Who Was the Better C: Ayton or Clingan

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Who was Better

  • Total voters
    28

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
wizenheimer said:
If I was to make my own subjective a list of priorities for a modern NBA C, it would look something like:

Rim Protection (Clingan)
Paint Defense (Clingan)
Focus & Intensity (Clingan)
Rebounding (Clingan)
Upside (Clingan)
Switch-ability on defense (Draw)
Offensive Rebounding (Clingan)
Salary & Contract (Clingan)
Post Passing (Draw)
Strong Hands in Traffic (Ayton)
Shooting % at Rim (Ayton)
3 point Shooting (Clingan)
Mid Range Shooting (Ayton)

I know other people will want to rearrange those priorities; maybe add some. But in my view this really isn't close
Click to expand...

Pretty fair, although I think Ayton is much better than Clingan on the switch-ability.
 
STOMP said:
PER is an advanced stat too. I pointed to it as a counter to your contention that this season was a statistical blowout in DC's favor.
Click to expand...

Per is an advanced formula based stat, but it's significantly influenced by volume and opportunity:

upload_2025-4-16_19-28-45.png

Ayton averaged 10.4 more minutes and 6.7 more FGA and had a 19.4% usage rate compared to Clingan at 14.2%

But, his PER was 17.7 while Clingan's was 17.4. That's a negligible difference and considering Ayton's big advantage in those volume components of the formula, I'd say PER in many ways favors Clingan
 
PCmor7 said:
Pretty fair, although I think Ayton is much better than Clingan on the switch-ability.
Click to expand...

maybe, but Ayton has a defensive intensity deficit. I've seen him consistently loaf on defense. Clingan works his ass off; granted, sometimes confusedly

still, Ayton is a drop-coverage C. He's not like Adebayo, Sengun, or Jarrett Allen
 
Mediocre Man said:
Even though we lose 6.6 points when he starts?

Id rather have a team of 10 PER guys that were all + in the +\- stat than a team of 20 PER guys that were -

Legit asking….does that make sense?
Click to expand...
Context matters. Ayton sat out much of the 2nd half of the season when the team played well and won games which of course is reflected in the +/- stats. Was it because DA was sitting that they played well and won, or was it because Deni stopped trying to fit in and became the team's undisputed alpha/best player? I'm solidly in the later camp.

For a vast majority of players in the league, their situation matters a great deal in how they statistically perform. From my observations, DeAndre & the team was vastly more effective when he was setting picks at top of the key & the primary P&R partner with Deni then when Deni was standing in the corner and Ayton was jacking up contested midrange jumpers as the clock wound down. Hopefully that answers your question

STOMP
 
STOMP said:
Context matters. Ayton sat out much of the 2nd half of the season when the team played well and won games which of course is reflected in the +/- stats. Was it because DA was sitting that they played well and won, or was it because Deni stopped trying to fit in and became the team's undisputed alpha/best player? I'm solidly in the later camp.
Click to expand...

And you think the latter has nothing to do with the former?
 
wizenheimer said:
maybe, but Ayton has a defensive intensity deficit. I've seen him consistently loaf on defense. Clingan works his ass off; granted, sometimes confusedly

still, Ayton is a drop-coverage C. He's not like Adebayo, Sengun, or Jarrett Allen
Click to expand...

Disagree. Not when he's allowed to blitz the ballhander on the high PnR. I think he's about as good a legit big as there is doing that. Certainly the best we've had in a long time. He's feet are light years ahead of Clingan and I don't think that's something Clingan has the ability to make up.
 
Everything Beagle said:
And you think the latter has nothing to do with the former?
Click to expand...
Do you think Ayton is calling the sets and defining player roles?

How many times will I have to say that I think Deni and Ayton were the best P&R combo on the team? I think it's most likely he was sat the 2nd half of the season after the trade deadline because the chance to improve his trade prospects had passed and management smartly moved on to prioritizing the development of the youngins

STOMP
 
PCmor7 said:
Disagree. Not when he's allowed to blitz the ballhander on the high PnR. I think he's about as good a legit big as there is doing that. Certainly the best we've had in a long time. He's feet are light years ahead of Clingan and I don't think that's something Clingan has the ability to make up.
Click to expand...
Exactly. His defensive strengths are not the same as Donovan's. While Ayton isn't the rim protector that DC is, he's much better on switches that happen on the high P&R which are the basis of the offense for most teams

STOMP
 
Everything Beagle said:
Since Billups is staying, if he cannot be trusted to make good decisions, then Ayton should probably go.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're saying. The coach is responsible for the strategy & calls the set plays, how is it Ayton's fault that the new guy took part of the season to ascend to an alpha role on offense? I don't blame Chauncey for making Deni earn that status either, thats how it should be.

STOMP
 
wizenheimer said:
Per is an advanced formula based stat, but it's significantly influenced by volume and opportunity:

View attachment 73486

Ayton averaged 10.4 more minutes and 6.7 more FGA and had a 19.4% usage rate compared to Clingan at 14.2%

But, his PER was 17.7 while Clingan's was 17.4. That's a negligible difference and considering Ayton's big advantage in those volume components of the formula, I'd say PER in many ways favors Clingan
Click to expand...
Given that PER is a normalized stat, the minutes and FGA/game differences are irrelevant. The usage rate difference is the significant item here, as the correlation between usage and PER is well-documented. Also worth noting, however that Ayton's eFG and TS% are also higher than Clingan's, which suggests that his higher usage may be justified.

Still, as you imply, PER is primarily an offensive stat, whereas other advanced stats like WS, BPM, and VORP which reflect defensive impact definitely favor Clingan.
 
I'm good with both. They both need to dunk more. Ayton also needs to up his defensive effort.
 
STOMP said:
I'm not sure what you're saying. The coach is responsible for the strategy & calls the set plays, how is it Ayton's fault that the new guy took part of the season to ascend to an alpha role on offense? I don't blame Chauncey for making Deni earn that status either, thats how it should be.

STOMP
Click to expand...
I thought the rule of the game in this thread is you only get to keep one.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Given that PER is a normalized stat, the minutes and FGA/game differences are irrelevant. The usage rate difference is the significant item here, as the correlation between usage and PER is well-documented. Also worth noting, however that Ayton's eFG and TS% are also higher than Clingan's, which suggests that his higher usage may be justified.

Still, as you imply, PER is primarily an offensive stat, whereas other advanced stats like WS, BPM, and VORP which reflect defensive impact definitely favor Clingan.
Click to expand...

well, about the eFG% and TS%, there is not really a significant gap between them.

eFG%: Ayton .573....Clingan .560
TS%: Ayton .583....Clingan .570

so he was 2.3% better at eFG and 1.6% better at TS%. That difference between the 2 categories explained by Clingan's much higher FT Rate, since eFG omits FT's from it's equation.

to me, that's not a notable advantage for Ayton considering he's in his 7th and Clingan is a rookie. It's clear though that Ayton is a better shooter, but that's about the only thing he has on Clingan

as for PER being normalized, how can you tell:

PER = (1 / MP) * [ 3P + (2/3) * AST + (2 - factor * (team_AST / team_FG)) * FG + (FT * 0.5 * (1 + (1 - (team_AST / team_FG)) + (2/3) * (team_AST / team_FG))) - VOP * TOV - VOP * DRB% * (FGA - FG) - VOP * 0.44 * (0.44 + (0.56 * DRB%)) * (FTA - FT) + VOP * (1 - DRB%) * (TRB - ORB) + VOP * DRB% * ORB + VOP * STL + VOP * DRB% * BLK - PF * ((lg_FT / lg_PF) - 0.44 * (lg_FTA / lg_PF) * VOP)]

Where:
  • MP= Minutes played
  • 3P= 3-point field goals made
  • AST= Assists
  • FG= Field goals made
  • FT= Free throws made
  • FGA= Field goals attempted
  • TRB= Total rebounds
  • ORB= Offensive rebounds
  • TOV= Turnovers
  • VOP= Value of possession (estimated average points per possession)
  • DRB%= Defensive rebounding percentage
  • STL= Steals
  • BLK= Blocks
  • PF= Personal fouls
  • lg_FT,lg_PF, lg_FTA = League average free throws made, personal fouls, and free throw attempts, respectively
  • team_AST,team_FG = Team assists and field goals made
  • factor= A variable dependent on team assists and field goals
I'm kidding. Try and explain al that, item by item. Wake me when you're done

by the way, IIRC, I think Hollinger has even said that he thinks his PER formula(s) may undervalue offensive rebounds

bottom line, as you mentioned, PER is basically a formula based gauge of offense skewed by usage. That Ayton has a 37% higher usage and only a 1.7% higher PER is pretty revealing
 
wizenheimer said:
as for PER being normalized, how can you tell:

PER = (1 / MP) * [ 3P + (2/3) * AST + (2 - factor * (team_AST / team_FG)) * FG + (FT * 0.5 * (1 + (1 - (team_AST / team_FG)) + (2/3) * (team_AST / team_FG))) - VOP * TOV - VOP * DRB% * (FGA - FG) - VOP * 0.44 * (0.44 + (0.56 * DRB%)) * (FTA - FT) + VOP * (1 - DRB%) * (TRB - ORB) + VOP * DRB% * ORB + VOP * STL + VOP * DRB% * BLK - PF * ((lg_FT / lg_PF) - 0.44 * (lg_FTA / lg_PF) * VOP)]

Where:
  • MP= Minutes played
  • 3P= 3-point field goals made
  • AST= Assists
  • FG= Field goals made
  • FT= Free throws made
  • FGA= Field goals attempted
  • TRB= Total rebounds
  • ORB= Offensive rebounds
  • TOV= Turnovers
  • VOP= Value of possession (estimated average points per possession)
  • DRB%= Defensive rebounding percentage
  • STL= Steals
  • BLK= Blocks
  • PF= Personal fouls
  • lg_FT,lg_PF, lg_FTA = League average free throws made, personal fouls, and free throw attempts, respectively
  • team_AST,team_FG = Team assists and field goals made
  • factor= A variable dependent on team assists and field goals
I'm kidding. Try and explain al that, item by item. Wake me when you're done

by the way, IIRC, I think Hollinger has even said that he thinks his PER formula(s) may undervalue offensive rebounds

bottom line, as you mentioned, PER is basically a formula based gauge of offense skewed by usage. That Ayton has a 37% higher usage and only a 1.7% higher PER is pretty revealing
Click to expand...


Well, it starts with 1/MP - which immediately tells you that all the values are per minute. Since FGA is a full-game stat - the 1/MP immediately neutralizes that. So, I think his assertion that these are not relevant to the calculation of PER are basically right. By starting with 1/MP you basically immediately know that all the stats used there are rate based, so the FGA (just like 3P, AST, FG, FT, TRB, ORB, TOV, STL, PF and BLK) is basically neutralized to be a FGAR (FG Attempt Rate per minute) which comes down to the usage...

I am sorry if you were trying to be sarcastic, no green font etc...
 
andalusian said:
Well, it starts with 1/MP - which immediately tells you that all the values are per minute. Since FGA is a full-game stat - the 1/MP immediately neutralizes that. So, I think his assertion that these are not relevant to the calculation of PER are basically right. By starting with 1/MP you basically immediately know that all the stats used there are rate based, so the FGA (just like 3P, AST, FG, FT, TRB, ORB, TOV, STL, PF and BLK) is basically neutralized to be a FGAR (FG Attempt Rate per minute) which comes down to the usage...

I am sorry if you were trying to be sarcastic, no green font etc...
Click to expand...

yeah, I was being a little sarcastic

but I am still wondering if the minute normalization eliminates skew all the way thru that formula.
 
wizenheimer said:
yeah, I was being a little sarcastic

but I am still wondering if the minute normalization eliminates skew all the way thru that formula.
Click to expand...

That seems like it does - because you have (1 / MP) * [ .... ]

In other words, if you were to write it in the traditional way, you would have the [ ... ] as the numerator (above the line) and MP as the denominator (below the line)
 
andalusian said:
That seems like it does - because you have (1 / MP) * [ .... ]

In other words, if you were to write it in the traditional way, you would have the [ ... ] as the numerator (above the line) and MP as the denominator (below the line)
Click to expand...

right, it comes down crudely to higher usage = higher PER
 
wizenheimer said:
right, it comes down crudely to higher usage = higher PER
Click to expand...

When they players are roughly as efficient, sure. Obviously, an efficient player on a lower usage will still have a higher PER than a low-efficiency, high-usage player.
 
Everything Beagle said:
I thought the rule of the game in this thread is you only get to keep one.
Click to expand...
ah, that makes more sense. I was just talking hoops and saying who I think will start next season. Of the two, I like Clingan better but thats based on who I think he'll be in a couple more years.

STOMP
 
STOMP said:
ah, that makes more sense. I was just talking hoops and saying who I think will start next season. Of the two, I like Clingan better but thats based on who I think he'll be in a couple more years.

STOMP
Click to expand...
I’d rather Clingan start with a 24-minute limit, and get a crafty old guy to back him up and teach him the real shit.
 
HailBlazers said:
As long as both centers get minutes I don't see what the kerfuffle is about.
Click to expand...
Both will get minutes next year. Some posters just enjoy being upset & will invent scenarios so they can get their anger on. Like this past season, I expect DA to get more at the start of the year as they profile him for the trade deadline & DC to get more towards the end of the season.

Starting is a status thing. Who finishes games is much more important to winning games.

STOMP
 
STOMP said:
Both will get minutes next year. Some posters just enjoy being upset & will invent scenarios so they can get their anger on. Like this past season, I expect DA to get more at the start of the year as they profile him for the trade deadline & DC to get more towards the end of the season.

Starting is a status thing. Who finishes games is much more important to winning games.

STOMP
Click to expand...
Luckily we won’t be winning more than 41 games next year so even then it’s not very important
 
STOMP said:
Both will get minutes next year. Some posters just enjoy being upset & will invent scenarios so they can get their anger on. Like this past season, I expect DA to get more at the start of the year as they profile him for the trade deadline & DC to get more towards the end of the season.

Starting is a status thing. Who finishes games is much more important to winning games.

STOMP
Click to expand...
I’ve never understood this thinking. It’s like player A going 5-10 from the FT line in the first quarter, and player B missing his only two FT’s at the buzzer. Player B gets bashed, but player A was more at fault for the loss. If Ayton is a -6.6 when on the floor, and Clingan a a +1 then why should Ayton be on the floor? The game is 48 minutes. All of them matter equally, don’t they
 
STOMP said:
Given health, I think it's likely they will be over 500 next season

STOMP
Click to expand...
Completely agree. The team is good. Great? No, but good. There are pieces we need, but if Avdija and Sharpe can be what they were late in the season, if the offense can get more ball movement and the Conductor can stay out of his own way with minutes then we should be pretty decent. As you said, given health.
 
Mediocre Man said:
Completely agree. The team is good. Great? No, but good. There are pieces we need, but if Avdija and Sharpe can be what they were late in the season, if the offense can get more ball movement and the Conductor can stay out of his own way with minutes then we should be pretty decent. As you said, given health.
Click to expand...
We probably could've gone .500 this season and qualify for the playin. But it felt like we were indecisive between winning and tanking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top