I understood that part, my example was Rudy Gay vs. Chris Paul (both around 144, but Gay a bit higher), Beasley vs. Conley, etc. I like the idea in general, but the formula ends up very much in favor of chuckers from bad teams.
Btw, dividing by 20 doesn't really change much, it just makes the numbers smaller and easier to read.
2013 Ben Gordon is 133.5, 2009 Pau Gasol is 128.5. Multiply those numbers by 20, Ben Gordon is still ranked higher than Pau Gasol.
I don't know how to fix the formula, but the general direction is interesting. Especially those "25% usage, 110 OffRtg" etc benchmarks.
I think what people are also ignoring is that Gay was actually quite good once he joined our team despite playing through injuries.
In 33 games with Toronto Gay averaged (Paul George's stats are in brackets):
34.7mpg | (37.6mpg)
19.5ppg | (17.4ppg)
6.4rpg | (7.6rpg)
2.8apg | (4.1apg)
1.7spg | (1.8spg)
0.7bpg | (0.6bpg)
2.8topg | (2.9topg)
42.5% FG | (41.9% FG)
33.6% 3PT | (36.2% 3PT)
85.6% FT | (80.7% FT)
So basically Rudy was significantly better at scoring the basketball (20.5ppg per 36 compared to 16.7ppg per 36 on very comparable percentages). And George was a better rebounder and facilitator (but not really by a wide margin). Obviously George was also the better defender (although I think the gap here is overstated, Rudy is a great defender in his own right).
In reality they are about equal in skill level at this point.
During his time in Toronto his PER was 17.6 (which is higher than Paul George's btw), and he had a respectable but not stellar TS% of 51.
Last edited by Xixak; Mon Aug 12th, 2013 at 12:44 AM.
If both breakout this season that is certainly a little bit of concern worthy.
Guys breaking out 8 years in to the league playing for a contract is always interesting to say the least.
When JV hits his prime, where will Gay and Lowry be?
"Championships are what we live for, now lets go win them."Tim Leiweke
Basketball has clear winners every night --except at the draft, which is all homework, politics and chance.
Nobody is saying that Ben Gordon is a better player than Pau Gasol, but Ben Gordon has proven that he can create offense in a variety of ways at a much higher level than the average NBA player. And it should be noted that 'chuckers' can have a useful purpose in the right situation, again, as Dean Oliver pointed out in his book (Basketball on Paper). A 'chucker' in tandem with 1 or more high ORTG/low usage players can complement each other to form an excellent offensive unit as an aggregate. For example, Gay/Amir/JV has great potential to be such a unit, since JV and Amir will never be high usage guys and cannot create their own offense. So rather than being subjective and using a 'derogatory' term like 'chucker' we should actually put some metrics to define a 'useful chucker' vs. a 'harmful chucker'. Not sure what those parameters are, but I would say that any player who can maintain ORTG > 90 @ USG > 27 has a tremendous amount of offensive skill which can be deployed beneficially for the team.
And again, it is critical to 'divide by 20', not multiply by 20. The point is to show the value of a guy like Carmelo Anthony, who can bear at least 30% of the offense. That's basically taking half the load off of another player, which allows a guy like Tyson Chandler to do his thing without becoming a liability on offense. Or having Lebron and Wade, which allows you to play Shane Battier or other players at low usage/high efficiency.
You can call these metrics, the 'golden' rules of thumb. LOL.
No one here is dismissing the whole idea that usage / role matters. But your specific formula is probably not the way to go.
So yep, there has to be a distinction between a useful and a harmful chucker. And talking about the formula, it should value "useful chucking" higher than "harmful chucking".
But at this point, we are kind of re-inventing the wheel here.
Offensive win shares (basketball reference) are basically calculated on the same principles we are talking about. They account for offensive rating, usage, they apply a parameter for "harmful chucking", and then they reward "useful chucking". Their formula is more sophisticated than that, it breaks it all into small pieces, but it's based on the same ideas:
Btw, in their formula, "useful chucking" starts at OffRtg = 0.92 * league average = a bit over 97.
It would be cool if they had OWS / 48 rating.
I simply suggested you a way to double check (multiply your end results by 20). But it's obvious.
Here's another interesting BB-ref sort. USG > 26 / MP > 1000 & sorted by ORTG.
It shows 28 players and the guys that have reputations as 'chuckers' are right at the bottom & the superstars are at the top. Maybe the half-way point is the cut-off? You can think about it from a practical point of view too. No coach is going to keep giving a guy minutes if he is indiscriminately hoisting bricks and his teammates will probably stop passing to him.
In terms of over-valuing and under-valuing players, that's a loaded question unto itself. When a player like Chris Bosh decides to team up with superstars, then I think he should be undervalued. He is choosing to do less work and bear less responsibility. Does he have the 'potential' to be greater? No question. Or the another way to look at it, is the he is sacrificing personal greatness for the greater good, and that reflects in a lower 'present' value.
And all formulas are flawed, with nobody claiming to have the be-all, end-all answer. As I mentioned, it's a quick and dirty gut-check, in which Paul George does not look good even in comparison to his own teammate.
Who put George in the same sentence with LeBron, Melo and Durant??
I'm basically ranking the top SF's in the game. I think George is the 4th best SF in the game. But that doesn't mean he's in LeBron or KD or Melo's level. Give your head a shake.
And yes i think Rudy Gay is the 5th best SF in basketball.
Follow me on Twitter - @11_RRyan
Gay on the other hand play alongside with whom? DeRozan? and a 2nd year player in JV?
Of course Kawhi would be more efficient than Gay!!! but that doesn't mean he's better. Gay is a much better player than Leonard and i don't think it's even close.
Leonard is basically a 3D type of player. Gay on the other hand is a guy that is capable of taking over games.
Follow me on Twitter - @11_RRyan
Pierce is better than Gay.. yes Pierce is 35 and almost done, but he's still better.
Rudy Gay is a top5 SF.
Demar is a top10 SG.
Val is a top5 C.
Lowry is a top15 PG.
The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!
Tbh I always forget Pierce idk why.
He was better than both George and Gay last season tbh.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)