Coincidence?

[Schilly]

Meyers kinda reminds me of this sometimes

[video=youtube;HPPj6viIBmU]

 

[Boob-No-More]

...I think that it might be part coincidence, part not. While the stats don't backup T.Rob, the stats also don't account for pure hustle, determination, toughness, intimidation, and the overall confidence that T.Rob brings to the floor. I feel like our top 7 rotation guys would much rather "go to war" with T.Rob than they would with M.Leo. So with that, I am 100% in the FREE T.ROB camp!

Actually, it's the things that don't show up in the boxscore that the net on court/off court stats are supposed to show. How do the little things, setting picks, spacing the floor, taking charges, drawing double teams, etc. impact a team's performance when a certain player is on the court. Given a large enough sample size, if those things you mention TRob does are having a positive impact on his team, it will show up in his net on court/off court stat. Unfortunately, for guys like Robinson and Leonard, it takes a while to accumulate a relevant sample size. So far, the measure of on court/off court impact favors Leonard, but that could change once both players accumulate more PT.

BNM

 

[Blazer4ever]

I think the problem is with Stotts shuffling the rotation (Leonard instead of Robinson, Barton instead of Wright) and with McCollum being activated roles are becoming less clear. Players have gotten used to playing the same rotations and are now forced into lineups they are not as comfortable or confident in. It will probably take a little time before Stotts finds the right rotation to play regularly.

 

[TripTango]

It's not that simple. The same player doesn't always come in for the player going to the bench. Often times a guard will come in for a front court player, when going with a smaller line-up. For example, Mo Williams may come in for Robin Lopez and Aldridge slides over to center and we go with a 3-guard line-up. Plus, there are many more variables. As net on court/off court is a measure of team performance when a specific player in on the floor vs. on the bench, it is also influenced by which teammates, and which opponents, are on the court with him. That's why a large sample size is required to base any conclusions on this data.

Sooooo it's exactly what I said it was?

Obviously there will be multiple bench players replacing any given starter. My point was simply that a starter's net on/off will ALWAYS be influenced by the quality of the bench, and vice versa. The statistic is a difference (i.e. subtraction) between performance of the team when the player is on vs. when he is off. This means it is influenced not only by how well the player does, but also how well his replacements do. (See my Aldridge example.) Sample size is always important, but it has no bearing on the effect I'm describing. Better replacements for a player = worse net on/off statistic for him as an individual. And vice versa.

What the data does shows, is that our starters consistently outscore their opponents, and our bench consistently gets outscored when they are on the court.

Close. It's showing that the starters outscore their opponents compared to the bench. If the starters all outscored their opponents by 30, and the bench all outscored theirs by 15, the bench players would STILL have a negative net on/off score.

Most teams have a mixture of positive and negative net on court/off court numbers for both their starters and bench players.

Actually, all teams must, out of mathematical necessity, have both positive and negative net on/off statistics, since they are all relative to each other. The sum of all net on/off scores on a team, weighted by playing time, will always equal zero (except maybe for teams with traded players).

I'm not sure if that helped, all I was really trying to point out that the net on court/off court results for our roster are in sync with what we see on the court - we have an excellent starting five, one of the best in the league, but a very weak, below average bench.

That all may be true, but your conclusion is not supported by the stat in the way that you think it is. It's a relative stat comparing a player to his replacements, and is therefore not an absolute indication of how well that player does against his opposition. A player who beasts every night will still get a negative score if his replacement(s) always beast even harder. Look at what I'm saying and check the numbers again for yourself -- every description of the stat I've seen supports my interpretation.

 

[Blazer Fanatic]

Agreed, so long as it's for the Idaho Stampede. Or maybe the Chicago Bulls after they trade us Noah for a package of crap.

Summer league, fan fest, pre-season...

 

[riverman]

I still think it's commendable that Stotts will play every guy on the bench in a blow out. Barton has earned minutes and I was glad to see some TRob last game. Meyers is improving, even if you only look at his blooper reels. CJ has yet to score a pt against a real NBA defense, so I'm not crowning him anything yet.

 

[Hobbesarable]

I still think it's commendable that Stotts will play every guy on the bench in a blow out. Barton has earned minutes and I was glad to see some TRob last game. Meyers is improving, even if you only look at his blooper reels. CJ has yet to score a pt against a real NBA defense, so I'm not crowning him anything yet.

Well, he needs to find them playing time in order to develop them for next season. Our team already traded next year's first round draft pick (top 12 protected) to Charlotte and 5 future second round draft picks to other teams. Our team is also over the salary cap. Our options for adding players next season will be limited to only a few options. Olshey will need to be creative in order to beef up our interior defense and bench talent.

 

[BrianFromWA]

Next year we'll have the non-tax MLE (~6M) and the BAE (~2M) to spend.

 

[Hobbesarable]

Next year we'll have the non-tax MLE (~6M) and the BAE (~2M) to spend.

Thank you for that info, Brian.

 

[noknobs]

Coincidence?

No.

 

[Haakzilla]

Bench M.Leo -- Free T.Rob!

 

[BBert]

Still a coincidence.

Great to see TRob go off with a passion.

The Leonard experiment may be over (for the time being).

 

[Natebishop3]

 

[magnifier661]

Robinson has a bad net in 300 minutes. Leonard's in 118.

Williams' and Wright's are in about 1300 combined minutes.

Wright didn't play much the last couple games if I remember. I'm glad Stotts isn't giving the vets leeway for minutes. If you aren't performing, you will be benched. Good way of thinking because the players behind them will know if they play hard, they will get burn.

 

[BBert]

After sitting at the end of the bench for weeks, Robinson acknowledged his performance was fueled by a heavy dose of hunger.

“If they fire you, would you want your job back,” Robinson said, laughing. “I want mine back. It made me hungry, man.”

Good move, coach.

 

[Eastoff]

Wright didn't play much the last couple games if I remember. I'm glad Stotts isn't giving the vets leeway for minutes. If you aren't performing, you will be benched. Good way of thinking because the players behind them will know if they play hard, they will get burn.

'After sitting at the end of the bench for weeks, Robinson acknowledged his performance was fueled by a heavy dose of hunger.

“If they fire you, would you want your job back,” Robinson said, laughing. “I want mine back. It made me hungry, man.”'

Good move, coach.

Yeah, if Stotts can get more out of his bench through "capitalism." that's great! Make them compete against each other and want it more.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Yeah, if Stotts can get more out of his bench through "capitalism." that's great! Make them compete against each other and want it more.

Indeed! I thoroughly enjoyed Robinson's spirited performance last night. Losing his spot in the rotation clearly lit a fire under him, and that's a good thing. Because, unlike some posters here, who are so invested in their own negative opinions they actually take great satisfaction in seeing certain players fail, I want to see ALL of our players improve. It makes the team better, and that's a good thing.

I love the fact that Freeland, Leonard and Robinson are all competing for our backup big man minutes. It's pushing them all to improve. We saw Freeland's obvious improvement over the summer. He went from being completely lost to a solid contributor off the bench. He earned his minutes by doing the "little" things that help the team (rebounding, good position defense in the paint, setting good picks, etc.) and set an example for Leonard. I know some here hate Leonard so much (they refuse to spell his name correctly) and therefore refuse to acknowledge his obvious improvement. He went from being a very weak rebounder to rebounding at an elite level. His position defense is also noticeably improved. He still has a long way to go, which is why I'm glad to see the competition for PT between these three as it will push them all to continue to improve, but he seems to have learned how to go straight up on defense when protecting the rim, like Freeland. Proper rebounding technique and proper defensive positioning can be taught, and I'm thrilled to see both Freeland and Leonard showing improvement in these areas.

And now, we are seeing Robinson playing inspired ball after being benched in favor of Leonard. Everyone is talking about the energy Robinson brought last night. That's not what impressed me the most. He almost always brings that energy. What impressed me last night was he cut down on the unforced errors and stupid decisions. He did not try to force his own offense. He played within the flow of the game. He also did not lose his man on defense. It was one game and only 11 minutes, but it's clear that the coaches have been working with him and telling him what areas he needs to improve to help the team and earn minutes in the rotation.

It's also clear the coaches did the same thing with Freeland and Leonard, told them they need to improve their rebounding and position defense in order to earn minutes. So, I'm very happy that all three players are showing improvement. I hope they will continue to work with the coaches, learn from their mistakes and successes, and continue to improve.

BNM

 

[blue9]

[post removed for the sake of brevity]

Repped!

 

[Draco]

TripTango you bring up some very good insights about net On/Off court. If you look at other NBA teams they all have a near equal mix of positive and negative net on/off court stats. If you look at the Thunder every one of their starters including Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka have a negative net on/off rating.

I think it would make more sense to look at just the on court +/-. The net figure should be ignored.

 

[TripTango]

TripTango you bring up some very good insights about net On/Off court. If you look at other NBA teams they all have a near equal mix of positive and negative net on/off court stats. If you look at the Thunder every one of their starters including Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka have a negative net on/off rating.

I think it would make more sense to look at just the on court +/-. The net figure should be ignored.

Yeah, it's tricky. The whole appeal of advanced stats lies in taking many aspects of a player's game into account -- all those little intangibles that don't show up in the raw box score. The problem with that, though, is that if you add too many layers, it can be nearly impossible to figure out what your final number even means.

To be honest, those Thunder numbers make absolutely no sense to me at the moment. My first thought was that Durant's numbers were messed up by how little time he spent off the court, giving small garbage minutes too much significance, but Sefalosha and Ibaka have similarly negative values, with far more reasonable playing time percentages... I just don't know. I also don't watch enough OKC basketball to have any deep insights on how their lineups and rotations might be causing these crazy numbers. Anybody got any ideas?

Also, just so we don't get too derailed from the original topic, I've got this crazy idea: why don't we keep T-Rob AND Nardo on the team for awhile? You know, unless some kind of awesome, no-brainer trade comes up involving either one? Just a suggestion.

 

[Natebishop3]

Yeah, it's tricky. The whole appeal of advanced stats lies in taking many aspects of a player's game into account -- all those little intangibles that don't show up in the raw box score. The problem with that, though, is that if you add too many layers, it can be nearly impossible to figure out what your final number even means.

To be honest, those Thunder numbers make absolutely no sense to me at the moment. My first thought was that Durant's numbers were messed up by how little time he spent off the court, giving small garbage minutes too much significance, but Sefalosha and Ibaka have similarly negative values, with far more reasonable playing time percentages... I just don't know. I also don't watch enough OKC basketball to have any deep insights on how their lineups and rotations might be causing these crazy numbers. Anybody got any ideas?

Also, just so we don't get too derailed from the original topic, I've got this crazy idea: why don't we keep T-Rob AND Nardo on the team for awhile? You know, unless some kind of awesome, no-brainer trade comes up involving either one? Just a suggestion.

They both need PT to improve, and I'd rather see the minutes go to Robinson. The team obviously sees Leonard as a stretch four, but I don't see how we can adequately develop both young bigs. One has to go. I'd prefer it to be Leonard.

 

[Hobbesarable]

They both need PT to improve, and I'd rather see the minutes go to Robinson. The team obviously sees Leonard as a stretch four, but I don't see how we can adequately develop both young bigs. One has to go. I'd prefer it to be Leonard.

Our offense is among the best in the NBA. Now, they need to work on the defense. And defense is definitely not Leonard's forté.

Besides, Robinson oozes all kinds of energy while he's on the floor.

 

[TripTango]

They both need PT to improve, and I'd rather see the minutes go to Robinson. The team obviously sees Leonard as a stretch four, but I don't see how we can adequately develop both young bigs. One has to go. I'd prefer it to be Leonard.

You don't see how we can adequately develop two young bigs? I'm not following. Are our teacher-to-student ratios too low during practice? Are we over the "raw young player" luxury tax quota? Is this Thunderdome?

[video=youtube;pmRAiUPdRjk]

I like T-Rob. I think he's got great potential as a hustle player. I think he deserves more playing time than Meyers right now. But I don't see how any of that means that "one has to go".

 

[Hobbesarable]

You don't see how we can adequately develop two young bigs? I'm not following. Are our teacher-to-student ratios too low during practice? Are we over the "raw young player" luxury tax quota? Is this Thunderdome?

I like T-Rob. I think he's got great potential as a hustle player. I think he deserves more playing time than Meyers right now. But I don't see how any of that means that "one has to go".

We are probably stuck with both. Olsehy will need to be creative with next season's roster additions.

 

[Boob-No-More]

We are probably stuck with both. Olsehy will need to be creative with next season's roster additions.

I'm guessing creativity is not a problem for Olshey when it comes to roster moves. Last summer he added Lopez to our starting line-up, and Williams, Wright, Robinson, McCollum, Crabbe, Watson to our bench just by letting Hickson, Babbitt, Nolan Smith, Pavlovic, Jeffries, Maynor walk and throwing in a couple 2nd rounders. Our bench still needs improvement, but both the veterans and young guys we have now are WAY better than what we had last year - and most importantly of all, he added a REAL starting center.

BNM

 

[BBert]

We are blessed with both. No need to decide now. Continue to develop them both and play them off of each other. There is no telling what the future holds.

 

[Boob-No-More]

We are blessed with both. No need to decide now. Continue to develop them both and play them off of each other. There is no telling what the future holds.

The nice thing is, given their skill sets, they could eventually co-exist. Robinson is a great offensive rebounder, but Leonard is developing into a better defensive rebounder (based on recent performance). Leonard can spread the defense with his shooting so Robinson can attack the rim. They aren't there yet, but they are both very young and improving.

BNM

 

[Draco]

To be honest, those Thunder numbers make absolutely no sense to me at the moment. My first thought was that Durant's numbers were messed up by how little time he spent off the court, giving small garbage minutes too much significance, but Sefalosha and Ibaka have similarly negative values, with far more reasonable playing time percentages... I just don't know. I also don't watch enough OKC basketball to have any deep insights on how their lineups and rotations might be causing these crazy numbers. Anybody got any ideas?

The OKC bench is outscoring other teams reserves more than the OKC starters are outscoring other teams starters.

It doesn't mean the OKC bench is better than the OKC starters!

 

[TripTango]

The OKC bench is outscoring other teams reserves more than the OKC starters are outscoring other teams starters.

It doesn't mean the OKC bench is better than the OKC starters!

But by those amounts? With Durant on the floor they tend to outscore their opponents by 7.3, and when he sits they tend outscore their opponents by 8.7? Obviously this is tied into the substitutions themselves, along with their opponents' substitutions (which was part of my original point), but that difference still seems odd. Regardless, your interpretation is probably correct -- I'm just surprised by the magnitude of the effect.

 

[Schilly]

3-0 since re-inserting TRob... Still a coincidence?