BY next playoffs

[Further]

By next playoffs I see a change to three of our starting 5. That's a pretty huge difference if I am right. Of course Roy and LMA are fixed to their positions, but my guess is that Martell (or a SF upgrade) will be starting next year, and Batum will be moved back to the bench where he will hone his skills for another season or two. The Center position will almost certainly be Oden, especially if he can control his fouling at all and stay healthy, pushing Joel to the bench. And I am not sure how, but I just don't think that Blake will be the starting PG. Hopefully a trade to bring in a better PG will be the reason, but even if that does not happen, I bet that by the end of next season Bayless will be moving ahead of Blake.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

By next playoffs I see a change to three of our starting 5. That's a pretty huge difference if I am right. Of course Roy and LMA are fixed to their positions, but my guess is that Martell (or a SF upgrade) will be starting next year, and Batum will be moved back to the bench where he will hone his skills for another season or two. The Center position will almost certainly be Oden, especially if he can control his fouling at all and stay healthy, pushing Joel to the bench. And I am not sure how, but I just don't think that Blake will be the starting PG. Hopefully a trade to bring in a better PG will be the reason, but even if that does not happen, I bet that by the end of next season Bayless will be moving ahead of Blake.

Very possible we'll have 3 different starters. However, how many will be from different teams? To me, that's the real question.

 

[andalusian]

I will be shocked if Webster wins the starting role next year. I think it will be Batum, Rudy or a SF we trade for...

 

[blue32]

Rudy can't play the SF though............. plus Rudy is great given B-Roy more rest, he needed it in the playoffs, and couldn't get it.

 

[andalusian]

Rudy can't play the SF though............. plus Rudy is great given B-Roy more rest, he needed it in the playoffs, and couldn't get it.

Rudy or Roy playing SF - The idea is that both of them are in the starting line - we have already seen Nate try it - and it might have to happen to find all the extra playing time Rudy deserves.

 

[blue32]

Rudy or Roy playing SF - The idea is that both of them are in the starting line - we have already seen Nate try it - and it might have to happen to find all the extra playing time Rudy deserves.

yeah, that could work. I dont know for how long though, and whose going to come off the bench? Batum and Marty?

 

[andalusian]

yeah, that could work. I dont know for how long though, and whose going to come off the bench? Batum and Marty?

It is going to be interesting for sure. We already see Roy and Rudy spending time together on the court often - does not really matter if it is starting or not - but as Rudy gets stronger - he deserves more than 25 MPG - and quite frankly - if you could get by playing Roy 48 minutes a game - you would - so these two will spend time at the 2 and 3 positions together.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think it really will depend on what KP does this offseason. Unless he brings in a high profile PG or SF, Nate will still have his favorites.

Greg should start if healthy
Aldridge obviously
If no SF upgrade is brought in it might still be Batum, but webster could get it as well
Roy obviously
If no upgrade is brought in it will continue to be Blake. I don't care what Nate says, he does not want to run, and Blake is perfect for him because he can't run.

 

[Wizard Mentor]

I think it really will depend on what KP does this offseason. Unless he brings in a high profile PG or SF, Nate will still have his favorites.

Greg should start if healthy
Aldridge obviously
If no SF upgrade is brought in it might still be Batum, but webster could get it as well
Roy obviously
If no upgrade is brought in it will continue to be Blake. I don't care what Nate says, he does not want to run, and Blake is perfect for him because he can't run.

Don't underestimate the power of the Bayless-side.

 

[LittleAlex]

Don't underestimate the power of the Bayless-side.

Do not underestimate Nate's stubborn need to play guys he likes in spite of all evidence. Think Jack last year.

If KP does not rid Portland of Blake in the off season, Nate will start him no matter who gets brought in. Just like he would have started Jack this year if he had stayed.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Do not underestimate Nate's stubborn need to play guys he likes in spite of all evidence. Think Jack last year.

If KP does not rid Portland of Blake in the off season, Nate will start him no matter who gets brought in. Just like he would have started Jack this year if he had stayed.

Or why Outlaw continues to play even though statistically the Blazers are slightly worse when he is on the floor, and the Blazers are better when Batum is on the floor.

 

[andalusian]

Or why Outlaw continues to play even though statistically the Blazers are slightly worse when he is on the floor, and the Blazers are better when Batum is on the floor.

Numbers do not support your claims (should I add as usual - or is it expected by now?)

The Blazers win 55% of the time Travis is on the floor.
The Blazers win 50% of the time Batum is on the floor.

 

[andalusian]

Do not underestimate Nate's stubborn need to play guys he likes in spite of all evidence. Think Jack last year.

If KP does not rid Portland of Blake in the off season, Nate will start him no matter who gets brought in. Just like he would have started Jack this year if he had stayed.

Why would he start Jack this year when he did not start him last year? Last year Jack was our backup PG/SG - and given what we have seen from Sergio in the backup PG position this year - you have to be crazy not to understand why...

 

[Mediocre Man]

Numbers do not support your claims (should I add as usual - or is it expected by now?)

The Blazers win 55% of the time Travis is on the floor.
The Blazers win 50% of the time Batum is on the floor.

http://www.82games.com/0809/0809POR.HTM

Outlaw on the court +3.4 off the court the team is a +7.8

Batum on the court +6.1 off the court the team is a +4.8


The team also scores more and gives up less with Batum instead of Outlaw. Batum also has a higher +/- than Outlaw. Not that +/- is that important.

 

[andalusian]

http://www.82games.com/0809/0809POR.HTM

Outlaw on the court +3.4 off the court the team is a +7.8

Batum on the court +6.1 off the court the team is a +4.8

You understand the difference between +/- and win% right? A 30 points loss and a 1 point win leave you 1-1 in the standing...

Win% for the rescue... The Blazers win more with Travis on the court, they might lose with a higher point differential when Travis is on the court - but if it happens less often - they are still better off with him playing...

It's really not that complicated...

 

[Mediocre Man]

You understand the difference between +/- and win% right? A 30 points loss and a 1 point win leave you 1-1 in the standing...

Win% for the rescue... The Blazers win more with Travis on the court, they might lose with a higher point differential when Travis is on the court - but if it happens less often - they are still better off with him playing...

It's really not that complicated...

Sorry, too many things point to Batum being better. You can twist your numbers just to argue all you want, but facts are facts. The team plays better when Outlaw is not on the floor.

 

[andalusian]

Sorry, too many things point to Batum being better. You can twist your numbers just to argue all you want, but facts are facts. The team plays better when Outlaw is not on the floor.

Twist my numbers? It's 82games.com numbers. We win more when Travis is on the floor. The only twisting done here is not done by me.

I agree that Batum is the future - I have no doubts that he will be a better player with time - but this year - the facts are clear. The Blazers won more with Travis on the floor.

 

[Mediocre Man]

It also points to the fact that the Blazers score more and give up fewer points when Batum is on the floor.

 

[Minstrel]

You understand the difference between +/- and win% right? A 30 points loss and a 1 point win leave you 1-1 in the standing...

Yes, but why do you think win% is a more useful measure? It's essentially the same as evaluating teams by win-loss records versus point differential. Win-loss records are the actual results, but point differential tends to get more at how well the team is actually playing.

If you count the 30 point loss as just a "loss" exactly equal in magnitude to a 1 point loss, I think you're arbitrarily throwing away information. Magnitude matters, not just direction (positive/negative).

 

[andalusian]

It also points to the fact that the Blazers score more and give up fewer points when Batum is on the floor.

... and we already covered it - this statistic can be easily swayed by a couple of bad or good games and is not the same as determining who the team is better playing. The win% shows that Nate knows exactly who he wanted on the floor - and rightly so. The bad +/- on Travis can be explained by two things:

1. He spent a lot more time with Sergio on the floor than Nic - and Sergio is just bad for win% and +/- - Batum's +/- might have looked a lot worse if he had to play with Sergio instead of Blake.
2. Batum is more consistent and Travis is not - which is not a real surprise - we already know that. Travis either makes the huge plays or the bonehead plays - it is who he is - but at this point in their career - playing Travis is more conducive to winning.

I am going to be blatant here and say that I think your dislike for Travis and Nate are getting the best of you right now. Nate did the right thing playing Travis as much as he did - because Travis was more ready to help the team win at this point. It was done out of necessity - Batum did a great job for a rookie - and he has a great future - but his minutes had to be managed to let him learn on the fly and not burn him - and Nate did it very well.

I am going to last year's Jarret Jack whine-fest again - Jarret had his share of problems last year - and the Blazers improved this year by playing Rudy his backup SG minutes - but last year playing him over Sergio was the right thing to do - and we got an ugly reminder of that this year - when we had to play Sergio backup PG minutes.

 

[andalusian]

Yes, but why do you think win% is a more useful measure? It's essentially the same as evaluating teams by win-loss records versus point differential. Win-loss records are the actual results, but point differential tends to get more at how well the team is actually playing.

If you count the 30 point loss as just a "loss" exactly equal in magnitude to a 1 point loss, I think you're arbitrarily throwing away information. Magnitude matters, not just direction (positive/negative).

The goal of a basketball game is to win - not to have a large blowout. point differential is important when you come to measure a team against another team and get an idea of what the overall team is doing - but win% gives you a better understanding of the line-ups that the team plays that are working well - because the win% per player gives you a better understanding of how the players play overall - since these players play with different combination from within the same team. point differential between teams does not have these overlapping roster combination that individual +/- stats have to contend with.

Since Batum plays mostly with our stars (Roy/Aldridge) and less with the 2nd unit - his point differential within the team can be misleading for his overall impact - especially when you realize that Travis had to play heavy minutes as the #1 option on offense with the 2nd unit - next to less effective players like Frye and Sergio. The point differential here is not as much of a reflection on Travis as the win% - I would actually argue that the fact that Batum wins less playing mostly with the first unit vs. Travis's win% - despite the fact that Travis plays a lot with a lesser unit - tells me that Travis is offering a more important role at this time for the team. There is a reason you see Travis more at the end of the games with the stars.

You actually see that, in my opinion, because Travis has a very valuable role on this team - as a go-to scorer. He does not work as a starter because the team usually goes to LMA at the start of the game - but he works well in the 4th quarter as a closer because the team usually does not go to LMA at the end of the game - they go to Brandon and Travis.

What is happening is usually that the team plays structured ball at the start of the game - going to LMA. By the end of the game the opposing team makes the in-game adjustments trying to take the Blazers out of their comfort zone - this usually means better, quicker doubles on LMA, attacking the ball-handlers to make the passes into the post harder and the like - and that's where Travis's unique ability to create a shot for himself comes in handy. If a guy can elevate over a defender and take a shot with a good chance of it going in - there is very little you can do. The reality of the situation is that it is easier to take LMA out of his game with good defense because he can not create a shot for himself in tough situations as Travis can.

Travis plays a lot - because he wins us a lot of games thanks to this unique ability. His win% reflects this. When Batum's offense will progress to the point that it is harder to close him out with good defense (as the Rockets did, for example) - you will see him play more - and his win% will reflect it.

 

[Minstrel]

The goal of a basketball game is to win - not to have a large blowout. point differential is important when you come to measure a team against another team and get an idea of what the overall team is doing - but win% gives you a better understanding of the line-ups that the team plays that are working well - because the win% per player gives you a better understanding of how the players play overall - since these players play with different combination from within the same team. point differential between teams does not have these overlapping roster combination that individual +/- stats have to contend with.

I agree with your criticism of +/-, but not your claim that win% does a better job of accounting for that. win% is simply +/-, but drops the magnitude and only retains the polarity (+ or -). I don't think unadjusted +/- (either in the usual +/- form or the cut-down win% form) is a very good tool to evaluate players.

There are Adjusted +/- figures that attempt to account for who the player played alongside and who the player played against (reserves tend to play more minutes against other reserves, for example). I'd much rather look at those, if I wanted to use indirect measures (measures that don't use the player's individual statistics).

 

[andalusian]

I agree with your criticism of +/-, but not your claim that win% does a better job of accounting for that. win% is simply +/-, but drops the magnitude and only retains the polarity (+ or -). I don't think unadjusted +/- (either in the usual +/- form or the cut-down win% form) is a very good tool to evaluate players.

I suspect that win% does a good job of telling you when someone that is bad for the team plays long minutes and when someone that is good for the team plays too little. If there is a correlation between playing time and win% - and will tell you generally speaking if the rotations work.

Where it will do a bad job is when you compare between players on different positions or when you have to ask a question about the use of a specific player only with a lesser unit.

In this case - we have two players playing in the same position - and Batum actually plays a lot less with the lesser unit. The concerns you raise have some legitimate issues - but clearly not in this case. I can take an issue with them when it comes to Sergio and Bayless - because one played regular minutes and the other only occasional minutes - mostly in blowouts - but in the case of Travis and Batum - it just does not seem like a real concern.

Batum played more of his time with the better team-mates and yet his win% is lower. This, right there, tells you that at this point Travis's ability to provide offense was more important and he was more valuable to the team.

There are Adjusted +/- figures that attempt to account for who the player played alongside and who the player played against (reserves tend to play more minutes against other reserves, for example). I'd much rather look at those, if I wanted to use indirect measures (measures that don't use the player's individual statistics).

Well - if you can provide these numbers and we can look at them and discuss them - I would be more than willing to waste time thinking about them. In the context presented - between Batum and Travis - win% trumps +/- stats.

I have a real hard time figuring out why Joel's win% is so much lower than Oden's for example - I suspect, however, that this is really a case of the big mismatch Oden provides to other teams - be it other team's first or 2nd unit - and Nate's insistence on protecting him from getting additional fouls and limiting his minutes - Nate might have had no problem letting Joel play less effectively when he was in foul trouble and long minutes when he was tired. I do not however find it surprising that Travis's win% is higher than Batum's - Batum was a nice surprise and a great hope for the future - but his role was limited. He was a garbage man on offense from a wing position and his defense was hit (Wade, Prince) or miss (Artest, LBJ).

 

[hasoos]

I think it really will depend on what KP does this offseason. Unless he brings in a high profile PG or SF, Nate will still have his favorites.

Greg should start if healthy
Aldridge obviously
If no SF upgrade is brought in it might still be Batum, but webster could get it as well
Roy obviously
If no upgrade is brought in it will continue to be Blake. I don't care what Nate says, he does not want to run, and Blake is perfect for him because he can't run.

Unfortunately I believe that is a problem with Nate. He will play guys until you trade them away, and sometimes that is the only way to keep him from putting certain talent on the floor.

 

[Minstrel]

I suspect that win% does a good job of telling you when someone that is bad for the team plays long minutes and when someone that is good for the team plays too little.

I suspect the same about +/-. I just suspect neither of them provides any precision.

Well - if you can provide these numbers and we can look at them and discuss them - I would be more than willing to waste time thinking about them. In the context presented - between Batum and Travis - win% trumps +/- stats.

I disagree that win% trumps +/-, even when comparing players on the same team at the same position. In my opinion, they have the same drawbacks and win% has the further drawback of throwing out a lot of the information. Teams play the games to win...the job of players is to do as much as they can to help a team win, not to win or lose themselves. The magnitude of +/- is highly relevant to how much an individual helps.

As for presenting Adjusted +/- stats, I can't seem to find recent ones. Back in 2005-06, 82games.com had them, but they don't seem to have them since then. I personally don't tend to use +/- (adjusted or otherwise, and I consider win% to be part of +/-) because NBA stats people say that you need about three years worth of data before they start to become relatively reliable. I think +/- is an interesting concept but I'm still a bit skeptical about how well it isolates a single player's value. I prefer direct measures, like PER or win shares, augmented by observation (especially for defense).

At least, as far as publicly available metrics go. It's entirely possible that teams have great proprietary systems that use +/-. Roland Ratings are interesting in that they mesh direct measures like PER with +/-.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

... and we already covered it - this statistic can be easily swayed by a couple of bad or good games and is not the same as determining who the team is better playing. The win% shows that Nate knows exactly who he wanted on the floor - and rightly so. The bad +/- on Travis can be explained by two things:

1. He spent a lot more time with Sergio on the floor than Nic - and Sergio is just bad for win% and +/- - Batum's +/- might have looked a lot worse if he had to play with Sergio instead of Blake.
2. Batum is more consistent and Travis is not - which is not a real surprise - we already know that. Travis either makes the huge plays or the bonehead plays - it is who he is - but at this point in their career - playing Travis is more conducive to winning.

The higher win% can also be attributed to the fact that Outlaw was more often on the floor during the 4th quarter than Batum was. We were one of the best 4th quarter teams in the league this year, but I wouldn't necessarily attribute that fact to Outlaw's presence so much as our depth and Roy's late-game transcendence.

Collinearity does not equate to causation, and the argument is relevant on both sides (re: win% and +/-). My argument for Batum would simply be based on that which I see, not based on statistics that may or may not support my position.

 

[andalusian]

I suspect the same about +/-. I just suspect neither of them provides any precision.

My guess is that +/- is a lot more volatile to blow-outs (either way) that win% - again, neither is perfect - but when you look at the same position within the same team - win% seems a lot less volatile to edge situations - in the specific case of Nic. vs. Travis and who they play with - it makes no sense at all that Travis who plays a lot more with low-% players like Frye and Sergio is over-utilized when his win% is higher than Batum who plays most of his time with our 3 best win% guys (Roy, LMA, Blake).

As I said - there are very good reasons to question both philosophically - but since a blow-out is worth the same weight in the win/lose column as a small-margin victory I would be more interested in win%, it is less volatile to blow-outs and in the specific case discussed - there is every-reason to suspect it provides better feedback given the consistent play of Batum with the 1st unit.

I disagree that win% trumps +/-, even when comparing players on the same team at the same position. In my opinion, they have the same drawbacks and win% has the further drawback of throwing out a lot of the information. Teams play the games to win...the job of players is to do as much as they can to help a team win, not to win or lose themselves. The magnitude of +/- is highly relevant to how much an individual helps.

I disagree. What matters is winning the games, not the score margins. You go wins first, score-margins when there is no clear answer. While you throw some information with win% - you also throw out a lot of outliers that sully the big picture...

 

[LittleAlex]

Why would he start Jack this year when he did not start him last year? Last year Jack was our backup PG/SG - and given what we have seen from Sergio in the backup PG position this year - you have to be crazy not to understand why...

Jack was the point guard at the end of a large number of games last season. And I thought he started at least part of the season.

At any rate, Nate played him in crunch time which allowed Jack to lose at least 4 games for Portland last season. Nate would have never stopped playing Jack in crunch time as long as he was on the team.

As for Sergio Vs Jack Vs Blake: That is like comparing shit with nuts in it versus shit with corn in it. No matter then difference, you are still talking about shit.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Jack was the point guard at the end of a large number of games last season. And I thought he started at least part of the season.

At any rate, Nate played him in crunch time which allowed Jack to lose at least 4 games for Portland last season. Nate would have never stopped playing Jack in crunch time as long as he was on the team.

As for Sergio Vs Jack Vs Blake: That is like comparing shit with nuts in it versus shit with corn in it. No matter then difference, you are still talking about shit.

It's possible he did lose us 4 extra games, but I'd take it over the 8 Sergio would have lost us.

 

[andalusian]

The higher win% can also be attributed to the fact that Outlaw was more often on the floor during the 4th quarter than Batum was. We were one of the best 4th quarter teams in the league this year, but I wouldn't necessarily attribute that fact to Outlaw's presence so much as our depth and Roy's late-game transcendence.

Chicken and egg situation here, are we as good a 4th quarter team because Outlaw was in in the 4th or was Outlaw that good because he was there in the 4th...

The reality of the situation is that Outlaw mostly played with the starters in the 4th and we were a good 4th quarter team... this reflects on both sides.

What Nate did is really a smart thing - Outlaw is really effective as a scorer - but his value as a scorer is especially high when he can take these impossible "shit they broke our play let's throw it to Travis" situations - so Nate plays him with the starting unit only at the end of the game when the opposing team has made their adjustment to stop whatever else Portland was doing - while going to the structured offense through LMA at the start of the game.

Collinearity does not equate to causation, and the argument is relevant on both sides (re: win% and +/-). My argument for Batum would simply be based on that which I see, not based on statistics that may or may not support my position.

The funny thing is that Outlaw's stats are better individually (PER) and in team wins (win%) - Batum is a more consistent player (he will not dominate a team and he is not going to kill you with stupid mistakes) and he does not need to score to be effective - these are his advantages.

Travis can win you a game and can force the other team to pay attention to another scorer to make Roy's job easier - he is more valuable at this stage at the end of close games.

I have no doubts in my mind that overall Batum is a better defensive player - especially when it comes to consistency. I suspect that if you need to have one defensive possession you need to stop - Travis will be just as effective as Batum or even more so - but he does not play defense as consistently and will hurt you with some dumb plays.

I hate it when people resort to "my eyes tell me" and "it's correlation without causation". I am more than happy to acknowledge problems with statistics and the fact that they are not the end-all of everything - and I am more than happy to require an eye test in addition to statistics - but the fact of the matter is that we have a pretty capable coaching staff which seems to go with what the statistics tell you. At this point it comes down to "the statistics do not agree with my position - so my eyes are better than the coaching staff".

This coaching staff is very successful with these guys and the statistics do not support your position. When these things align - no offense, I am going with the professional eyes and the stats over the "correlation without causation" catch-phrase.