945Re: replacement level players
- May 6, 2002--- In APBR_analysis@y..., Ed Weiland <weiland1029@y...> wrote:
>Interesting. Since Wallace only averaged 11 minutes for 46 games,
> --- harlanzo <harlanzo@y...> wrote:
> > I know this has been touched upon, but does anyone
> > have the
> > capability to look the stats of a player only when
> > he plays greater
> > than 15 or 20 minutes? If we had this data we might
> > have better idea
> > of the ability of the guys at the end of the bench
> > and how readily
> > replaceable some front-line guys are. For example,
> > John Wallace
> > seems like a guy who could surely put up acceptable
> > numbers with
> > enough minutes. IF we compared his and others
> > numbers in games where
> > they played 15+ minutes I think we might get a
> > better picture of
> > their ability.
> Here's Wallace's log:
> He played in 10 games where he got over 15 minutes. If
> my quick math is right, he averaged 21.3 min, with
> 12.4 pts, 4.7 boards and a .558 FG pct in those games.
> The Suns' record in those games was 4-6.
and shot only .435 FG pct, he must have been Really Bad in those
other 36 games.
Most likely, he is a streaky shooter, as well as a limited player.
In other words, when he isn't hitting, he doesn't bring much game at
Based on his 11-minute average performance, I'd expect about 12.5 pts
and 5 reb in 36 minutes, not in 21 minutes.
This might be where coaches earn their money (and why we don't get
paid for This). If Wallace is on, play him. If not, back to the
> I looked at Scott Williams numbers in his 20+ minuteAgain, when your 4th- or 5th-best player has a strong game, you are
> games last season and found that not only was he a
> better player in such games, but the Bucks looked like
> an elite team in those games and a .500 team when
> Williams played less than 20 minutes.
much more likely to win. That doesn't mean playing this guy 30-40
minutes, regardless, is going to get you the same results.
> I didn't thinkConsistency is a much-sought quality in players.
> it was much more than a fluke at the time, but in
> light of Milwaukee's mediocrity this season perhaps
> Williams was a better fit there than most
> folks--including Bucks management--realized. At the
> very least it was a situation they probably didn't
> need to correct.
> There are some players I'd like to do such a study forKeon is intriguing. He has better rebounding and scoring numbers
> this season, one that comes to mind immediately is
> Keon Clark.
> Ed Weiland
than Antonio or Hakeem. Another up-and-down player.
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>