and you have to be able to create your own shot? How many players can do that? There's a reason that when you look at the top 30 high volume shooters in the NBA shooting over 7 attempts per game that there are less than 5 shooting above 38% and there are also reasons that there are only 30 players taking 7+ 3's per game.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Basically, my high-level argument is that creating shots is more difficult than you think especially for big men and especially the more that games matter. Volume is a SKILL and efficiency is less straightforward than you'd think when comparing players. Players that can't create their own shot have to have a play set up for them that results in a series of passes leading them to being open. Okay, well that sounds hard...especially against good defense. Wait, so how many times do I have to pass it to him before he's open? What happens now if he's not open before the shot clock ends? What is that players efficiency if he's now forced to have to create his own shot?

Unless a player can create their own shot, you can try to move the ball to them and generate open looks but there's no guarantee that they will be open--especially so if you've decided to make it an emphasis of your offense to try to get the ball to a 3 point shooter who is highly efficient but reliant on someone to create the shot for them (this includes Towns). So now you're telling me that you want to try to force passes to a player, against a defense that knows what you want to do, and ask the player to take shots that are likely more highly contested because they are more difficult and you expect them to keep the same 'higher' efficiency? In my opinion, these revelations about shot creation are crucial to understand as a basketball fan, especially when understanding the type of team construction that will lead to playoff success.

Now, again when we're talking about a player like Towns I do think he should shoot more. I think there are of things Towns could do to demand the ball more and take more shots that he creates from the perimeter. However, I reject the idea that you are making a choice between an Edwards and Towns shot. Instead, I think you're making the choice between a Towns shot and a lesser player. There are extra possessions out there. If you told me there was literally not a single extra possession to be found than sure...Towns over Edwards.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Towns & Edwards are clearly the Wolves highest usage players if we are using usage to define the number of possessions that ends in a shot--this is backed up by usage data. However, when I am using these terms it's very high-level because basketball is fluid.I would even argue that Edwards is the #1 option over Towns although I wish Towns demanded the ball more often. D Lo's usage rates are down ~5-7% from his usage in GSW/Brooklyn and 5% from his USG last season.Towns/Edwards are at 27-28% compared to D Lo's 24-25%.

I'm not sure the #1/#1a type terminology works well outside of a rough blanket term.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. As you mentioned Ant is getting steals and turning them into points. The percentages you list include fast breaks, I wonder what his at the rim and in the paint numbers are in the half court. While we agree he needs to improve at the rim, it is also worth noting that his ability to get to the rim is perhaps his best asset. If he can improve his at the rim percentage and increase his drives he would become significantly more valuable and get to the line more. Ant’s lack of whistles could be directly linked to his lack of drives.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fastbreak points/attempts at the rim muddying the at the rim data and conclusions - These are good questions. I actually started my post with the same concern and had started to type out what I thought would be the narrative when I started writing (because I thought it was) that Edwards half-court attempts at the rim were really low and his percentages, while on the surface at the bottom end of where you want it to be, was buoyed by his FG% on fastbreak attempts.

Ultimately, I started doing some work by hand to remove fastbreak points and try to guess at FG attempts on the fastbreak using points/percentage but it was too intensive. There wasn't easy to get at data that was easy enough to access within how far I was willing to search.

What I can say about why I decided to remove it is that Edwards ranks highly in fastbreak points per game, but he still only scores 3.87 points per game. I think I ended up with some assumptions that suggested a good enough estimate for Edwards fast break attempts is about 3 attempts per game. Basically, even though Edwards is near the league lead in fast break points it's really not that many possessions per game. I would have still kept it, but when you realize that if you are going to make that comparison between Edwards 2 point shots at the rim in the halfcourt and other comparable wings... you'd have to remove their fastbreak point attempts and points as well. The majority of the pool I was comparing had 2-3+ fastbreak points as well (on the low end you're comparing 1 made basket versus 2 and probably 1.5 shot attempts versus 3 shot attempts and the majority was even closer than that).

That led me to focusing on the positive around fastbreak points in terms of being an anchor on leveling efficiency numbers because doing the math to take away the whole pools transition points to see a change in ~1 attempt at the rim compared to the group for those that have more transition baskets didn't really seem meaningful. What I can say is that, at a high-level, Edwards still gets to the rim at one of the highest levels in the league both when comparing to all players but especially when comparing him to other wings. The majority of wings that get to the rim a lot in the halfcourt are somewhat unsurprisingly players that also are dangerous in transition.
1. Regarding Ant’s 3 point volume. I agree there is a natural variance between games and even seasons for the players you mentioned. But you look at guys like Towns who are capable of shooting at or above 40% on the year and you ask the question why is it more valuable for Ant who shoots between 33-38% to take an extra 5 3s (the difference between 5 and 10 attempts per game,) then for KAT? If KAT takes 5 at between 40-45 % he should roughly 2-2.25. If we double that number KAT taking 10 attempts gets you roughly 4-4.5 makes per game. Also you mention Ant is the 1a or 1b scorer. But Towns is the primary scorer on a given night and as often as not Dlo scores either as much, more, or almost as much as Ant often on fewer shots. That is before we even ask questions about the attempts per game of the players in the class you listed above.



1) I would not argue against wanting Towns to take more 3 point attempts. Towns is a better 3 point shooter than Edwards. The first thing I would say is that if you're going to bring that energy at Edwards are you also going to bring it to the majority of the best wings in the NBA as well? Because if you're making that argument then you should think that by definition. If you do that's fine, I've been a proponent of this type of NBA theory in the past. I just want to know because then the conversation shifts from Towns/Edwards to debating NBA theory--which is fun too.

There are only 27 players in the entire NBA who shoot 5.5 or more 3pt FGA per game and make >38%. Some of these are not players who are asked to create primary offense but secondary players who get to benefit from the efficiency increases associated with a lesser shot difficulty.

2)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I would argue that Towns should take more 3 point shots, but he shouldn't take 3 point shots from Edwards. Instead, I would rather have Towns take additional shots from really anyone other than Edwards given that Edwards 3 point shots have the second-highest efficiency on the team behind Towns. However, I would say that's a fallacy to make me choose between Towns & Edwards. To be clear, I am definitely a proponent on having Towns take 10 3's per game. However, there are plenty of shots in a game for Towns to shoot 5 additional shots per game and Edwards to maintain his volume.

The reason that it is valuable (I'm not sure I would say it in the more valuable context) for Edwards to be able to create 8 3's per game is that creating shots is a difficult skill in the NBA that is treated like it isn't. It is HARD to create 8 or 10 looks per game to get your shot off. It's even harder for bigs to generate shots at that volume because they are reliant on someone getting them the ball. Generating volume is a skill as much as a certain number of fans who believe in a certain type of NBA theory might want to believe.

I'm not sure Towns is able to generate 10 3's on average in a given night. I'm really unsure that Towns can create his own shot that many times once defenses know that the Wolves primary game plan is to try to get Towns the ball or Towns is going to try to dribble to get his shot open above the 3 point line. I think that either Towns would have to initiate the ball over halfcourt himself, which would lead to TOs, or the Wolves would have to try to find ways to force balls through defenses that are heavily denying the ball leading to TOs. In addition, to create that many shots Towns would have to be willing to shoot more. Towns is relatively selective with his shot choices, which helps his efficiency. However, he really does not take a lot of contested 3's. In fact, during Towns career ~90% of his 3's have been assisted. Which in a general sense means many of them are catch and shoot or in rhythm 3's--which is fine.

But again, now you're asking something much more difficult when it comes to creating an additional 5 3's for Towns. You're asking how can we get the ball to Towns X amount more times that will lead to scenarios where Towns is open enough to feel comfortable to shoot 5 more 3's. If you're making an argument that why don't we just let players with higher 3 point percentages shoot more? Well are they efficient because they have the luxury of shooting shot types that have a higher expected efficiency? Would they be able to keep that efficiency if they weren't in that scenario?

Do you really think that there aren't a ton of scenarios, especially in games that matter more like the playoffs, where it's really hard to generate open looks and you have to be able to create your own shot? How many players can do that? There's a reason that when you look at the top 30 high volume shooters in the NBA shooting over 7 attempts per game that there are less than 5 shooting above 38% and there are also reasons that there are only 30 players taking 7+ 3's per game.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Basically, my high-level argument is that creating shots is more difficult than you think especially for big men and especially the more that games matter. Volume is a SKILL and efficiency is less straightforward than you'd think when comparing players. Players that can't create their own shot have to have a play set up for them that results in a series of passes leading them to being open. Okay, well that sounds hard...especially against good defense. Wait, so how many times do I have to pass it to him before he's open? What happens now if he's not open before the shot clock ends? What is that players efficiency if he's now forced to have to create his own shot?

Unless a player can create their own shot, you can try to move the ball to them and generate open looks but there's no guarantee that they will be open--especially so if you've decided to make it an emphasis of your offense to try to get the ball to a 3 point shooter who is highly efficient but reliant on someone to create the shot for them (this includes Towns). So now you're telling me that you want to try to force passes to a player, against a defense that knows what you want to do, and ask the player to take shots that are likely more highly contested because they are more difficult and you expect them to keep the same 'higher' efficiency? In my opinion, these revelations about shot creation are crucial to understand as a basketball fan, especially when understanding the type of team construction that will lead to playoff success.

Now, again when we're talking about a player like Towns I do think he should shoot more. I think there are of things Towns could do to demand the ball more and take more shots that he creates from the perimeter. However, I reject the idea that you are making a choice between an Edwards and Towns shot. Instead, I think you're making the choice between a Towns shot and a lesser player. There are extra possessions out there. If you told me there was literally not a single extra possession to be found than sure...Towns over Edwards.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Towns & Edwards are clearly the Wolves highest usage players if we are using usage to define the number of possessions that ends in a shot--this is backed up by usage data. However, when I am using these terms it's very high-level because basketball is fluid.I would even argue that Edwards is the #1 option over Towns although I wish Towns demanded the ball more often. D Lo's usage rates are down ~5-7% from his usage in GSW/Brooklyn and 5% from his USG last season.Towns/Edwards are at 27-28% compared to D Lo's 24-25%.

I'm not sure the #1/#1a type terminology works well outside of a rough blanket term.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. As you mentioned Ant is getting steals and turning them into points. The percentages you list include fast breaks, I wonder what his at the rim and in the paint numbers are in the half court. While we agree he needs to improve at the rim, it is also worth noting that his ability to get to the rim is perhaps his best asset. If he can improve his at the rim percentage and increase his drives he would become significantly more valuable and get to the line more. Ant’s lack of whistles could be directly linked to his lack of drives.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fastbreak points/attempts at the rim muddying the at the rim data and conclusions - These are good questions. I actually started my post with the same concern and had started to type out what I thought would be the narrative when I started writing (because I thought it was) that Edwards half-court attempts at the rim were really low and his percentages, while on the surface at the bottom end of where you want it to be, was buoyed by his FG% on fastbreak attempts.

Ultimately, I started doing some work by hand to remove fastbreak points and try to guess at FG attempts on the fastbreak using points/percentage but it was too intensive. There wasn't easy to get at data that was easy enough to access within how far I was willing to search.

What I can say about why I decided to remove it is that Edwards ranks highly in fastbreak points per game, but he still only scores 3.87 points per game. I think I ended up with some assumptions that suggested a good enough estimate for Edwards fast break attempts is about 3 attempts per game. Basically, even though Edwards is near the league lead in fast break points it's really not that many possessions per game. I would have still kept it, but when you realize that if you are going to make that comparison between Edwards 2 point shots at the rim in the halfcourt and other comparable wings... you'd have to remove their fastbreak point attempts and points as well. The majority of the pool I was comparing had 2-3+ fastbreak points as well (on the low end you're comparing 1 made basket versus 2 and probably 1.5 shot attempts versus 3 shot attempts and the majority was even closer than that).

That led me to focusing on the positive around fastbreak points in terms of being an anchor on leveling efficiency numbers because doing the math to take away the whole pools transition points to see a change in ~1 attempt at the rim compared to the group for those that have more transition baskets didn't really seem meaningful. What I can say is that, at a high-level, Edwards still gets to the rim at one of the highest levels in the league both when comparing to all players but especially when comparing him to other wings. The majority of wings that get to the rim a lot in the halfcourt are somewhat unsurprisingly players that also are dangerous in transition.
1. Regarding Ant’s 3 point volume. I agree there is a natural variance between games and even seasons for the players you mentioned. But you look at guys like Towns who are capable of shooting at or above 40% on the year and you ask the question why is it more valuable for Ant who shoots between 33-38% to take an extra 5 3s (the difference between 5 and 10 attempts per game,) then for KAT? If KAT takes 5 at between 40-45 % he should roughly 2-2.25. If we double that number KAT taking 10 attempts gets you roughly 4-4.5 makes per game. Also you mention Ant is the 1a or 1b scorer. But Towns is the primary scorer on a given night and as often as not Dlo scores either as much, more, or almost as much as Ant often on fewer shots. That is before we even ask questions about the attempts per game of the players in the class you listed above.



1) I would not argue against wanting Towns to take more 3 point attempts. Towns is a better 3 point shooter than Edwards. The first thing I would say is that if you're going to bring that energy at Edwards are you also going to bring it to the majority of the best wings in the NBA as well? Because if you're making that argument then you should think that by definition. If you do that's fine, I've been a proponent of this type of NBA theory in the past. I just want to know because then the conversation shifts from Towns/Edwards to debating NBA theory--which is fun too.

There are only 27 players in the entire NBA who shoot 5.5 or more 3pt FGA per game and make >38%. Some of these are not players who are asked to create primary offense but secondary players who get to benefit from the efficiency increases associated with a lesser shot difficulty.

2)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I would argue that Towns should take more 3 point shots, but he shouldn't take 3 point shots from Edwards. Instead, I would rather have Towns take additional shots from really anyone other than Edwards given that Edwards 3 point shots have the second-highest efficiency on the team behind Towns. However, I would say that's a fallacy to make me choose between Towns & Edwards. To be clear, I am definitely a proponent on having Towns take 10 3's per game. However, there are plenty of shots in a game for Towns to shoot 5 additional shots per game and Edwards to maintain his volume.

The reason that it is valuable (I'm not sure I would say it in the more valuable context) for Edwards to be able to create 8 3's per game is that creating shots is a difficult skill in the NBA that is treated like it isn't. It is HARD to create 8 or 10 looks per game to get your shot off. It's even harder for bigs to generate shots at that volume because they are reliant on someone getting them the ball. Generating volume is a skill as much as a certain number of fans who believe in a certain type of NBA theory might want to believe.

I'm not sure Towns is able to generate 10 3's on average in a given night. I'm really unsure that Towns can create his own shot that many times once defenses know that the Wolves primary game plan is to try to get Towns the ball or Towns is going to try to dribble to get his shot open above the 3 point line. I think that either Towns would have to initiate the ball over halfcourt himself, which would lead to TOs, or the Wolves would have to try to find ways to force balls through defenses that are heavily denying the ball leading to TOs. In addition, to create that many shots Towns would have to be willing to shoot more. Towns is relatively selective with his shot choices, which helps his efficiency. However, he really does not take a lot of contested 3's. In fact, during Towns career ~90% of his 3's have been assisted. Which in a general sense means many of them are catch and shoot or in rhythm 3's--which is fine.

But again, now you're asking something much more difficult when it comes to creating an additional 5 3's for Towns. You're asking how can we get the ball to Towns X amount more times that will lead to scenarios where Towns is open enough to feel comfortable to shoot 5 more 3's. If you're making an argument that why don't we just let players with higher 3 point percentages shoot more? Well are they efficient because they have the luxury of shooting shot types that have a higher expected efficiency? Would they be able to keep that efficiency if they weren't in that scenario?

Do you really think that there aren't a ton of scenarios, especially in games that matter more like the playoffs, where it's really hard to generate open looks and you have to be able to create your own shot? How many players can do that? There's a reason that when you look at the top 30 high volume shooters in the NBA shooting over 7 attempts per game that there are less than 5 shooting above 38% and there are also reasons that there are only 30 players taking 7+ 3's per game.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Basically, my high-level argument is that creating shots is more difficult than you think especially for big men and especially the more that games matter. Volume is a SKILL and efficiency is less straightforward than you'd think when comparing players. Players that can't create their own shot have to have a play set up for them that results in a series of passes leading them to being open. Okay, well that sounds hard...especially against good defense. Wait, so how many times do I have to pass it to him before he's open? What happens now if he's not open before the shot clock ends? What is that players efficiency if he's now forced to have to create his own shot?

Unless a player can create their own shot, you can try to move the ball to them and generate open looks but there's no guarantee that they will be open--especially so if you've decided to make it an emphasis of your offense to try to get the ball to a 3 point shooter who is highly efficient but reliant on someone to create the shot for them (this includes Towns). So now you're telling me that you want to try to force passes to a player, against a defense that knows what you want to do, and ask the player to take shots that are likely more highly contested because they are more difficult and you expect them to keep the same 'higher' efficiency? In my opinion, these revelations about shot creation are crucial to understand as a basketball fan, especially when understanding the type of team construction that will lead to playoff success.

Now, again when we're talking about a player like Towns I do think he should shoot more. I think there are of things Towns could do to demand the ball more and take more shots that he creates from the perimeter. However, I reject the idea that you are making a choice between an Edwards and Towns shot. Instead, I think you're making the choice between a Towns shot and a lesser player. There are extra possessions out there. If you told me there was literally not a single extra possession to be found than sure...Towns over Edwards.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Towns & Edwards are clearly the Wolves highest usage players if we are using usage to define the number of possessions that ends in a shot--this is backed up by usage data. However, when I am using these terms it's very high-level because basketball is fluid.I would even argue that Edwards is the #1 option over Towns although I wish Towns demanded the ball more often. D Lo's usage rates are down ~5-7% from his usage in GSW/Brooklyn and 5% from his USG last season.Towns/Edwards are at 27-28% compared to D Lo's 24-25%.

I'm not sure the #1/#1a type terminology works well outside of a rough blanket term.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. As you mentioned Ant is getting steals and turning them into points. The percentages you list include fast breaks, I wonder what his at the rim and in the paint numbers are in the half court. While we agree he needs to improve at the rim, it is also worth noting that his ability to get to the rim is perhaps his best asset. If he can improve his at the rim percentage and increase his drives he would become significantly more valuable and get to the line more. Ant’s lack of whistles could be directly linked to his lack of drives.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fastbreak points/attempts at the rim muddying the at the rim data and conclusions - These are good questions. I actually started my post with the same concern and had started to type out what I thought would be the narrative when I started writing (because I thought it was) that Edwards half-court attempts at the rim were really low and his percentages, while on the surface at the bottom end of where you want it to be, was buoyed by his FG% on fastbreak attempts.

Ultimately, I started doing some work by hand to remove fastbreak points and try to guess at FG attempts on the fastbreak using points/percentage but it was too intensive. There wasn't easy to get at data that was easy enough to access within how far I was willing to search.

What I can say about why I decided to remove it is that Edwards ranks highly in fastbreak points per game, but he still only scores 3.87 points per game. I think I ended up with some assumptions that suggested a good enough estimate for Edwards fast break attempts is about 3 attempts per game. Basically, even though Edwards is near the league lead in fast break points it's really not that many possessions per game. I would have still kept it, but when you realize that if you are going to make that comparison between Edwards 2 point shots at the rim in the halfcourt and other comparable wings... you'd have to remove their fastbreak point attempts and points as well. The majority of the pool I was comparing had 2-3+ fastbreak points as well (on the low end you're comparing 1 made basket versus 2 and probably 1.5 shot attempts versus 3 shot attempts and the majority was even closer than that).

That led me to focusing on the positive around fastbreak points in terms of being an anchor on leveling efficiency numbers because doing the math to take away the whole pools transition points to see a change in ~1 attempt at the rim compared to the group for those that have more transition baskets didn't really seem meaningful. What I can say is that, at a high-level, Edwards still gets to the rim at one of the highest levels in the league both when comparing to all players but especially when comparing him to other wings. The majority of wings that get to the rim a lot in the halfcourt are somewhat unsurprisingly players that also are dangerous in transition.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


3. I understand your argument about the value of possessions. Using your 100 total possessions formula you are correct that 1 steal for 2 points is actually significantly more valuable because of the swing. However, if Ant gives up 6 points in failed attempts and only manages to secure 1 extra possession worth 2 points, now the wolves are -2 at least. It is also worth noting that basketball is a game of confidence and momentum. When lunges and misses he breaks down our defense. Giving opponents open 3s or easier interior dunks/layups. Allowing opposing teams to build momentum is an issue. A lot of current success is in fact because we create such havoc on defense that opposing teams struggle to build their rhythm and therefore go on fewer and shorter runs. Ant is no doubt more defensively productive this year than last, but his steals are not always only his steals and his gambles are not always a net positive.[/quote]


Ant's ability at the rim as his best asset I don't disagree that Ant's ability to get to the rim is one of his best assets. It might even be his best asset, especially in a world where he actually gets calls. I don't think that Edwards should decrease his 3 point volume even if it is his best asset. If that is his best asset his volume 3 point shooting is a close second. Comparatively, I would argue that the skill that he's best at as it compares to his peers is probably his 3 point shooting aside from his ability to get to the rim itself.

Edwards points per possession on the season on his 3 point shots are ~1.11 or 1.12 points per possession. This season that would rank somewhere between #2-5 in total offensive points per possession by teams in the league. A 3 point shot attempt from Ant has the same points per possession that the best offenses in the league generate on average. In general, an Edwards 2 point shot at (51%) averages roughly 1.02 points per possession, though this doesn't factor in free throws. There are possession when Edwards purposefully doesn't get all of the way to the rim, but we cannot assume that he will get to the rim everytime either.

That's just attacking the numbers, I think there's more to 3 point shots than you are willing to admit as we sit here in a vacuum. Edwards willingness and ability as a 3 point shooter forces defenses to play up on him, go over screens, not cheat towards other defenders off ball, and gives Edwards extra space to beat his defender. There's more than just the points per possession, in some ways there's a value similar to use an analogy the play action pass in football. I think Edwards volume shooting opens things up not only for his own game, but also for teammates... I also think it raises his production ceiling on games that he hits. In addition, if 3's are variable and the difference between 33-38% is largely luck on any given night the easiest way to limit that potential variance to whatever degree possible is to shoot a high volume of 3's.

The hottest take I would have is that I really don't think the difference between 32-38% matter on an individual game basis (though may matter somewhat in aggregate). The reason that I would want Edwards to keep shooting 3's, other than the fact that he's really good at it and it's one of the things that has him on a star trajectory, is that the margin of error is so thin between a good and bad night. You would say that Edwards should limit his 3's because he's had a 2-7 night (28%) however one make would put him at an above average shooting night (38%). If Edwards, based on his current numbers, is going to hit that 38% 7-8 times out of 10 and hit that 27% 2-3 out of 10 times. I really don't think it's a reason to not shoot a high volume of 3's.

Summary - I've shown that I think Edwards 3pt shots are efficient enough that they warrant the volume, that I think 3 point shots have other benefits that open things up for Ant's drives, and additional spacing for teammates, and that I believe that even the nights Ant has a bad shooting night is really a coin flip difference in his play from his good shooting nights and 1 missed potential shot that really isn't worth stressing about.

However, even if you didn't like any of those points my bigger point is the same point you made for Towns and 3's with Edwards and 2's. My biggest question is why not more 2 attempts? Why do we have to have Ant shoot fewer 3's if we want him to shoot more 2's? Especially if he is our 2nd best 3 point shooter by percentage like this season. How about Ant keeps shoot 8-9 3's per game and we increase Edwards usage to give him 3-4-5+ more possessions that could be driving opportunities?

Edwards usage rate is ~27%. The majority of star wings get 30-34% usage rates. Part of that is D Lo/Towns, but there's room for more.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. I understand your argument about the value of possessions. Using your 100 total possessions formula you are correct that 1 steal for 2 points is actually significantly more valuable because of the swing. However, if Ant gives up 6 points in failed attempts and only manages to secure 1 extra possession worth 2 points, now the wolves are -2 at least. It is also worth noting that basketball is a game of confidence and momentum. When lunges and misses he breaks down our defense. Giving opponents open 3s or easier interior dunks/layups. Allowing opposing teams to build momentum is an issue. A lot of current success is in fact because we create such havoc on defense that opposing teams struggle to build their rhythm and therefore go on fewer and shorter runs. Ant is no doubt more defensively productive this year than last, but his steals are not always only his steals and his gambles are not always a net positive.[/quote]
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Yes, it's a simple formula but it illustrates the underlying theory behind a principle rather than the exact results. Your examples obviously are scenarios where the tradeoffs are not worth it. However, the reason that I am a believer in that theory is simple as well. If a player gambles they will be successful a certain portion of the time and a failure in the other portion of time.

In the possessions that they are successful, there is virtually an 100% chance of points (we'll use it just to make a point). In the possessions that they gamble in fail, there is a very few percentage of those failure outcomes that lead directly to the scenario that you just mentioned. The majority of times plays try to take a step to guess where a play is going and fail it does lead to an advantage for the offense, but not an automatic basket and largely not even close. Even if we wanted to say it generated an open jump shot the majority of the time, even open jump shots only have call it roughly a 50% chance of going in. There will be additional gamble failures where it doesn't generate a good look before Ant is able to recover and there will even be possessions that lead to a turnover happening after the gamble fails and yes there will also be easy buckets as well.

However, even in the scenarios that lead to higher quality shots for the offense the only thing you lose is the marginal difference in the shot value. If Edwards gambled and failed and that led to an open jump shot that now has a 60% chance of going in versus a 50% chance, you're not directly giving up points with the gamble you're giving up 10%. The reason the turnover theory works well is because when the gamble fails you have an almost 100% chance of two outcomes happened 1) the opposing team not scoring on their possession 2) a close to 100% chance of scoring on the possession gained.

The only thing you give up in order to get a chance at that value is the difference between the chance an opposing team would have made a FG on average and the difference based on whatever advantage gained from a gamble. The majority of time what's gained is relatively small and the bigger point is gambling doesn't lead to a proportionate negative outcome (simple reasoning being that the gambling player can recover within a few seconds, there are still 4 players defending, and the majority of shot types even wide open ones only change the expected chance at a make by 10's of % points).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This is not me saying gamble at all costs. This is me saying having a defensive mentality and system of being aggressive on defense, actively jumping in and out of lanes, and actively trying to put your defense in scenarios to generate turnovers is generally a bet that is well worth it. It certainly has been for the Wolves this year. Their defense has improved to somewhere in the average or above average range and they also generate the most amount of turnovers which means they likely also generate the most amount of points from their defense.

Defense is really two things 1) your ability to make opponents miss shots 2) your ability to prevent the opponent from even beign able to take the shot in the first place 3) your ability to take those possessions where you prevent a shot (turnover) and turn that extra possession into points. Ultimately, I'm not concerned that Edwards defense is having the negative effect that you're suggesting that we should be worried it could because the Wolves defense in playing a style that rewards that type of aggressive defensive behavior has led to the Wolves improving in multiple areas to the point that this season they've won as many games with their defense as their offense.

If Edwards can operate within a successful 5 man defensive unit, I'm not really concerned with details.

[TheZachAttack]

@theZachAttack, I decided I am going to stagger my responses so as to make the conversation a bit more digestible.

1. Regarding Ant’s 3 point volume. I agree there is a natural variance between games and even seasons for the players you mentioned. But you look at guys like Towns who are capable of shooting at or above 40% on the year and you ask the question why is it more valuable for Ant who shoots between 33-38% to take an extra 5 3s (the difference between 5 and 10 attempts per game,) then for KAT? If KAT takes 5 at between 40-45 % he should roughly 2-2.25. If we double that number KAT taking 10 attempts gets you roughly 4-4.5 makes per game. Also you mention Ant is the 1a or 1b scorer. But Towns is the primary scorer on a given night and as often as not Dlo scores either as much, more, or almost as much as Ant often on fewer shots. That is before we even ask questions about the attempts per game of the players in the class you listed above.

2. As you mentioned Ant is getting steals and turning them into points. The percentages you list include fast breaks, I wonder what his at the rim and in the paint numbers are in the half court. While we agree he needs to improve at the rim, it is also worth noting that his ability to get to the rim is perhaps his best asset. If he can improve his at the rim percentage and increase his drives he would become significantly more valuable and get to the line more. Ant’s lack of whistles could be directly linked to his lack of drives.

3. I understand your argument about the value of possessions. Using your 100 total possessions formula you are correct that 1 steal for 2 points is actually significantly more valuable because of the swing. However, if Ant gives up 6 points in failed attempts and only manages to secure 1 extra possession worth 2 points, now the wolves are -2 at least. It is also worth noting that basketball is a game of confidence and momentum. When lunges and misses he breaks down our defense. Giving opponents open 3s or easier interior dunks/layups. Allowing opposing teams to build momentum is an issue. A lot of current success is in fact because we create such havoc on defense that opposing teams struggle to build their rhythm and therefore go on fewer and shorter runs. Ant is no doubt more defensively productive this year than last, but his steals are not always only his steals and his gambles are not always a net positive.

Disregard my wall of text in my other post if you like. If we really want to get simple on #1/#2 the only thing we really disagree on is that Towns touches should come at the expense of Edwards and that Edwards attempts at the rim should come by decreasing his 3 point volume. I would rather Towns attempt more 3's, either by being aggressive and creating the shot himself, or by the Wolves giving him more touches at the expense of shots they give to their lesser players.

I think the reason Edwards is on a star-level trajectory is that he has it both in terms of 3 point volume and ability to get to the rim. Edwards 3 point shots are really efficient and they do things that help create space for his drives, but also for his teammates as it relates to spacing and how teams guard him. There aren't a lot of players who can do one of those things as well as Edwards can and he can do both. The way to maximize Edwards talent isn't by taking from 1 or the other it's growing the pot. Edwards should driving the ball more in general, both as a way to score more at the rim and draw more fouls but also collapse the defense and create open shots for teammates. That path is the way forward not playing a zero sum game with his current shot totals.


I say disregard my other post because I found really interesting data that backs the idea that there is a reason behind Edwards driving tendencies and lack of foul calls. I found a stat called drives per game. Edwards is ranked 39th at 11 drives per game well below the sample that I was comparing him to. The lowest group of players was grouped in the 15-16 range and then there was another large group in the 17-18 range and outliers in the 19-20 range. It's really interesting that Edwards ranks higher than all of these players in attempts at the rim but has significantly fewer drives per game (4-9).

The next question I had is Edwards drives number lower because he chooses to stay out at the perimeter or another reason? Part of the reason is that Edwards is not also the primary playmaker for the Wolves. Guys who are the primary playmaker will get a lot more touches. Edwards touches are in the high 60 range which is within the middle of a range of where other "wings" are positioned from the mid 60's to the mid 70's. His touches aren't the problem at least not all of it (it may be relevant for comparing to players like Harden).

I'm going to stop digging for now. I think it's clear that part of the reason that he doesn't get more free throws is because he doesn't drive to the rim much. I should say that he doesn't drive to the rim much either to try to score or get fouled or pass to teammates.

[fattymcgee]

Ant led the entire NBA last week in +/- with a +96!

[minimus]

Ant led the entire NBA last week in +/- with a +96!

Imagine if we drafted a true basketball, not a football player. lol

[life_saver]

I expected Ant to be a poor 3 point shooter based on what I heard about him pre-draft...I don't watch college basketball, so I remember reading about Ant pre-draft and saw some of them calling him a low-efficiency chucker..so for me, it's been a pleasant surprise to see Ant shoot from 3 at above average efficiency with such high volume attempts. It's also not like he only takes easy open 3's...he does attempt wide variety of 3's..be it catch & shoot or off-the dribble 3's or even stepback 3's.

[life_saver]

This is very impressive

Read on Twitter

[Baseline81]

Read on Twitter

[fattymcgee]

Ant has now tied Luka and KD for 2nd all-time for most 40pt games before age 21 with four.
If he can get 4 more by the end of the season he will tie Lebron for the most.