OT: The more things change ... (Sergio in Sacto)

[Boob-No-More]

So what? Basketball games are not won only on individual talent.

Nope, but it sure helps.

No, I am just showing you that scoring is just as volatile to the team-mates and opponents as +/- - I am telling you that all these individual stats you present are just as situation dependent... negating the crux of your argument.

I disagree. Scoring, rebounding, etc. are not nearly as depdendent on teammates and opponents as +/-. A good player will still be able to score or rebound when playing on a bad team. He has more control over those individual stats than he does over +/-. That same good player on a bad team will have a negative +/- even if he is playing at a high level individually AND helping his temmates play better. There is simply only so much one player can do if he's surrounded by inferior teammates.

If you have a great scorer that never gets the ball from his team-mates, his scoring will suffer, if you have a great set-up man with players that can not score - his assists will suffer, etc, etc, etc...

Ludicrous. Name one GREAT scorer in the entire history of the NBA who was frozen out by his teammates. If you put the best player in the game on a team of D-League rejects, he will still score, rebound and assist, but he will struggle to have a positive +/- due to his inferior teammates. He has much more control over his own production (individual stats) than he does over the ineptitude of his teammates. He can use his own talent to elevate the play of his teammates, but they will still be limited by their own lack of talent - and HIS +/- will be directly impacted by the inferior talent of his teammates.

BNM

 

[Boob-No-More]

that seems to indicate that sergio doesn't play a whole lot of minutes that matter(which is what you would expect from the 3rd string pg). playing a lot of your minutes during garbage time does weird things to +/-.

Thank you for putting this all into perspective. I can't believe the level of discussion over the +/-of a 3rd string PG on a bad team.

And yes, I am as guilty as anyone for the volume of this thread.

BNM

 

[andalusian]

I disagree. Scoring, rebounding, etc. are not nearly as depdendent on teammates and opponents as +/-. A good player will still be able to score or rebound when playing on a bad team. He has more control over those individual stats than he does over +/-. That same good player on a bad team will have a negative +/- even if he is playing at a high level individually AND helping his temmates play better. There is simply only so much one player can do if he's surrounded by inferior teammates.

Ludicrous. Name one GREAT scorer in the entire history of the NBA who was frozen out by his teammates.

Who said anything about being frozen out - it has to do with sharing the load, having less touches, having to play in a system that is not tailored to his strength. If you are a team-mate of Greg Oden and Joel - your rebounding rate would suffer greatly - because they are such fantastic rebounders. Did Aldridge's rebounding rate miraculously became 20% better this year or is it because he is not playing next to these 2 guys?

Devin Harris had a huge jump in PER, Scoring, win-score when he moved from Dallas to NJN - did he become a much better individual player because he likes the Garden State? No, his individual stats went from "nice young guy with a good upside", somewhat better than average starter on Dallas to an all-star level 21.6 PER.

All individual stats are affected by your team-mates, be it those that are easy to see - or those that you have to sift through a lot of noise and data to get to.

The problem is that you want to look at absolutes. This is "human science" - it is not perfect, there is no single formula you can plug someone into and come up with an answer. You have to have a combination of multiple statistics, and try to figure them out - and basketball games are won on team play and coaching just as much as it does on individual talent - the Rocket's go-to guy when things get tough, this year, is Aaron Brooks and his 15.5 PER. And yet, they are sitting at 23-18.

Last year Durant had the highest PER on his team and the lowest +/- - +/- captured much better his bad, bad defense and the horrible effect it had on his team's success. This year, his biggest improvement has been on defense - and his +/- reflects it - and his team's success does as well.

+/- is a valid statistic, just like PER is, just like all the other individual stats. You just need to have a proper sample size and the ability to plug it into the correct evaluation. But to claim that the other individual stats are not effected by team mates and opponents is just absurd, and patently wrong.

 

[Boob-No-More]

+/- is a valid statistic, just like PER is, just like all the other individual stats. You just need to have a proper sample size and the ability to plug it into the correct evaluation.

After all this, on your LAST sentence we finally agree. That's EXACTLY what I've been saying all along. My BIG problem with +/- is, because all the variables involved, you need a MUCH bigger sample size to reach anything approaching a meaningful conclusion.

That (small sample size) was my problem with the way it was used to compare Martin (who has played NINE games all season) and Sergio (who is a third string PG racking up DNPs) in this thread specifically, and my problem withe the way it gets misused by many people in this forum as a single player, single game stat whenever their guy has a good +/- or the guy they are hating on has a bad +/-.

I don't recall ever seeing anyone in this thread, or this forum using +/- with a proper sample size in a proper context. It is the continual misuse based on insufficient sample size that drives me nuts and makes me wish the NBA didn't even track this stat.

BNM

 

[rocketeer]

Last year Durant had the highest PER on his team and the lowest +/- - +/- captured much better his bad, bad defense and the horrible effect it had on his team's success.

actually, that was probably a much better indicator that +/- requires a sample size larger than just one season(which is true) for it to be completely effective.

 

[andalusian]

actually, that was probably a much better indicator that +/- requires a sample size larger than just one season(which is true) for it to be completely effective.

That was right for 2 years running with Durant. It was probably more an indication that PER is really an offensive stat more than a complete package - because if you watch OKC play this year compared to their games last year - it is clear that Durant's defensive improvement is a lot bigger than the offensive improvement he is showing this year.

I would say that in this case it is more an argument in favor of +/- than a remark on sample size.

 

[andalusian]

After all this, on your LAST sentence we finally agree. That's EXACTLY what I've been saying all along. My BIG problem with +/- is, because all the variables involved, you need a MUCH bigger sample size to reach anything approaching a meaningful conclusion.

That (small sample size) was my problem with the way it was used to compare Martin (who has played NINE games all season) and Sergio (who is a third string PG racking up DNPs) in this thread specifically, and my problem withe the way it gets misused by many people in this forum as a single player, single game stat whenever their guy has a good +/- or the guy they are hating on has a bad +/-.

I don't recall ever seeing anyone in this thread, or this forum using +/- with a proper sample size in a proper context. It is the continual misuse based on insufficient sample size that drives me nuts and makes me wish the NBA didn't even track this stat.

I have no problem with that, nor with the conclusion that Sergio's +/- means squat this year because of his lack of play. My only objection is to the idea that +/- is meaningless or is a team-stat, it is just not.

I want to say, however, that +/- can make sense in single game situations as well - if you do not look at it in isolation. For example, if you have one guy who has a bad +/- and played a significant part of the game - but just about anyone else on the team that played a significant part of the game has a positive +/- - it is pretty clear that this guy was the one bringing everyone down - and not the other way around...

 

[Boob-No-More]

That was right for 2 years running with Durant. It was probably more an indication that PER is really an offensive stat more than a complete package - because if you watch OKC play this year compared to their games last year - it is clear that Durant's defensive improvement is a lot bigger than the offensive improvement he is showing this year.

I would say that in this case it is more an argument in favor of +/- than a remark on sample size.

It's also a huge indication that OKC added some very young, talented players to their team through the lottery and those young players are improving. You can't blame their previously horrible record on Durant. Nor, can you give him all the credit for the TEAM's improvement this year. His first year, the TEAM flat out sucked. So, naturally he had a bad +/-. Last year they were better. This year, with their younger players coming into their own, the TEAM is even better. So, of course, his +/- is better.

So, is Durant's better +/- more indicictive of his individual improvement on defense, or more indicitive of playing with improved teammates? Who knows? Insufficient sample size.

BNM

 

[andalusian]

It's also a huge indication that OKC added some very young, talented players to their team through the lottery and those young players are improving. You can't blame their previously horrible record on Durant. Nor, can you give him all the credit for the TEAM's improvement this year. His first year, the TEAM flat out sucked. So, naturally he had a bad +/-. Last year they were better. This year, with their younger players coming into their own, the TEAM is even better. So, of course, his +/- is better.

So, is Durant's better +/- more indicictive of his individual improvement on defense, or more indicitive of playing with improved teammates? Who knows? Insufficient sample size.

BNM

Please, Westbrook's PER this year is lower than last year, Green's as well, same with Collison and Sefalosha. Kristic had gone from 13.6 PER to 13.9 (hooray), Harden is a nice addition, but his win-score or PER (14.6, less than your average starter in the league) - is not the reason they have already won in half a year what they won last year in an entire season... Maynor gives them a little more than what Livingstone gave them last year - but they were winning before he moved there from Utah...

So, yes, the main reason they are winning is because they went from having a superstar on offense and supersuck on defense who negated more than he contributed, to have a superstar on offense and a good defensive player in Durant. In half a year his defensive win-score is already higher than it was all of last year. Durant's DRTG went down from 109 to 102 this year. It's a huge improvement - and the main reason they are so much better this year. His ORTG has only gone up by 2 points per 100 possessions.

This, right there, is why they are better.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Please, Westbrook's PER this year is lower than last year

Since when is 16.2 lower than 15.2? Westbrook has improved his offense (ORtg from 99 to 102) AND his defense (DRtg from 111 to 105) has improved by an amount comparable to Durant's.

Green's as well, same with Collison and Sefalosha. Kristic had gone from 13.6 PER to 13.9 (hooray),

And, each and every one of these players has improved defensively by a comparable amount to Durant. That's part of the improvement process for young players - learning how to play NBA defense. It looks like an across the board improvement in team defense - not just simply a case of Durant improving his defense turning the entire team around. Good for Durant. He's now playing passable defense, but so are his teammates - and they deserve credit to. As you once said, basketball is a team sport. That's true on both sides of the ball. If you are going to give Durant credit for improving his defense, you have to give that same credit to his teammates for their comparable improvement.

Harden is a nice addition, but his win-score or PER (14.6, less than your average starter in the league)

But he's not a starter. He's coming off the bench and his numbers are very good for a rookie bench player. His addition has certainly improved their bench, as did the addition of Maynor.

So, yes, the main reason they are winning is because they went from having a superstar on offense and supersuck on defense who negated more than he contributed, to have a superstar on offense and a good defensive player in Durant. In half a year his defensive win-score is already higher than it was all of last year. Durant's DRTG went down from 109 to 102 this year. It's a huge improvement - and the main reason they are so much better this year. His ORTG has only gone up by 2 points per 100 possessions.

This, right there, is why they are better.

It sure looks to me like a team effort to improve their defense. They were all pretty horrible on defense last year and they have ALL improved by a comparable amount his year - not JUST Durant.

And yes, Durant's offense has also improved significantly. His PER has jumped from 20.8 to 24.6 and his TS% is 0.603, which is amazing for a wing player.

Saying the main reason OKC is so much better this year is Durant's improved defense is just flat wrong. It's just one of many factors, a better bench, better team defense by ALL players, and Durant's continued improvement on offense have also made significant contributions to their better record.

They are also a much better rebounding team this year. Last year, they had exactly one more rebound than their opponents for the entire season. This year through 42 games, they have outrebounded their opponents by 139 - an average of +3.3 rebounds per game. That's an extra 3+ possessions per game for their team.

The fact that they didn't start out 1-12 under PJ, who was laying Durant out of position, also helps.

BNM

 

[MARIS61]

sergio has played 23% of the time for the kings. he has played 8% of their "clutch minutes"(4th quarter or overtime, less than 5 minutes left, neither team ahead by more than 5 points).

that seems to indicate that sergio doesn't play a whole lot of minutes that matter(which is what you would expect from the 3rd string pg). playing a lot of your minutes during garbage time does weird things to +/-.

Your definition of clutch time is arbitrary and misleading. Most of the King's games are decided early on. Not many nailbiters.

Sergio has played in key parts of most wins and often they are key because he came in and changed the tempo and balance of power. That is how Westphal sees him and has used him.

Tonight he played 10:15 against Orlando and was 3-4 fg, 1-1 3pt, 1-1 ft, 5 ast (most on team), and 3 stls (most on team) for 8 pts and a +11 (best on team) while Martin was -28 (worst on team).

Beno's slide continued also with an ugly showing. Sergio will be moving into the regular rotation again by trade day, if not sooner.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Sergio will be moving into the regular rotation again by trade day, if not sooner.

Whose regular rotation?

BNM

 

[rocketeer]

Your definition of clutch time is arbitrary and misleading. Most of the King's games are decided early on. Not many nailbiters.

it's not my definition. it's 82games.com. i simply used their numbers because they are the ones available.