DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

Sixers Grades at the All-Star Break

Good rankings and good post Statman, as always. Looking at them right now, Lou Williams Teamwork at C+ looks a little generous.

user-pic
mchezodefa reply to Rich on Feb 18 at 10:19
+/-

Good rankings and good post Statman, as always. Looking at them right now, Lou Williams Teamwork at C+ looks a little generous.

how is a C+ generous? that is ridiculous. if a player is doing exactly what the coach wants him to do, how can you give him anything less than an A?

If a team mate constantly ignores wide open players in their comfort zone to dribble into a double team instead, why would you give him an A?

Teamwork is an on the court thing - I doubt collins says 'lou don't pass it to anyone open if you can get double teamed instead'

I think I'm higher on Lou than most here, but I had to downgrade him on "teamwork" for two reasons:
- He doesn't seem to have the best sense of when to push it on the break, usually choosing to slow it down if he can't get his own shot. While this minimizes turnovers, it limits opportunities for others.
- As you mention, sometimes he'll over-dribble on a possession, resulting in a bad shot (either for himself or someone else). While the play might be called for him, he needs to do a better job of recognizing when it's better to pass to someone else.

I do think Lou is better at hitting the open man than most of us realize, with an assist rate only marginally worse than Jrue's (see my reply to Brian's comment below).

His assist rate is high this year, but more impressive to me is his turnover rate being down for the fourth straight off season.

Assist rate can be a really misleading number when viewed in a vacuum. It's the percentage of made FGs by your teammates when you're on the floor that you assist on. Which seems straightforward, but when you think about it, it's directly tied to - and overly influenced by - usage rate. Lou uses 27.6% of possessions himself on turnovers and shots, so his assist rate is on the other 72.4% of possessions. Whereas Jrue's usage rate is only 21%, so he's assisting on 28.4% of 79% of possessions. As your usage rate goes up, your assist percentage goes up.

To put it mathematically, given 1000 possessions at this rate:

Jrue would use 210 possessions (scores and turnovers), assume 0.4 made field goals per possession on the other 790 possessions, that equals 316 made field goals by his teammates. Jrue would assist on 90 of those at his current assist rate.

Lou would use 276 possessions (scores and turnovers), again assuming 0.4 made FG per P on the other 724 possessions, that equals 289 made field goals by his teammates. Lou would assist on 69 of those at his current assist rate.

The difference in assist rate may only be 4.6%, but I think the gap between the playmaking abilities of these guys is much, much wider than that. Even if their assist rate was equal at 28.6%, Jrue would still have 8 more assists in the same number of possessions, Lou's just getting a bonus because of his usage.

Um, yeah, what he said

This is the opposite side of the coin from what I was saying. My point (in a way of speaking) was that it shouldn't be held against a player that he can't get an assist on his own shot attempts, especially if his shot is the primary option for the play. It's one thing if the shot comes at the expense of a pass that might be a better play, but I don't think that is the case on the majority of Lou's shots.

So, when an assist is possible (on a teammate's made field goal), Lou is responsible a good percentage of the time. Put another way, I would not downgrade a prime Michael Jordan as a playmaker just because he was shooting most of the time. What I want to know is what percentage of time when a pass was the right play did the pass get there. I think assist percentage captures that fairly well, though another metric that incorporated passing turnovers might be better.

I see what you're saying. Assist rate is a stat that really troubles me, just like turnover rate, really. Guys who take a ton of shots have inflated assist rates as a rule, and devalued turnover rates as a rule. The thing that bothers me most about the two stats is that assists aren't factored into turnover rate, it's based only on usage rate.

So a PG who averages 10 assists and 3 turnovers, but only takes 6 shots per game would have a 33% turnover rate. But a guy who takes 20 shots, hands out 0 assists and turns the ball over 3 times would have a 13% turnover rate. It really bugs me.

Well then we could use something different.

A:TO still works, and while I'm not smart enough to do the research I always thought from a team point of view that the relationship between assists and made baskets might be relevant

Here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about. DeMarcus Cousins has a lower turnover rate than Jrue (16.8% to 17.1%). They have the exact same number of turnovers (152). Jrue has played 541 more minutes, at the point, he has 252 more assists, but because Cousins takes an ungodly number of shots, he has a better TOV%.

Good point about turnover rate. I had assumed it was something closer to turnovers per possession. And ideally I would like to see something like "turnovers per turnover opportunity," because players who never touch the ball except to shoot (say, Songaila or Kapono) don't usually turn it over.

In an ideal world, we could grade playmaking according to every pass attempted, say from -3 for a turnover to 0 for a neutral pass to +3 for a great pass. And it wouldn't matter whether the player who received the pass made the shot or not. Potentially, we could also assign negative numbers for good passes not made (this would require even more subjective judgment). Then we could average the pass values over pass attempts and come up with a playmaking score for the game. I think maybe I'll try this on a game in the 2nd half and score Lou, Jrue, and Iguodala that way.

One last comment about assist rate: simply taking a lot of shots doesn't "boost" anyone's assist rate. The player still has to pass to get assists. If you want to look at a player who really never passed, take a look at George Gervin's page on basketball-reference.com (career usage rate over 30%, career assist rate 13%).

Well, 13% is even inflated imo. I mean it inflates it in relation to assists/36.

I suppose a gunner's assist rate is higher relative to that of other players than his assist/minute rate, which is probably your point. But I counter that assists/minute doesn't fully take into account how often a player is "supposed" to pass vs. shoot (and even though Lou is the nominal PG when he's in, a lot of plays are drawn up for him to shoot). To capture playmaking fully, there needs to be a statistic similar to "good pass per pass opportunity," which is why I proposed scoring "playmaking" the way I did.

Maybe we should both try to score "playmaking" for the same game? I have a feeling it may be somewhat subjective, so it would be good to get two pairs of eyes looking at it ...


Yeah, that's a good idea. Maybe the next away game we can do a half. We should come up w/ some guidelines going in.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Feb 18 at 16:12
+/-

Look at Iverson. he had some crazy years were his asst% and usage were both over 35%.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Feb 18 at 0:09
+/-

Am doing my grades for Sunday paper. They're not too far from yours.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Feb 18 at 0:10
+/-

Iguodala to Holiday: 'Don't let the rookies beat you':

http://ow.ly/3YL7a

Really like the way you broke the grades down. Mostly I agree, I'd probably have Lou below a B for playmaking, simply because he's always at the point when he's in and he's only at about 5.1 assists/36 minutes. It's not his focus, obviously, but that's still a really low number for me when we're talking about a PG with a team that has such flat scoring talent (by flat, I mean so many guys at equal skill levels in the half court, give or take. Scoring should be pretty even among the top 5 or 6 scorers).

I'm not sure I'd give Collins a B+ in player development. I'm still worried about Jrue and Turner, but it's something we're going to have to wait and see about.

Re: Lou's playmaking, my impression is that he's worse than a B, but the stats say that he's only marginally worse than Jrue (24% to 29% assist percentage). And I do take into account that when Lou has the ball, a large percentage of his "plays" are set up to have him shoot as the primary option (whereas this is less the case with Jrue). So Lou's assist percentage is really not too bad considering.

Re: Collins' player development, I should have been more clear about my definition. I think of "player development" as maximizing the performance of individual players on the roster, and that includes veterans as well as younger players. So he's done a great job with Thad and Brand, a good job with Iguodala (remember that Collins' emphasis in the off-season was for Iguodala to make first-team All Defense, and Iguodala has responded with the best defense of his career) and Meeks, and a decent job with Hawes.

The question marks re: player development, as discussed in great detail here, are with Jrue, Turner, and Speights. I happen to think that if Jrue shows he's more trustworthy with the ball, he'll get his opportunities in the 4th quarter as the season continues. We can wish that Turner gets more minutes, but I think he's made nice progress recently in showing an all-court game off the bench, and that can only help in the long run. Speights is the big question mark, as his leash seems to be much shorter than Hawes' with regard to mistakes. Speights made a glaring error in the last game (he tried to help on a P/R but wound up 30 feet from the basket as the Rockets scored), and I'm wondering if Collins' is harder on mistakes that show a fundamental lack of understanding (which often seems to be the case with Speights) vs. a lack of talent (as is often the case with Hawes).

Re: Lou's playmaking, my impression is that he's worse than a B, but the stats say that he's only marginally worse than Jrue (24% to 29% assist percentage).

But his usage rate is also higher than Jrues (27.6 to 21) and he's 'arguably' a point guard, so he has a higher usage rate combined with a lower assist rate. I think that lends more credence to the lack of lou playmaking ability. Playmaking to me isn't creating for yourself, it's creating for others, and Lou doesn't do that well, or often enough to warrant a B in my opinion. I wonder how many of Lou's 'playmaking' is more of a - holy crap i can't get him to fall for the pump fake i better pass it before the clock goes off?

See my response above about the assist rate.

Cool post. I'll give everyone an A as long as they rebound and play defense, I'm an easy grader. Collins will get an A if he runs more JTI with Brand and Thad. Those are the best five, he should start that lineup and play it together whenever possible.

I think attitude should be straight A across the board. No one on that list dogs it, they all bring the effort every night.

And I think grading something like attitude is kind of silly :)

Overall though quite a nice read

user-pic
tk76 reply to stoned81 on Feb 18 at 10:23
+/-

There is a difference between effort and attitude.

I'd say those grade are more for the last 40 games. We all tend to throw out that 3-13 start, but it should be part of the equation. As should Iguodala's missing 12 games.

So, been thinking about this Speights thing and it feels like (to me) not like the Blazers are truly interested in Speights per se but just doing a little 'dumpster diving' (or the NBA trade equivalent). See a guy so far out of the rotation that Darius Songaila gets minutes before him and presume a team doesn't really like him and make a lowball offer and see if they'll bite.

It's weird, cause Anthony Randolph supposedly will still fetch a first round pick but what exactly has he accomplished in the NBA over speights?

While I can't dispute that Thaddeus Young has been 'good' this year, I'm a bit concerned that he hasn't been that much better than he was his rookie year, but the perception is he's having a break out season, not because of improvement per se but the fact that he regressed in season 2 and season 3 of his career (not entirely his fault in season 3).

I'm hoping this return to rookie form doesn't cause the sixers to somehow over pay him in the off season, and the whole 'at the basket' numbers don't seem sustainable long term to me.

Story: A special homecoming for Holiday:

http://ow.ly/3Z51X

user-pic
mgfields on Feb 18 at 11:24
+/-

Meeks, Williams, and Turner all are shooting the same percentage (Meeks .407, Williams .406, Turner .409).

Does shooting mean 3-point shooting? If not, then why does Turner get a D, Meeks a B+, and Williams a B-?

Turner 46.9
Meeks 58.8
Williams 54.0

Those are the true shooting percentages (a better number in my opinion) to look at than just FG%. Turner is just not looking good in that measurement.

If we're just talking shooting, the eFG is a better measure (doesn't take FTs into account)

Turner: .422
Williams: .460
Meeks: .525

B- for Lou is probably a little high, actually.

and Jrue should be higher than Lou at .484.

Except I don't think FT's should be taken out of the equation. Lou is inhuman at getting to the free throw line and it's a major strength of his game (plus he shoots them at a pretty good rate) and I think free throws should be considered when talking about shooting as a whole.

However, that consideration aside, either number shows a reason for having turner much lower than meeks/williams as opposed to the standard FG% number

TS is a measure of scoring efficiency to me, not a measure of how good of a shooter you are.

Whichever you prefer to use is fine, just saying, both numbers make the case for Turner being well below Meeks and Williams whereas the FG% by itself does not

user-pic
mgfields reply to Brian on Feb 18 at 11:37
+/-

What exactly is eFG?

I don't think Turner is a better shooter than Meeks. Good Lou might be the best shooter on the team, but Bad Lou could also be the worst.

Effective Field Goal Percentage; the formula is (FG + 0.5 * 3P) / FGA. This statistic adjusts for the fact that a 3-point field goal is worth one more point than a 2-point field goal. For example, suppose Player A goes 4 for 10 with 2 threes, while Player B goes 5 for 10 with 0 threes. Each player would have 10 points from field goals, and thus would have the same effective field goal percentage (50%).

A good reference site I refer to often when I forget how to calculate some stuff is:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html

That's probably a simpler way to explain and calculate than what I did. I was just trying to show the logic behind the number.

Yeah, I got what you were trying to do - I'd just say something like "eFG takes into account that a made 3 is 50% more points than a made 2" back in my teaching days

eFG is basically like this (made 2pt FG x 2) + (made 3pt FG x 3) divided by FGA, divided by 2, so it gives you added value for made threes. It looks like this (((2pFGM * 2)+(3pFGM*3))/FGA)/2

4/10 from the floor with 4 made 2pt FGS would give you an eFG of 0.4 (((4x2)+(0x3))/10)/2=0.4

4/10 from the floor with 3 made 2pt FGS and 1 made 3pt FG would give you an eFG of 0.45 (((3x2)+(1x3))/10)/2=0.45

And for completeness and comparison, TS%

True Shooting Percentage; the formula is PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA)). True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws.

For me, "shooting" is primarily about points per (shot) possession, so I weight TS% more then eFG%. Thus, Lou's B- because of his high FT rate. I probably should have labeled it "scoring efficiency" to be more clear.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 12:07
+/-

In Lou's case he draws a lot of fouls on jumpers. So the FT's bump his jump shooting effectiveness.

But if a guy draws lots of FT's in the pain, but can't hit jumpers, I would not say his raised TS% from FT's reflects he is a good shooter.

user-pic
tk76 reply to mgfields on Feb 18 at 11:43
+/-

TS% and eFG%

ET: .469/.422
LW: .540/.460
JM: .588/.525

3pt%:
ET: .27
LW: .34
JM: .40

16-23ft jumpers:
ET: .34
LW: .36
JM: .30 ( but LW/ET both take 6X as many of these shots)

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Feb 18 at 11:50
+/-

That last stat is ugly. Turner and Lou both take 2.8 shots a game from 16-23 ft. Each on average make only 1.0.

Getting 2 pts from 2.8 shots is lousy. Yet for Turner, this is 40% of his total shots taken. He needs better shot selection.

In Lou's case these "bad shots" from 16-23 ft represent only 26% of his total shots, and he also gets to the line a ton (often drawing fouls on these long jumpers.)

There's nothing I hate more than a long two. Nothing.

If I had time, I'd take a look at Turner's game log and see if he's drastically improved his percentage on long twos as the season has gone on. He does seem much better as of late. Still hate the shots, though.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Brian on Feb 18 at 11:59
+/-
user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Feb 18 at 12:04
+/-

ET 16-23 ft jumpers per/g per month:

Attempts have been pretty consistent month to month: 2.8/2.6/3.0/2.8 (last 10: 3.2.) So maybe trending up a tiny bit.

FG% on these shots has also been relatively consistent:
38/38/26/44 (last 10: 40%). So good in Feb, terrible in January.

I hate the missed bunny (or the reggie evans) much more

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Feb 18 at 11:57
+/-

In comparison, Jrue shoots 41% from 16-23ft, and only 23% of his total attempts are from that range.

Only 14% of Meeks attempts are 16-23 feet.

And Iguodala... shoots 38% from 162-3 feet, and these shots are 35% of his total. This is about where he has been every year.

And Iguodala... shoots 38% from 162-3 feet, and these shots are 35% of his total. This is about where he has been every year.

And it just finally needs to stop.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 12:06
+/-

He could definitely cut those way down. Though not entirely, but I think he could cut them in half, almost.

Maybe next year.

Does anyone remember what Collins' goal was for Iguodala heading into the season regarding FTs vs. 3Ps? I can't remember the exact ratio he wanted.

Last year he was at 303 3PA, 430 FTA, so 1.42 FTA/3PA

So far this year, he's at 112 3PA, 212 FTA, so 1.89 FTA/3PA.

Wish I could remember the ratio Collins targeted.

user-pic
zig reply to Brian on Feb 18 at 12:27
+/-

Collins was going for a 2:5 3PA to FTA ratio. So yeah, he is doing a lot better than last year, but still well below collins goal of 2.5 FTA/3PA.

Wow. He only did that once in his career. The problem is a dip in FTA more than taking too many threes.

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 14:22
+/-

I'd rather they just be threes, catch and shoot ones at that.

The Grizzlies just signed Rodney Carney to a 10 day contract to compensate for Rudy Gay's injury (thanks to Evan Turner's jujitsu D, he'll be out for at least a month). Always liked Carney, I think he's athletic and talented enough to be a decent wing off the bench in the NBA.

The Bergen Record claims the Denver Jersey deal is done pending Carmelo and Teddy KGB meeting and Carmelo agreeing to the extension.

I still don't think Carmelo will agree to the extension and I think New Jersey is just a pawn in this whole thing, but I never doubted they'd get back into it near the deadline with one last try

The rumor mill is abuzz today that Troy Muprhy is in the Denver deal but will immediately be flipped somewhere else (with a pick or two) since Denver doesn't want the luxury tax payments on him.

That sounds like a TPE thing to me - some team absorbing Murphys salary and getting some picks to do it.

People think it's Toronto or Cleveland or someone else (I don't know who else has a TPE big enough)

Hey, does anyone know how NBA players are paid? Do they only get checks during the season, or are they paid year-round, like on a weekly or bi-weekly basis?

I believe it's only during the season they get paid - I think most sports are like that - I know the NFL keeps talking about missed checks and those not happening until Games are missed.

Not sure if this is accurate but it seems that someone claims to know they are paid biweekly during the season

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006040100861

Damn - if i read the whole answer from yahoo i would have seen the original source link which adds some credibility

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=shirley_paul&id=2368830

Makes sense. If the players got bi-weekly checks througout the summer, that would kind of be an advantage to the owners in a potential lockout.

Yeah, but it makes sense that they only get paid during the season (when they're 'working') and I figured if that's how it works in the NFL it probably works the same in most leagues.

It's why all the heads are talking about march 3rd (for the NFL) as a fake deadline as the players won't have motivation until they miss checks...and the NFLPA has some strength, the NBAPA is limp and basically no stronger than the NHLPA and I think Stern really is out to crush them

Looking at these rankings, I really agree with all of them. The only real two I question are Brand's defensive position and help grades. He's been great at those, no?

Also, especially recently, I feel as if Turners overall grade is more than the sum of his parts so to speak. His individual areas aren't great, but he's making positive effects out there.

To my eyes (and I'm just as prone to confirmation bias as anyone else), Brand is just average at defensive positioning (percentage of time he really challenges a shot), especially when he's playing center. His opponent PER numbers on 82games.com (which is almost a month out of date by now) reflect this, and I've seen it in a couple of the games I tracked with Differential Production. I don't think it's for lack of effort, but he's too slow to guard some guys, too short to guard others (Amare being an example of a tough cover both ways).

For help defense, I give Brand some credit for his blocks (which aren't extraordinarily high), but he's still average or below average at helping on the P/R. He's most effective on defense with his surprise double teams, but I'm glad he doesn't overdo that (like Reggie Evans did).

What do you think? With your coach's eye, is Brand usually in the right spot defensively?

user-pic
Rich reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 16:27
+/-

I must have glossed over what you meant by positioning. I do think he challenges shots pretty well, but he is limited so he often gets scored on. So that one is definitely fair, because although he does give effort, he is limited.

I would incorporate P and R defense into the positioning part, and you are right, he's not good at that. I just feel that he covers for Hawes, Thad and the other terrible centers a lot in the paint.

I would incorporate P and R defense into the positioning part, and you are right, he's not good at that.

The sixers haven't been good at that for a while now

user-pic
tk76 reply to Rich on Feb 18 at 15:52
+/-

I agree with the ratings (for the most part) as well. But is Brand really all the way back to an "A-" PF right now? I'd say he was A in his career year. A- in most of his prime, and more of a B/B+ right now.

Brand is being maximized- which is great. But there still are a lot of weaknesses in his game. He has to be set to score (either a jumper or one of his pet moves.) While most "A-" PF's are guys you can make a quick pass to in the lane and expect them to finish strong. Brand still struggles in traffic unless he can first get set.

Well, to use one of your techniques, how many PFs right now are averaging 15.2 PPG, 8.7 RPG, 1.2 SPG, and 1.1 BPG and shooting 52%? The answer is one: Elton Brand. The only other player in the league who is doing that is Dwight Howard.

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 16:15
+/-

Yeah, I think he's being used perfectly on a team that hugely needs what he brings.

So by that standard he's been a A-. I just don't think he is an "A-" PF, but he is for this Sixers team. If he was asked to do different things that other PF's do he would be exposed. But I guess that is true for anyone.

Does that make any sense?

BTW, his role is similar to Boozer. Which is better at what they do?

Boozer just kind of sucks defensively doesn't he?

Well, if Boozer played the whole season, he would get an A from me. Maybe I'm just a more lenient grader than you :-)
(By the way, I wouldn't quibble with a B+ for Brand.)

Josh Smith hits the list

and Lamarcus Aldridge misses by 1/10 of a steal

Whoops - sorry - i was looking just at the counting stats - not the FG%

Sorry about that

Spencer Hawes: Just saw a bush cheney 04 sticker on a jeep in downtown houston. I love Texas. So american.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 15:47
+/-

I wonder if he includes the 35% of Texans who are Hispanic in his thinking. They are Texans and Americans as well (well most of the :) I'm afraid he is not broad thinking in that way...

Funny thing is, I know a lot of people who would consider texas a separate type of country (and same with california)

I love how this country was founded by the type of people todays 'real americans' would have hated. Northeastern lawyers :)

To what extent can Thad become a "James Worthy type" for a winning team?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/worthja01.html

Meaning an impact, efficient high scorer for a contender who gets out and runs. But lacks rebounding or great defense.

Were the Lakers that unique to where someone like Thad can't develop into a key part of a contender? Not Thad as the best player, but in a high profile role (like Worthy on the Lakers.)

user-pic
tk76 reply to tk76 on Feb 18 at 15:44
+/-

But I guess Worthy played more minutes at SF than PF (and started at SF.) But I'm pretty sure he was a combo forward.

Then again, with Magic, that team had a very non-traditional line-up. Even more than a team that uses Iguodala as point forward :)

For what it's worth, I thought Worthy was a plus defender in his prime, in a way that Thad will never be. Worthy guarded Bird in all those finals (I shudder to think of Thad guarding Bird). Also, Worthy did more than catch Magic's passes and dunk; he had a polished low post game and was the #1 scoring option on the later Lakers champions (86-87 and 87-88).

I do think that Thad would look even better than he does now if paired with an elite PG (e.g., Nash, Kidd, Paul), but that's true of almost everyone who can finish well. But to start on a title contender, he'd have to be a better one-on-one defender. Put it this way: if Thad were on the 86-87 Lakers, he'd be fighting Billy Thompson for 10th man status. (On the other hand, I think the 89-90 Sixers could really have used him :-))

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 16:09
+/-

Yeah, I'm not saying Thad is Worthy. I'm just trying to project his role on a good team as he enters his prime.

As I was debating at LB, is a player like Thad destined to put up numbers on a team that can't compete in a playoff setting? Or can he be a top 4 or 5 piece on a great team.

Worthy was probably the #3 piece on the Lakers. But those top 2 were top 20 All-Time. But teams were concentrated with talent at that time.

By 86-87, Worthy was #2 on the Lakers (a very distant #2, of course).

As I said, I think for Thad to be top 4/5 on a title contender, he'd have to improve his man-to-man defense. Do you think he could stop Turkoglu even now in an isolation situation?

user-pic
tk76 reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 16:25
+/-

Why would he have to? Or are you saying Iguodala is gone?

He needs to add another 15lbs of muscle (not so hard to do when you are talking someone 6'8) and just continue to improve as a defender. But you probably need a legit defensive center behind him.

Well, Iguodala was there and Orlando went to "whoever Thad was guarding." If your presence on the floor makes you the immediate target of the other team's isolation offense, you aren't good enough to be top 4/5 on a title contender. But I don't think we're disagreeing: if he improves his defense, he could become that.

user-pic
Rich reply to Statman on Feb 18 at 16:29
+/-

That's his major weak spot in my opinion. He can't shoot, but he's found a way to still be a deadly efficient scorer. Guarding threes and moving his feet on the perimeter is rough for him. I used to cringe when we were playing Boston and he'd have get down in a stance and guard Paul Pierce. He didn't look comfortable.

but he's found a way to still be a deadly efficient scorer

Do you think that 75% at rim (approximate) number is sustainable?

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 16:36
+/-

No, but I don't think it's a fluke either. For whatever reason, Collins is getting him the ball in spots that he's really comfortable in. He can be pretty close to 70 percent for a few years.

The scary thing about Thad is that he's blown plenty of bunnies this season, and had some halves where he just can't put the ball in the hole. His percentage could be a lot better.

I don't know how much higher it can be - I mean look at the list here

http://hoopdata.com/shotstats.aspx (You have to click on FG% to sort it) and check out the 'significant minute' players who are above thad...I mean thads up there with the best 'at rim' centers in the game.

Not sure how much better he could get...just something i noticed last night (that and the fact that his over all improvement is basically just a return to his rookie year performance)

user-pic
Rich reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 16:51
+/-

You mean he returned to rookie form outside of the at rim numbers? That is a significant jump from a rookie, so I guess you have to weigh the difference between it being a fluke and improvement. I'm an optimist generally, so I usually give a little more weight to improvement. He could hover around 70 percent if he is utilized correctly IMO, but who knows?

His numbers this year specifically could be higher because I feel like a couple of games he's missed a bunch of easy ones (kind of an unimportant side point that shows how good he's been this year).

No - sorry

This year his at the rim numbers are close to league best and well above his 3 year average

His overall performance (as best we can measure it) really isn't better than his rookie year - it's just that as opposed to progressing in years 2 and 3 he took steps backwards, so it seems like he's showing 'great growth' tis year when really he's just doing what he did when he was 19.


Thad is a great example how stats can be misleading. When he was a rookie, the only way he scored was on putbacks after offensive rebounds or after broken plays, as well as run the break. This year plays are being run for him, opponents defenses game plan for him, he even gets a double team from time to time. And he has dealt with all that fairly well thus far. That i call improvement.

It would be a disaster if we just let go of him IMO.

Plays aren't being run for Thad - running plays for thad is a disaster

Losing him wouldn't be a disaster, giving him a 5 year 50 million dollar deal (or so) would be a disaster

Actually, plays are being run for him, a ton of plays, actually, to get him the ball at the elbow for the most part. Collins actually said he runs the most plays for Thad and Lou.

If you say so - I don't see much play running or calling in the sixers offense - and any there might be is pretty simple to my eyes (which is probably why it stagnates in the hal court so much)

It's not complex. Thad starts on the baseline, or the wing, runs his man through a screen or two to get separation, gets the ball at the elbow, goes to work.

Ok, phew, i was worried thad had to remember a variety of plays :)

user-pic
Tom Moore on Feb 18 at 16:46
+/-

My Q & A with Rod Thorn about the Sixers and trade deadline:

http://ow.ly/3Zl7P

user-pic
Sean reply to Tom Moore on Feb 18 at 16:54
+/-

Tom, great read. Based on the couple related questions, it appears that Thorn doesn't anticipate us making a move by the deadline. Is that the overall impression you came away with?

Was a great read, and thorn that silver tongued devil side steps the speights question with ease :)

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to Sean on Feb 18 at 17:09
+/-

Yes -- unless another team improves its offer.

Doesn't sound like there's much interest in Kapono, even with his expiring contract.

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to Tom Moore on Feb 18 at 17:12
+/-

One more thing with Thorn:

Q: What are the chances you'll make a deal by the deadline?

A: I seriously doubt it. I don’t have anything (imminent), but you never know.

Hollinger picks Jrue to win MVP

PG, 76ers: Holiday is a big point guard and a smooth athlete. But he has one of the better "off-foot" dunks in the game, extending his left hand after his right leg jump. He'll catch guys by surprise because most athletes jump better off of the leg opposite their regular shooting hand. Holiday is my pick to win the Rookie Challenge MVP trophy, since I expect him to have the ball in his hands a lot. And unlike Stephen Curry and Brandon Jennings, who are required to be scorers for their teams, Holiday will enjoy the break from having to run a team and can look more to get buckets.

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 17:39
+/-

Oh so Holiday has an advantage in this game scoring the ball because, unlike other players who are scorers, he's not so he'll be, like, extra-motivated to enjoy the break from... not being a scorer, and to score.

user-pic
tk76 reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 17:41
+/-

Is Jrue starting? Because I can see him riding the pine for most of the game.

No idea

I must admit, I'm surprised that griffin is doing the rookie game, the dunk contest, and the ASG (though I'm not sure how many minutes he'll get on Sunday)

user-pic
Tray reply to GoSixers on Feb 18 at 17:47
+/-

Popovich will be lynched if he doesn't play Paul and Griffin together for some significant amount of time. Actually, I'd like to see a Griffin-Duncan frontcourt briefly, it would be interesting in a symbolic kind of a way.


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif