AP PHOTO
Well this is the end of our five part look into the things I’d personally like to see happen next season for the Thunder. Much like the previous four installments, this one has been a hot button issue for the fan base and I suspect it will continue to be until the players involved settle the debate organically by how they play.
But without further ado, here is Part V…
I want to see Serge Ibaka emerge as the Thunder’s starting PF.
I know a lot of people are going to see this as a shot at Jeff Green and it’s not. Not at all. The fact of the matter is that I have always and will always continue to believe that Jeff Green has a very important role for this team and the Thunder franchise (and yes, that role is on the court and not some weird KD BFF or “calming presence in the locker room” nonsense. Jeff Green is better than you probably think he is, trust me).
Now obviously I’m not one of the people who want Green dealt or dream up trades where somehow he gets traded for an All-Star caliber PF despite those very same people saying he stinks and somehow equating “stinky player + picks or expiring contracts” = “trading for an All-Star PF.” Fuzzy math is fun, just not very logical.
But I digress…
What this is really about is what kind of role Jeff Green has on the Thunder team and, no matter what you think about Serge Ibaka or Jeff Green, I think we can all agree that the PF position for the Thunder is relatively unsettled. The people who love Jeff Green readily admit to the fact that he has to get better on the block, at rebounding, etc, etc if he’s going to make a career of being a stretch PF in the NBA. This fact is typically not disputed.
On the contrary, the people who aren’t in love with Jeff Green want him to either move to the bench and become an all-purpose Sixth Man, usually spending time at both forward positions, because his versatility and unique skill-set would make him a nightmare off the bench for opposing teams and that role seems almost tailored for him specifically or, well, they want him traded as soon as possible for that mythical stud big man.
But don’t you see the common thread in both these camps? The whole, “Jeff Green has not looked like the long-term answer at PF for the Thunder if they want to take that next step” part that both sides seem to agree upon? No matter how much they love or loathe Green?
That is why I, barring an unforeseen improvement in Green’s shooting percentage from outside (you can’t really be called a stretch 4 when your outside game is not actually stretching the defense any because you’re not making a high enough percentage of three pointers to pull other PF’s away from the basket) or his offensive post play/rebounding, I think that about halfway through the season, or maybe even a bit past that, we will all see this situation resolve itself without any drama or disruption.
Put bluntly: I think Serge Ibaka will be a better PF at some point in this season than Jeff Green is for the Thunder.
And that statement should really come as no surprise since Jeff Green’s skills aren’t that of a PF, his size and style of play aren’t particularly suited for a PF and, well, Green is doing a fairly admirable job playing out of position WHILE not having a center with the skills that could offset Green’s skills in the post.
You see, Serge Ibaka fills a hole that the Thunder have in the post that Jeff Green just can’t partly because of who the Thunder trot out there at center. In fact, you could argue that part of Green’s struggles at the PF spot have just as much to do with the Thunder centers as Jeff Green’s tweener status does.
And Serge Ibaka is a tweener as well. It’s just that he’s between a center and a power forward instead of a power forward and a small forward. And for a team so bent on being a dominant defensive force, the Thunder will continue to lack solid post defense until either Serge Ibaka forces Brooks to give him more minutes in the paint at the 4 or, and this is a best-case/dream scenario, Cole Aldrich turns into Joakim Noah 2.0 and erases a lot of Green’s and everyone else’s defensive troubles at the rim.
But which one of those is more likely to happen?
Jeff Green is entering his fourth season in the NBA and after the expected jump in production from his rookie year to his sophomore campaign, Green’s numbers seem to be fairly easy to pin down if he continues to be played primarily at the PF spot: 15-16 points, 5-6 rebounds, 1.5-2 assists, 1 steal and shooting 35% from 3PT land and 45% from the field in about 37 minutes a game.
Solid numbers, sure. But by no means eye-opening or really assuring from a post player. Especially when the other post player Green is typically paired with is pulling down fewer rebounds and scoring fewer points on average, making it that much more important for Green to be a force at the rim and on the boards.
Plus, I just can’t help wonder what those numbers could look like if Green came off the bench and split time at both forward positions, carrying the scoring load (which he can infinitely better than Ibaka ever could) on the Thunder’s second unit, who so desperately needs a scoring punch, especially if Harden gets pegged as a starter.
You see, when it comes down to it for the Thunder, and Jeff Green, and Serge Ibaka, it’s really all about fit.
To me, Serge Ibaka fits better as a PF with the starting unit, whereas Jeff Green fits better as the all-around, utility Lamar Odom-ish Sixth Man that is a matchup nightmare for second units (and some first units).
Remember, I never said I think Serge Ibaka will become a better basketball player than Jeff Green at some point this season. I just said he’d be the better PF for the Thunder.
And while I don’t think Serge is anywhere near close to ready right now to take the starting PF spot from Green, I think if he continues to progress the way he did during his remarkable rookie campaign (seriously, just go back and check out his #’s, check out his progression from month to month…shoot, watch the footage, too!), I think Serge Ibaka will make this argument moot because everyone will be unable to come up with a reason why he shouldn’t get the lion’s share of minutes at PF for the Thunder.
Even Jeff Green—who I genuinely believe would flourish in the Sixth Man role and possibly mean even more to the Thunder than he does now, which is a lot.
@Mark!
Well said!
I need to make sure not to misquote KD. My memory is not what it used to be.
Any word on how Aldrich has looked in practice?
@Goose
You're right that statistics from prior years aren't always accurate when predicting future years.
I'm sure if you did a study looking at all players who played a reasonable number of minutes and used those stats to predict next season, you would find that those stats were a good predictor most of the time, but not all the time. I've seen studies like that in the past that break it down by statistic (rebounding, scoring, etc.) and show the relative ability to predict in each category. Some are better predictors than others.
So they're still useful for predicting, but no one can tell the future. Shocker, right? :)
Green could have a great year. It's possible, and I'd love to see it. But remember, you're only using half of KD's quote. Hard work beats talent... if talent doesn't work hard. Talent is important too.
@Mark!
But hyperbole is lulz.
With that in mind, I'm expecting a huge year from Green.
I don't know much about basketball or statistics, but I do believe one thing: people change. Stats are well and good, but they don't necessarily define anyone. Good players can decline, bad players can get better. That's where character and work ethic come into play. That's why KD says hard work beats talent.
One more thing: None here (that I know of) have made a living in basketball. So as much as we admire our opinions, let's not forget that none of us REALLY know what we're talking about.
We shouldn't be so quick to judge anyone. Take the past into consideration but remember the future is unwritten.
@Ozark
Well say that instead of hyperbole. That makes much more sense :)
Sometimes it helps to ask clarifying questions before jumping to conclusions. I generally find most of the stat people around here to be very responsible with how they use stats. That includes Crow, justin, DMOk, and a few others. So give them a little benefit of the doubt :)
Re: Melo vs Green
There are a lot of different angles to look at this "debate" (one of the more unrealistic topics I've seen lately). Would Melo make our team better on the court? Would we win more games? Would we win more championships? How risky would signing Carmelo be? How much of a commitment is it? How would he affect the other players on the team? etc etc etc
Stats are very informative when looking at the first question. Melo is a better basketball player than Green. It's not even close. This is what justin was discussing, and it sounds ludicrous to deny this is true based on a claimed misuse of statistics. It is what it is.
As for the rest of the questions, it's much less clear. Justin even agreed that signing Melo would probably be a bad idea for the team so I was confused why there was a need to continue haranguing the use of stats.
You have good things to say. I'd like to hear them, but it's hard (for me) when you start moralizing about the use of statistics :)
@Ozark
I'm with you Ozark, I too am a season ticket holder (saw every home game in person even through 3-29) and although winning is very important to me, it is more important to me personally to have a team I can be proud of and not ashamed to bring my kids to see. I think OKC will only tolerate that type of team for a while, at least until the NBA is truly established here. There are many people who complained the NBA was just a bunch of thugs before the Thunder arrived, but this team is really turning that idea around, and to bring in somebody who could hurt that plan is just not in the cards for a while.
@Ozark
Nobody's ignoring anything, but I will tell you I put a lot more value on what a player does on the court than what he does off the court. Doesn't mean the latter is not important or a consideration (and I gave an example: Stephen Jackson v. Jeff Green), but it's definitely not as much of a concern as real productivity. Again, 'problem children' win titles all the time. Do you think Laker fans care about Ron Artest's past transgressions? Did Detroit care about Rasheed Wallace's record setting technical year in Portland when they were having their parade? There is always a concern about how a player fits (on court and off) but I think that aspect of building a team is overblown in OKC, especially with respect to Jeff Green and his future.
@Mark!
I actually find Ozark quite interesting to read. Not embarrasing at all.
Overall, Ozark did say he was biased on the Melo vs. Green debate.
SunTzu 76 :@Mark! I think Ozark’s reaction in part is due to the seeming neverending reliance here on stats alone to prove player X stinks and should be dumped from the Thunder immediately, or player Y doesn’t get playing time, or player Z needs to be signed immediately because his stats in this category are so much better than player X. It gets old and most people know that you can find stats to prove almost anything you want to prove (I’m sure you can find some sort of stats to show Jeff Green is the best PF since Bob Petit). There is a reason why computers and stat guys alone do not run teams. Some coaches rely on stats more than others to varying degrees of success. In other words, it is more than just Melo is what I am getting from Ozark…or maybe I am reading too much into his posts.
This. I have nothing against advanced stats, I'm just complaining in a colorful way about how some of the people, not just here but on other websites use them so narrowly and without taking the whole picture into account, and realizing that these stats are affected by the situations and systems the players are in.
It puts me off when it is done to the point that people are only looking at the stats and ignoring the character of the individual producing them, I don't want to be a season ticket holder for a team that indiscriminately employs jerks and problem children. That is a peril of too narrowly focusing and statistics, and my alarm bells went haywire when I saw the Melo talk, which is stupid from a salary perspective as well, btw.
@Mark!
I think Ozark's reaction in part is due to the seeming neverending reliance here on stats alone to prove player X stinks and should be dumped from the Thunder immediately, or player Y doesn't get playing time, or player Z needs to be signed immediately because his stats in this category are so much better than player X. It gets old and most people know that you can find stats to prove almost anything you want to prove (I'm sure you can find some sort of stats to show Jeff Green is the best PF since Bob Petit). There is a reason why computers and stat guys alone do not run teams. Some coaches rely on stats more than others to varying degrees of success. In other words, it is more than just Melo is what I am getting from Ozark...or maybe I am reading too much into his posts.
@Ozark
Your overreaction to this topic has been embarrassing to read.
Justin's point was never that Carmelo is so good we'd be stupid not to sign him. It was that Carmelo is a better basketball player than Jeff Green and that labeling someone as a cancer doesn't provide any eminently meaningful information.
That's not the same as saying signing Carmelo to our team is the answer for success or even that it was a good idea... in fact, he agreed that it would be a bad use of our salary cap and he was opposed to the idea.
In spite of the statistics.
Who are you trying to convince? And of what? I'm confused. Maybe I'm not part of your intended audience, even though I'm a reader here? If not, I apologize for reading.
Ozark :My research also indicates that Melo Drama once had a nervous breakdown of an alarmingly primitive nature while lying on the floor of the Ford Center feigning head injury and/or paralysis because he didn’t get a call to go his way.
Sorry, you have forgotten. Melo narrowly escaped a career-ending assault, only to be chased back to his locker room by racist fans throwing molotov cocktails at him. It was a tragic event. Thank the good lord he made it out of there alive! Shame on OKC fans!
Gavin :OOT not sure if this has been posted, found this on realgm, about Clippers pick:
The Los Angeles Clippers’ own 2012 first round draft pick to Oklahoma City (top 10 protected in the 2012 draft, top 10 protected in 2013, top 10 protected in 2014, top 10 protected in 2015 and unprotected in the 2016 Draft). In addition, if the Los Angeles Clippers are required to send their 2012 first round pick pursuant to the above and are also entitled to receive Minnesota’s own 2012 first round draft, then Oklahoma City shall receive the lesser of the Los Angeles Clippers’ own 2012 first round pick and Minnesota’s own 2012 first round pick. [L.A. Clippers -Oklahoma City, 6/24/2010]
Read more: http://realgm.com/src_future_draftpicks.php#ixzz10tDjYk2K
Thanks for sharing that Gavin.
Are you guys really talking about Melo in OKC? I don't want him near the Thunder. This guy is not worth the money he's going to make. He's going to make nearly 22 mil. That's insane. Lebron is making 14, Durant 17. And they are the 2 most valuable players.
@Ozark
Every Knicks team over the last decade was doomed to failure by both statheads and traditionalists, so that point is kinda moot.
.a couple posts up it should be
.. it "tells" a nuanced story...
I use stats and statistical analysis because I learn more working it hard than not working it hard. I don't object to others doing it their way or rejecting my findings or my way but I am not swayed to stop my way either.
I will agree that basketball management is an art that should draw substantially on psychological insight. More than most basketball people are formally trained to do. I have mainly the media to gauge how street smart they are with it. It should go along with the observational and technical basketball knowledge and statistical insight.
I don't have training in psychological theory but I try to observe and apply some psychology related judgments. The stats are a starting point but not an ending point for thinking about 5 man units and interactions, the rotation and team design. I accept that strong team unity is a good thing and a fragile thing. My interest in team age is based on stats and judgment about the value of experience. these are but a few examples of acknowledgment of the importance of psychological elements.
I am not sure how much we really differ here, but I guess we might find out later. If you give specific cases where you feel the stats were given too much weight and explain why.
My "of course" was to "statistics are a tool of a skeptical mind that looks at the big picture".
I am pretty skeptical that any one stat is sufficient or that all of them are sufficient without some sorting and rounding and blending and culling and comparing with tape and judgment from watching a ton of games.
I am pretty skeptical that any set of observations or memories of them of any one person are likely to be fully sufficient either.
Of course.
But then what? Which specific stats or analysis won't you use or do you think are "wrong" or unnecessary or oversold for basketball in general or the Thunder in particular? Which ones? If it is PER or Offensive Rating or Adjusted +/- most use them with some caution and tacit acknowledgment they are not truly the Grand Unification Theory of Basketball. But they can use useful in combination with everything, at least for me.
If you or anyone limit their power, "put them in their place", how do you decide exactly how and when to do that? Based on trial and error experience? How long does it take to become world-class at judgment? How many NBA GMs and coaches have truly achieved this level of judgment and success from it without much use of stats? Are all of them maxed out or could they be even better with more receptivity and more exposure to more stats and analysis?
I am prepared to re-evaluate both the stats and the common sense and judgment when they are not in lock step. After review I sometimes find in favor of what the statistical analysis uncovers. Sometimes I will override it.
Proposition: Carmelo is a top 20 impact player in the league.
How much do you use to make that judgment? If I said I checked 5 Adjusted +/- ratings for Anthony by different authors and for different time periods would you be interested? it stills a nuanced story if you check it and consider it How would you react if it did not agree with your previous common sense / judgment / "experience"?
Ultimately it is an art but I'll use tools to make art.
Crow :
I’d say advanced stats are compatible in a mix with judgment and common sense and you seem to agree with that.
Perhaps you can point out some of the more egregious “reductions” in the future or pull some up from the past if you wish to make a case that can be considered?
It seems overdone to me to put stats prejudicially in opposition to “judgment and common sense”. Much of the mediocrity in basketball is based on just judgment and common sense.
Aye, and it is blindness to character that is the root cause of the many problems experienced by the Knicks over the past decade or so. No wonder they were tampering with Melo.
There is no one simple answer but there are various tools for getting a good sense of the pieces of the action and tools for getting a decent approximation of the sum of those things. More objectively than anyone just doing the judgment without any or much math.
Who are the real “Basketball Reductionists”- the ones that use stats and everything else or those who are content and confident to rely on instant sight and presumably long-term memory of all the many details and judgment and common sense to discern the proper view or choice from all that visual detail? I know my answer if I could only pick one; but I’ll grant that excess of either approach can be critiqued and isn’t as good as a careful mix of the two.
OOT not sure if this has been posted, found this on realgm, about Clippers pick:
The Los Angeles Clippers’ own 2012 first round draft pick to Oklahoma City (top 10 protected in the 2012 draft, top 10 protected in 2013, top 10 protected in 2014, top 10 protected in 2015 and unprotected in the 2016 Draft). In addition, if the Los Angeles Clippers are required to send their 2012 first round pick pursuant to the above and are also entitled to receive Minnesota’s own 2012 first round draft, then Oklahoma City shall receive the lesser of the Los Angeles Clippers’ own 2012 first round pick and Minnesota’s own 2012 first round pick. [L.A. Clippers -Oklahoma City, 6/24/2010]
Read more: http://realgm.com/src_future_draftpicks.php#ixzz10tDjYk2K
Il t
Crow :
My research shows Maynor got 20+ minutes 19 times last season on both teams. He scored 4+ baskets in every one of those game up til the last 3 times. My research shows he shot 60+% from the field 22 times but only got to play over 20 minutes on 1/3rd of those occasions. I’d rather know that than not.
My admittedly meandering but ultimately coherent and informative point is that statistics are a tool of a skeptical mind that looks at the big picture. Stats are not pythian priestesses of the oracle of delphi, whose prophecies will lead you to a Grand Unification Theory of Basketball.
Melo is pretty much impossible to imagine joining the Thunder, so while I share a don't want him at the price you'd have to pay for him view based on salary, stats, observation, assessment of his on and off the court personality and character and consideration of the alternatives, I won't dwell on him.
Just to throw this out there, but if the question is which player would I rather have long term, Green or Melo, I would pick Green. My reasoning is that Melo does not fit well enough to make us true contenders. As such, his contract would preclude future extensions and ability to improve. Green doesn't make us a champion either, but his contract likely does not tie our financial hands. Green can fit as a 6th man and leave money on the table to pursue a true 3rd option for the team. That capacity to improve makes him my choice long term.
@justin
I think the point he is making is that Melo has a history of poor behavior, and that players with his mindset tend to be less valuable than their individual production. It is essentially the converse of what many Thunder proponents claim in that players' chemistry and character can outweigh some of what they lack on the court. If it is taken as an addition or subtraction by varying (but generally small) amounts, I agree with Ozark. I think character can both increase and decrease a player's value outside of his individual production on the court.
But, good character can't make up for a player who is bad or a bad fit on the court. Similarly, bad character can't take make an elite producer worthless. All things matter, but it seems you all are arguing the significance of factors.
I'd say advanced stats are compatible in a mix with judgment and common sense and you seem to agree with that.
Perhaps you can point out some of the more egregious "reductions" in the future or pull some up from the past if you wish to make a case that can be considered?
It seems overdone to me to put stats prejudicially in opposition to "judgment and common sense". Much of the mediocrity in basketball is based on just judgment and common sense.
There is no one simple answer but there are various tools for getting a good sense of the pieces of the action and tools for getting a decent approximation of the sum of those things. More objectively than anyone just doing the judgment without any or much math.
Who are the real “Basketball Reductionists”- the ones that use stats and everything else or those who are content and confident to rely on instant sight and presumably long-term memory of all the many details and judgment and common sense to discern the proper view or choice from all that visual detail? I know my answer if I could only pick one; but I'll grant that excess of either approach can be critiqued and isn't as good as a careful mix of the two.
@Ozark
You're all over the place and I really don't see what point you're trying to make. Who cares about Carmelo and trade demands / whatever happened with Katt Stacks / whether he was really hurt? That all sounds like your subjective opinion on situations with conflicting reports in the media. Unless you have or are a source of inside information I don't see how any of it is pertinent to objectively valuing him as a player.
If you plan to use stats to inform judgment, you have to find or produce them and put them the out there and wrestle with them. A lot of times stats are put there fairly plainly so others can indeed use them to inform their judgment if they wish to. It is not always possible to fully wrestle with them in public without people saying that is too long, too complex, too boring. It is just as frequent to see folks apply judgment and common sense without much description of the depth and strength of that work.
@jdstorm
What does Atlanta get out of a deal like that? Green isn't measurably that much better than Marvin Williams to get rid of Smith. They would be swapping Smith for a PF downgrade, and still forcing Horford to play C. The Hawks have just bought an all-in approach to an only above average team. It is highly unlikely they admit (and thus start selling) their mistake in Johnson's contract for another couple years. As such, they are going to drop another ton of money into Horford and simply tread water outside the contender circle.
Which is sad, I'd really like to steal Smith or Horford for the Thunder.
Going back to the trading jeff green debate, if we are going to package green to get a better SF/PF to play with durant i would rather it was josh smith
Crow :@Ozark
Do you use statistical research at all in your practice of medicine?
Absolutely, but only to inform my clinical judgement. I grit my teeth at the practice of prescribing digoxin for congestive heart failure, and even for the most part adhere to treatment algorhithms.
I also marvel at the fact that statistical significance of clinical studies of gabapentin is amplified on the basis of whether the study was carried out within the city of Boston, ask drug reps about what the results of both arms of the clinical drug studies were, not just the ones submitted to the FDA (cough, cough, sertraline for adolescent depression, cough, cough, nice number needed to treat, cough, cough, what happens statistically when both arms of the study are combined?)
I'm also aware of the fact that meta-analysis of a large amount of pooled data can show topiramate to be ridiculously effective in treating irritability as a component of bipolar disorder in female patients only, in spite of topiramate never achieving statistical significance in the treatment of bipolar disorder as a whole in one individual study of significant double blind placebo controlled quality anywhere at any time on planet earth.
So much for strength in sample size, sometimes you can pick highly statistically significant but ultimately meaningless patterns out of red noise.
I'm also aware of large studies that are highly touted by pain management docs that fewer than 1 in 10,000 individuals prescribed pain medication will become addicted to it. Good news, there are likely fewer than 50 pain pill addicts in the OKC metro area!
I look at statistics all the time, I just let them inform, rather than guide, my common sense.
My research shows Maynor got 20+ minutes 19 times last season on both teams. He scored 4+ baskets in every one of those game up til the last 3 times. My research shows he shot 60+% from the field 22 times but only got to play over 20 minutes on 1/3rd of those occasions. I'd rather know that than not.
Which is simpler basketball or medicine?
@Ozark
Do you use statistical research at all in your practice of medicine?
My research indicates that Melo was involved a twitter feud with a below average looking woman named Katt Stacks (what's you're name outside the club, baby?) before later claiming his account was hacked. Like when he obviously demanded a trade and later claimed that was all a fabrication.
My research also indicates that Melo Drama once had a nervous breakdown of an alarmingly primitive nature while lying on the floor of the Ford Center feigning head injury and/or paralysis because he didn't get a call to go his way.
My research also indicates the Luke Babbit is more athletic on paper than Blake Griffin. Forget Greg Oden, we might as well hand the championship trophy to the Blazers right now.
My research also indicates that the Blazers are in damage control mode with Greg Oden, supplying a highly reassuring flickr slideshow of still photos of Oden from the first day of camp. It depicts Oden standing around during practice, shooting a flat footed shot, an inexplicable closeup of his knees in which the injured knee is completely obscured by clothing, photos of him sitting on a bench during a PT session, staring off into space, and one photo of him exercising his non-injured leg in isolation.
Anthony was been in 7 playoffs. He was above his strong regular season PER on 3 occasions, well below on 4. But the 3 good ones came in the last 4 seasons. Melo might get less criticism and doubt because he was part of an NCAA champion as a freshman, but that was a long time ago and a different level. His NBA team has been 1 round and out 6 of 7 times.
He might be a bit heavy but that is a complex issue.
@Dan
Oh I am with you on George Karl, ever since he bungled the '96 Finals by not putting Payon on Jordan I thought he was an overrated coach. But he's definitely done more to keep the Nuggets in line (as you said) than Dantley or Bzdelik before him. Karl is a decent manager of personalities, and I agree he leaves a lot to be desired as a strategist. I don't know who the Denver assistants are these days but I know in Seattle and in Milwaukee he relied heavily on his assistants.
Agree on Melo and a max contract. With the right coach and environment he'd be great. Maybe Avery Johnson and the Nets is the right kind of situation for him after all?
In a small study a few year ago 82 games estimated that teams averaged giving up .936 points per play.
@justin
I don't even think George Karl should be immune from criticism. Couple points-
1. I remember playing NBA live and going through the play breakdowns of each team. The Nuggets were one of the few teams in the league whose most used offense was isolation. One of the others was the Hawks, another poorly coached team who underperformed in the playoffs because their offense is predictable and easier to beat when you can gameplan against it.
2. A number of basketball writers have argued against the Max contract for Carmelo recently, arguing that the advanced stats don't warrant such a contract. I disagree, but I think George Karl's teams seem to fail to develop and utilize players as they should be. Carmelo, J.R. Smith, and Nene all have absurd athletic/basketball talent. Yet, none live up to their potential. Carmelo doesn't do anything particularly well but score, which he lacks great efficiency in, despite his enormous ability to rebound and defend. JR Smith has not evolved from anything beyond a 3 point shooter despite his raw athletic/basketball talent. And Nene is ridiculously productive, but is underused on the offensive end (124 offensive rating last year, 16% usage).
3. Their playoff series against the Lakers/Karl's coaching efforts before. I remember reading a story about Chauncey and his impact on the Nuggets. In essence, it said that before Chauncey came the team had no inbounds pass play. This is an absurd coaching failure. An inbounds pass play is one of the most obvious things to have in the NBA. Then what happened in the playoff series against the Lakers? Kenyon Martin, for some reason, is tasked with passing from inbounds near the end of a close game. Martin's pass gets stolen by Ariza in a crucial loss for the Nuggets. Then later in the same series. Nuggets are inbounding, close game. Who goes out to inbound? Kenyon Martin. What happens? Ariza steals it. To have this happen TWICE in the same playoff series is inexcusable.
5. This is less obvious than the others but still notable. They were interviewing George Karl while he watched the Nuggets series against the Jazz. JR Smith took a contested, long 3 point shot and missed. The interviewer asked Karl if he was ok with that shot. Karl said JR's shooting stroke looked good so he was ok with it, despite the fact that the shot was a 35 foot contested 3. This type of logic doesn't sit well with me when evaluating him as a coach.
I don't mean to bash a guy recovering from Cancer, and he is certainly better than Adrian Dantley at controlling the Nuggets' personalities, but I've been saying this before he was diagnosed. I would give Melo a max contract, simply because 1) he's elite at creating his own shot and 2) I think he's been misused by both George Karl and Adrian Dantley and might blossom under a better/displinarian coach on a more well-ordered team (Popovich, Adelman, maybe Rivers, not sure about Brooks but maybe the team-first environment would rub off).
justin :@Crow
Keep in mind PPP for Synergy is points per play, not points per possession. I’m not sure if there’s a difference, but maybe there is.
Yeah, good catch, points per play at the individual level is different than points per possession at team level because of offensive rebounding.
With a league average of 26% offensive rebounding %, backing out points from that quickly, it appears that on the first shot teams due average giving up around .9 points per play after accounting for the losses from turnovers. Any shot allowed over around .9 per play is probably an indication of defense worse than average.
justin :
@Mark!
I was kind of speaking in a vacuum. Melo has less utility to us due to the position he plays, but really it’s the same for Jeff Green. I think Melo / Durant could work out really well like a Dirk / Howard situation on steroids. Definitely not the ideal arrangement, though.
Melo seems to do well with George Karl, he seemed to slip into more bad habits (and the rest of Denver, also) with Dantley at the helm. I think his performance and attitude could be tied very closely to the environment he’s in…
Now were talkin!!!
@Mark!
I was kind of speaking in a vacuum. Melo has less utility to us due to the position he plays, but really it's the same for Jeff Green. I think Melo / Durant could work out really well like a Dirk / Howard situation on steroids. Definitely not the ideal arrangement, though.
Melo seems to do well with George Karl, he seemed to slip into more bad habits (and the rest of Denver, also) with Dantley at the helm. I think his performance and attitude could be tied very closely to the environment he's in...
justin :@Ozark
I agree that advanced stats should inform the common sense and not guide it. If we were debating, say, Jeff Green and Stephen Jackson I’d probably tell you I prefer Jeff Green, even though Stephen Jackson is more productive. Jackson is too much of a chemistry risk to justify the gap in productivity, IMO.
Applying this principle to Jeff Green and Carmelo Anthony, though, and I can’t imagine anything Carmelo might do short of stabbing Kevin Durant in the neck that would out weigh the difference in productivity.
I can't help it, I just happen to like Jeff Green and have an irrational grudge against Melo, so I had to interject.
However, I am willing to bet that Melo has a significant statistical decline within the next 5 years. Just call it a hunch. Guys who are fundamentally clowns with deep seated inadequacy issues like Rodman and Artest are one thing, narcissistic pricks like Kobe are another, but when I get that less-organized sociopathic vibe off a player I'm just going to assume they aren't worth whatever market value I'm going to end up paying for them.
justin :
Applying this principle to Jeff Green and Carmelo Anthony, though, and I can’t imagine anything Carmelo might do short of stabbing Kevin Durant in the neck that would out weigh the difference in productivity.
I don't know how much Green will cost the team if we resign him, but I know how much Melo would cost. I think there's a very real risk that we would be committing to a Westbrook/Durant/Melo lineup and it may not lead to a championship... which is what that type of move should accomplish.
I'll admit that I'm not sold on Melo as an alpha, so my bias may be in the way.
Anyway, in that sense Green is less risky, especially as an expiring.
@Ozark
I agree that advanced stats should inform the common sense and not guide it. If we were debating, say, Jeff Green and Stephen Jackson I'd probably tell you I prefer Jeff Green, even though Stephen Jackson is more productive. Jackson is too much of a chemistry risk to justify the gap in productivity, IMO.
Applying this principle to Jeff Green and Carmelo Anthony, though, and I can't imagine anything Carmelo might do short of stabbing Kevin Durant in the neck that would out weigh the difference in productivity.
@Sammy
I don't see the relation between basketball statistics and numerology or signing a headcase and endangering people's lives for profit... so I'm going with an overreaction based on the lack of additional talking points.
@Ozark
You're allowed to disagree with someone on how much value chemistry has. None of us have any controlling interest in the Thunder, so we're not going to be making any decisions that actually effect the team. It's ok :)
Sammy :@Ozark
You obviously have a point with this comment but it’s lost on me.
The point is advanced stats have a value, but they can't override judgement and common sense. Basketball is too complex to be reduced to an algebraic equation. You can't solve basketball mathematically like gravity.
Some people have been absorbed in an advanced stat mania to the point they miss the big picture and seem as ridiculous as someone trying to discover literal hidden codes in the Bible. Advanced stats should inform your common sense, not guide it.
Excuse me cause I like to riff abstract, some of these "Basketball Reductionists" need a little livening up from time to time.
@Ozark
Future performance and team performance can be much more accurately predicted by using 'advanced statistics' than a subjective take on 'psychological deficiencies'. AI was not the same player when he bailed on those teams, he had passed 35k minutes and didn't want to play off the bench which is where the 'advanced statistics' said he probably belonged at that point of his career.
Stating a preference for Jeff Green over Carmelo Anthony is just ludicrous. Advanced statistics or not.