560Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Again on the Rider's of the world
- Feb 1, 2002On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, HoopStudies wrote:
> --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "John W. Craven" <john1974@u...> wrote:Actually, exactly the opposite. A mediocre player on a bad team will put up numbers ahead of what he's shown to be "capable" of. I noticed this in the expansion years.
> > > -Isiah Rider was a very good example of a guy who was a "creative
> > > scorer", but who really was a bad player.
> > >
> > But was his ability to create his own shots the reason why he was a
> bad player? I'm thinking not; in fact, I'm thinking that it had more
> to do with his absolutely horrendous defense - this is a guy who said
> at the beginning of this season that he didn't work hard on that end
> of the floor and didn't see the need to. His stats actually show him
> to be a fairly efficient player - mid-40s shooting percentage
> throughout his career with a lot of 3s, and a pretty good amount of
> FTs until the last couple years.
> I don't have my numbers here at work and I hate speaking out of my
> bad memory, but here goes -- he was typically scoring the most for
> his team, but always less efficiently than his teammates and when he
> changed teams, the offense of his new team got worse, the offense of
> his old team got better. Would that qualify as a bad offensive
> player? Not necessarily. Not if he was being traded for outstanding
> offensive guys. I'd need to look.
> > > -All those guys left for expansion drafts -- many of them became
> > > scorers on bad teams. Does that mean they're good? No. Ron
> > > fits that mold a little right now.
> > That's attributable to the Bad Team Effect. I _know_ that this
> exists, but I want to quantify it. As of right now, my team-defense
> adjustments seem to account for it pretty well.
> The "Bad Team Effect"? A guy's teammates bring him down?
> Is thatNo, in fact we have evidence that he's *not* a good offensive player, and yet he puts up attractive offensive numbers. I'm of the opinion that this is a direct result of his playing for a crappy team and being the least bad of all the bad options available.
> what you're saying? Do we have any evidence that Mercer was ever a
> good offensive player before?
> Why didn't Rider's offensive numbersWell, this is exactly my point. Sorry I didn't explain myself better.
> get better when playing with better teammates?
>Yeah, I totally agree.
> Other questions: Should David Robinson's efficiency get better
> because Duncan is around? Did Stephon Marbury make Kevin Garnett
> better? If Larry Hughes were to go to Chicago, would he or Mercer
> take more shots? Would Chicago get better? Was Antonio Davis a
> worse player in Indiana because he didn't score as much as he does in
> Toronto? Should Davis' efficiency have been higher when he was
> surrounded by Reggie Miller, Rik Smits, and Chris Mullin than when
> his teammates are Vince Carter, Alvin Williams, Keon Clark? Jason
> Terry has been playing on a rather pitiful team, but his efficiency
> is above average, well above Mercer's. Both bad teams and Terry
> didn't have Brand around last year.
> Answering them all is above any simple rating system.
> > > -Iverson, despite his rap as a poor shooter, has generally been
> at or
> > > above the league average efficiency because the guy gets to the
> > > passes the ball (yes), and doesn't turn the ball over all that
> > I actually had Iverson as one of the 10 best players in basketball
> last year. The way I figure scoring, I assume that, as a function of
> being a member of an offense, any player on a team will make a
> specific amount of baskets per minute on the floor (which I figure
> out for each team by dividing assists by minutes played). Anything
> above that is, so to speak, gravy; the net effect is that guys who
> shoot 50% from the floor but make 4 attempts per game aren't rated
> ahead of guys who shoot 25 times a night at a 45% clip.
> I don't officially rank players with one overall number. I calculate
> things like win-loss records, net points per game, offensive and
> defensive efficiencies. By everything but offensive efficiency,
> Iverson ranked very high last year. And I checked team numbers to
> see whether the individual numbers made sense. They generally did.
> He was important. I did that again this year when he missed time and
> posted it in an earlier message.
> > Today's game is predicated too much on the ability of individual
> players to create their own shots to ignore this, IMO. No team in the
> league eschews the isolation play, guys who run the pick and roll
> well are going to get freed up for more shots than those who don't,
> and when there are 2 or 3 seconds left on the shot clock then that
> create-shots ability is of tantamount importance.
> Definitely. No one is questioning that.
> > > -Van Exel actually has been a pretty efficient scorer throughout
> > > career, just very erratic from game to game, and a poor defender.
> > Also a very underrated passer. His defense seems to be erratic as
> well; for example, he gives Gary Payton fits on both ends of the
> I think Van Exel is underrated for his passing because he too often
> comes down court and throws up an early shot. He is not a bad passer
> nor a bad shooter, but he can be a very bad decision-maker.
> Especially when he played with Shaq, it really upset his teammatesYeah, I've always kind of wondered about him. He seems to be the kind of guy who is, by dint of his playing style, completely unable to "tone down" his game to accomodate better teammates. I guess that if he could, he'd still be a Laker.
> and coaches that he would come down the court at the end of a tight
> game where he was supposed to get the ball to Shaq, but just throw up
> a 3pt shot (and he admittedly made a few). Whenever I see him, he
> makes a couple bonehead decisions a game. With a less talented
> surrounding cast now, some of those 3pt shots don't seem as
> boneheaded, of course. Context is important. Decent player, but one
> that can drive a coach crazy.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>