some advanced stats through 19 games

[moqui]

obviously not measures of total contribution, just different ways of looking at effectiveness while on the floor

 

[JOC44]

I guess it depends on how you define "advanced." I'm skeptcial of the value of these types of stats in free-flowing sports like basketball and soccer. That Gbinije comes out ahead of Fair in three of four categories doesn't comport with what I am seeing with my eyes.

 

[Knicks411]

Well it's pretty tough to compare two guys when one guy has played 92% of our minutes and the other guy has played 32% of our minutes. From a purely statistical standpoint, Gbinije has a higher EFG, higher true shooting, higher assist rate, lower turnover rate, comparable block rate, and higher steal rate. Their usage rates aren't in the same universe though.

All that being said, I don't think anyone would expect Gbinije to be able to put up the same kind of numbers in CJ's minutes/role.

 

[moqui]

I guess it depends on how you define "advanced." I'm skeptcial of the value of these types of stats in free-flowing sports like basketball and soccer. That Gbinije comes out ahead of Fair in three of four categories doesn't comport with what I am seeing with my eyes.

which is why I pointed out that they are obviously not measures of total contribution

 

[SWC75]

I guess it depends on how you define "advanced." I'm skeptcial of the value of these types of stats in free-flowing sports like basketball and soccer. That Gbinije comes out ahead of Fair in three of four categories doesn't comport with what I am seeing with my eyes.

I always wonder what they represent. Ennis does 23.3 what per game? Fair does .145 what per 40 minutes? Fans should be able to watch a game, see somebody do something and realize how that adds to the stats that he will be evaluated by.

 

[moqui]

I always wonder what they represent. Ennis does 23.3 what per game? Fair does .145 what per 40 minutes? Fans should be able to watch a game, see somebody do something and realize how that adds to the stats that he will be evaluated by.

I think it does confirm what I see with my eyes. My eyes tell me that Cooney's performance has been in decline, and this shows it - Cooney was the leader in every category at the end of the pre-conference season. My eyes tell me that Tyler Ennis is far and away the most important player on the team, despite his somewhat pedestrian numbers in the old-fashioned stats, and this confirms it. My eyes tell me that CJ, despite his good numbers in the old-fashioned stats, has not really made the leap as the featured offensive player, and advanced stats demonstrate that he has gone from a high efficiency, moderate volume player last year to a high volume, moderate efficiency player this year.

if you really want to know what each one signifies, it isn't that difficult to google their definitions.

 

[statsgrad]

CJ, for all he does well, is not a tremendous passer. We have fared much better against zone this season with Grant manning the foul line ... we really struggled at times last year with CJ at the foul line against zone defense. I would imagine his assist/TO ratio is not very good this year or last.

 

[billsin01]

I think it does confirm what I see with my eyes. My eyes tell me that Cooney's performance has been in decline, and this shows it - Cooney was the leader in every category at the end of the pre-conference season. My eyes tell me that Tyler Ennis is far and away the most important player on the team, despite his somewhat pedestrian numbers in the old-fashioned stats, and this confirms it. My eyes tell me that CJ, despite his good numbers in the old-fashioned stats, has not really made the leap as the featured offensive player, and advanced stats demonstrate that he has gone from a high efficiency, moderate volume player last year to a high volume, moderate efficiency player this year.

if you really want to know what each one signifies, it isn't that difficult to google their definitions.

Eh, I'm not so sure. Now I do appreciate these stats and certainly feel there's a place for advanced metrics in every sport. I also acknowledge I'm predisposed to defend anything CJ Fair does ... ever ... simply b/c I like him. That fact alone makes these numbers worth something if only from attempting to give an unbiased view of what's happening in these games.

But I do question the value of these numbers in a game like hoops where I still think you can tell a lot from old fashioned stats and, more importantly, watching games.

For example, Cooney's play has been in decline ... b/c he's shot terribly the past couple weeks. I'm not sure what value an advanced metric has that simply looking at his 3-pt % couldn't already tell you.

For Fair, whom I obviously love as a player, is there anyone watching games this year who is confused about the fact that he's a much better 2 or 3 option than the go-to guy? He's so good off the ball and smart and has such a unique game (mid-range, lefty, etc..) that he's a nightmare if you have to worry about Waiters and Kris Joseph or whomever else is out there. When he's the man, he's not quite at the same level. Having said that, there is also the truism that anybody who's "the man" is going to be less efficient. It's simply true. If Ennis had to carry the scoring load in addition to running the point, his percentages, efficiency and turnover rate would all suffer.

For Grant -- he's all or nothing. He's played better lately and obviously has all-world potential, but he has massive defensive lapses and serious holes offensively, which aren't as obvious due to Cooney/Fair/Ennis shouldering a good share of the scoring load.

For Xmas -- I like the kid but he has trouble not fouling out in 40 mins over two games, let alone one. so WS/40 are meaningless to a large degree. Also, he's accumulated 80% of the win-shares as Fair? Seriously? Or even more than half as many as Ennis? What in God's name could account for that? My assumption is that players get a good bump for 'efficiency' but that number is not taking into account that they're basically ignored by 90% of the teams we face on the offensive end.

I don't know. Like I said, there is some value in these numbers but I really don't think they add much beyond old-fashioned stats and game-watching. The idea that Xmas is worth twice what Baye is worth, is completely confusing as well.

 

[skurey]

there's an advanced stat for the CJ problem of being "the" guy. USG%

 

[jordoo]

The thing about CJ is his absolute strength as a player is being an excellent complimentary player. He can do a bit of everything and we saw this last season as his efficiency was great in that roll. I think this is what will allow him to stick in the NBA if he can get court time. He will never see a double team and will be surrounded by very skilled players allowing him to do what he does best which is kill teams efficiently as a 3rd or 4th scorer.
It really should be no surprise to us that his efficiency has gone down as he is now the spotlight center piece in our offense. He isn't the greatest isolation player for a couple of reasons. Not a super ball handler, nor a great passer and even his passes out of the double team are more of the reset the offense variety than the make you pay for doubling variety. He is at his best this season coming off of screens and either popping a midrange jumper or faking and driving right away. I do think he worked hard to improve his right hand bounce and finishing ability which shows but most of the time his offensive roll this season is straying from his strengths. The fact that he has done as well as he has in that roll (sans the to's which are starting to drive me crazy) is a great credit to him as a player. By being the featured offensive player his own efficiency goes down while everyone else's goes up.
When teams are forced to adjust or game plan for Grant and Cooney more then CJ will shine and his added driving ability is very noticeable in space. I would bet that if you looked at the early part of the season when Cooney was on fire CJ's efficiency was much better but in games Cooney has struggled to make shots CJ's efficiency has been lower. This team has a group of offensive guys that kind of all rely on each other being successful to an extent allowing each other time and space to operate. Cooney looks to be coming out of a decent length shooting slump, Rakeem looks to be establishing himself and Grant is getting more consistent with his contributions. I believe that these things will free CJ up to play more to his strengths for longer portions of the game and perform more efficiently.

 

[billsin01]

there's an advanced stat for the CJ problem of being "the" guy. USG%

My point is more that if you watch games you know fair will be more effective as a complimentary player than as the no. 1 option. It's fine that a stat exists but I don't really see what value it brings.

 

[Knicks411]

I don't know. Like I said, there is some value in these numbers but I really don't think they add much beyond old-fashioned stats and game-watching. The idea that Xmas is worth twice what Baye is worth, is completely confusing as well.

I can buy that, give or take a little. Neither guy plays a huge role in the offense, but Rak takes nearly twice as many shots per minute, and he's shooting 71% vs 59% for BMK. They do similar work on the glass (BMK better on the offensive boards, Rak better on D), and Rak blocks slightly more shots and has a much lower TO rate. (he's no great shakes at 17% but BMK is at an absurd 31%)

 

[skurey]

the value of not being a human who only sees what they want?

 

[billsin01]

I can buy that, give or take a little. Neither guy plays a huge role in the offense, but Rak takes nearly twice as many shots per minute, and he's shooting 71% vs 59% for BMK. They do similar work on the glass (BMK better on the offensive boards, Rak better on D), and Rak blocks slightly more shots and has a much lower TO rate. (he's no great shakes at 17% but BMK is at an absurd 31%)

If rak is able to give us a modicum of value in the post offensively -- a couple buckets a game, then I'd agree. But baye is by far the more consistent on the other end and bailed us out defensively many times this year. I'm really pleased with rak's improvement but I would say he has no more than a slight edge on baye so far this season. I'm just not sure there is a metric for intangibles, high are a HUGE part of basketball, IMO

 

[billsin01]

the value of not being a human who only sees what they want?

Huh? I'm saying the focal point of an offense almost always gets less efficient. There's not a tremendous need for a stat to tell someone that.

 

[moqui]

since Sports Reference began tracking win shares in the 97-98 season, only 3 players have posted a higher win shares total than CJ's 6.5 last season

Warrick sr. year 7.5
Etan Thomas sr. 7.4
Etan Thomas jr. 7.3
Etan Thomas so. 6.6
Wes Johnson jr. 6.6
CJ Fair jr. 6.5

(Carmelo put up a 5.8 because that team was so balanced)

 

[skurey]

Huh? I'm saying the focal point of an offense almost always gets less efficient. There's not a tremendous need for a stat to tell someone that.

but the extent to which this occurs is what the stats are all about

 

[Knicks411]

If rak is able to give us a modicum of value in the post offensively -- a couple buckets a game, then I'd agree. But baye is by far the more consistent on the other end and bailed us out defensively many times this year. I'm really pleased with rak's improvement but I would say he has no more than a slight edge on baye so far this season. I'm just not sure there is a metric for intangibles, high are a HUGE part of basketball, IMO

Sure, but just looking at the stats, which is all win shares or whatever is doing, Rak blows BMK away. It's fair to say Rak probably isn't gonna shoot 71% all year, but if he does, he's a pretty damn valuable player.

 

[jordoo]

I find the win shares in bball to be pretty bogus but I love the usage and efficiency stats as well as FG% on different types of shots because if you are looking at them as indicators to understand what you are seeing better they are great. If you just take the numbers and mush them together you get something that can be very misleading like win shares.

 

[jncuse]

More usage tends to hurt shooting efficiency, but its taking a big hit on Fair this year. He is missing shots that he hit last year.

I look at it is a positive. Fair shot much better last year - hence, a raise in his level of shooting for the rest of the year is a fairly reasonable expectation. And still we are 19-0 with him being a little down shooting wise.

 

[billsin01]

but the extent to which this occurs is what the stats are all about

Yes, I get the idea of statistics. But not all stats are equally valuable or illuminating. If you're trying to compare WHiP or OPS to BABIP in baseball, for example, the prior two are much more telling than the latter. Stats rarely tell the whole story and some stats are far more valuable than others

 

[billsin01]

since Sports Reference began tracking win shares in the 97-98 season, only 3 players have posted a higher win shares total than CJ's 6.5 last season

Warrick sr. year 7.5
Etan Thomas sr. 7.4
Etan Thomas jr. 7.3
Etan Thomas so. 6.6
Wes Johnson jr. 6.6
CJ Fair jr. 6.5

(Carmelo put up a 5.8 because that team was so balanced)

But doesn't this prove the point? How is melo not at like 20 on that list? I love the other players on that team but almost everything they did came back to melo at one point or another, right?

 

[billsin01]

Sure, but just looking at the stats, which is all win shares or whatever is doing, Rak blows BMK away. It's fair to say Rak probably isn't gonna shoot 71% all year, but if he does, he's a pretty damn valuable player.

I would love to see a dip in rak's shooting % b/c is take that to mean he's getting more touches and opportunities to create in the post. That would be huge for this team and,yes, would make him far more complete a player than baye.

 

[Knicks411]

I would love to see a dip in rak's shooting % b/c is take that to mean he's getting more touches and opportunities to create in the post. That would be huge for this team and,yes, would make him far more complete a player than baye.

Yeah if Rak went from say 71% on 11% of our shots to maybe 60% on 18% that would probably mean better things for the team

 

[jordoo]

The bigger issue is what happened to our other 1.7 wins? Can Buss, BJ and the walkons really be responsible for 1.7 wins?