135 Responses to “NBA News and Notes for May 3rd”

1. Ted Nelson - May 3rd, 2008 at 9:35 am What was everyone saying about the Celts and Pistons being so much better than everyone else in the East? Reply to this comment.

2. mase - May 3rd, 2008 at 12:40 pm “What was everyone saying about the Celts and Pistons being so much better than everyone else in the East?” u didnt agree? i always liked Atlanta’s team(Bibby trade excluded) and would love to see an upset on Sunday! Reply to this comment.

3. jon abbey - May 3rd, 2008 at 1:16 pm “What was everyone saying about the Celts and Pistons being so much better than everyone else in the East?” another product of the currently messed up system, as those two haven’t had to play games that really matter for months, and it’s evidently not so easy for them to turn it back on when they need. Garnett is showing once again why he’s never been nearly the player that Tim Duncan is, though. Reply to this comment.

4. Z-man - May 3rd, 2008 at 1:35 pm Looks like Carlisle is going to Dallas. Good, I didn’t like him, he alienates players. Avery! Avery! Reply to this comment.

5. Z - May 3rd, 2008 at 2:21 pm “Looks like Carlisle is going to Dallas. Good, I didn’t like him” I’ll always have a soft spot in my heart for Rick. I was at his Knick debut in 1988 and it was the game of his life. He probably scored 12 points on 5-8 shooting, but to an 11 year old starving for the Knicks to be good he looked like the Messiah. Anybody know of any way of finding specific box scores from 1988 on line? Reply to this comment.

6. Z-man - May 3rd, 2008 at 3:03 pm Out of respect for your touching comment, I will rephrase and say that Rick, while a good coach, is not as good a fit for the current Knicks as Avery. I mentioned in an earlier post (nobody responded) that I thought Avery could help get the most out of the guys we need to trade (Zach, Eddy, both JJ’s) and be better at getting the team to focus on D. After a couple of years, if Avery does not prove to be a coach that can navigate the playoffs, make a change. Reply to this comment.

7. DS - May 3rd, 2008 at 3:27 pm “Anybody know of any way of finding specific box scores from 1988 on line?” Should be somewhere in here: http://www.basketballreference.com/teams/teamyear.htm?tm=NYK&lg=n&yr=1987 Reply to this comment.

8. Z - May 3rd, 2008 at 4:16 pm Thanks. I found the game: 12/1/1987. The struggling (4-9) Knicks sign Rick Carlisle. His Knick debut: 34 minutes; 21 pts; 9-12 fg; 1-2 3pt; 2-2 ft; 6 assists; 2 rebounds (both offensive); 2 steals. Definitely the best line of his career. But for 24 hours I was to Rick Carlisle as Owen is to David Lee… Reply to this comment.

9. jimmy p - May 3rd, 2008 at 6:04 pm I’d have to call the 07-08 campaign successful if Atlanta wins Sunday….but that’s a long shot. I was pretty shocked by Glen Doc Rivers’ comments after the second loss…something to the effect of, “they’ve got to decide if they want it bad enough.” Huh? From what I saw in the second half Rivers was not responsive to Atlanta’s hot hand. Last night was a bit better, but not much. If your player can’t defend (Ray Allen) you’ve got to substitute and switch up. I have never understood Garnett in the playoffs. He’s looked good…and very good at times…but he needs to stare at opponents less and shoot more. Atlanta can’t defend him down low and he’s playing too far away from the rim, not asking for the ball enough. Rivers really sucks as a coach…never saw it this clearly before. Reply to this comment.

10. Thomas B. - May 3rd, 2008 at 9:31 pm RE: Atlanta A few months ago there was a discussion on the best young team in the NBA. Many posters voted for Portland but I said, “Look to the East.” ATL has a great young team. Possibly better than Portland. I think Josh Howard is just as good as Brandon Roy. Horford is better than Aldridge. Williams beats Webster. Ditto Childress over Outlaw. Law and Jack is a push. Portland has no back court player that is as talented as Joe Johnson (though he is not a “young” player). We can not put Oden in the equation until he plays at least 1 minute of pro ball so please save the “what about Greg Oden” comments. —— Of the available coaches, Avery Johnson is the best person for this team. ——– THe draft lottery cant get here soon enough. If we can get a top 3 pick we are in good shape. I see the draft as having five impact players: Rose, Beasely, Lopez, Bayless, and Gallinari. Of those five, Rose, Beasely, and Bayless can help the Knicks right away. A top 3 pick will ensure we get one of those 3 picks. C’mon ping pong balls. Reply to this comment.

11. caleb - May 3rd, 2008 at 9:40 pm I’m in Atlanta and the 37-45 record was a lot more surprising than the recent strong play — but with regard to the Portland comparison, you can’t ignore Oden — that’s why people think they have the best young team, not because anyone thinks Brandon Roy is the next Jordan. For them to be championship contenders, Oden has to pan out. btw — as fun as the Atlanta series has been, Boston has outscored them by 50 points over 6 games –not really an even match… more luck, than anything… Reply to this comment.

12. dave crockett - May 3rd, 2008 at 10:22 pm Thomas B said: I think Josh Howard is just as good as Brandon Roy… Ditto Childress over Outlaw. — You mean Josh Smith, right? I like Josh Childress too–a lot. He’s the Afro Samurai. Reply to this comment.

13. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 1:36 am David West requests some more respect from some people here, thanks in advance. Reply to this comment.

14. Ray - May 4th, 2008 at 9:57 am I dont mind Avery coming in. If we draft a PG he will be hard on him like he was on Devin Harris. He really shaped him in his early years. I kinda would like to see all New Yorkers in management. Mark Jackson as coach. Kenny Smith as GM. I know they would do their jobs with a lot of pride and they know what it means to the fans to want to bring a title here. It might not be a bad thing. Kenny has done commentary here and he knows what changes need to be made. He knows we have a lot of players with the same skill sets. He knows we need to get involved in the European scouting game and the D. League. I just think it might not be a bad move. It really cant get any worse. We’ll , maybe it can but i dont think it will. Reply to this comment.

15. nj hoop - May 4th, 2008 at 11:29 am “David West requests some more respect from some people here, thanks in advance.” I’ve got nothing but respect for the guy. Is it possible for a guy who everyone says is underrated to still be underrated? Absolutely. Last night 30 pts. on 13-23 from the field, 9 boards, mostly against K. Thomas, a lockdown defender. This guy is a total beast, what PF would you take over him right now? Boozer, KG? I think I’d go with West. Reply to this comment.

16. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 11:43 am well, that might be a bit too much respect, but what was impressive about his game last night (as well as Peja’s) is how many of those shots they had to create on their own in a 1-on-1 context, mostly difficult improvised shots against tough D. Reply to this comment.

17. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 12:31 pm Re david west, are you out of your mind? But yes, he had a great game. Not sure I’d call kurt thomas a “lockdown” defender, but he’s tough. Aside from paul, don’t you think tyson chandlers d was the key to the game? Duncan 1 of 9, wow. THAT is a lockdown defender. Reply to this comment.

18. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 12:48 pm it wasn’t just Chandler, they were doubling him almost every time he touched it anywhere near the post. Reply to this comment.

19. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 1:00 pm That’s true, and no one leaves bigtime scorers in single coverage, but c’mon - a lot of teams double and triple team TD - it doesn’t work like it did last night unless you have tyson chandler (or a young mutombo, young hakeem, etc.) Reply to this comment.

20. Owen - May 4th, 2008 at 1:02 pm David West did have four turnovers to go with those thirty points last night, but still, he is having a great playoffs so far. Good player, but I think at this point he is actually overrated. He has been an all-star already after all. Their is a huge amount of mystique to the mid range shooting big man. People put enormous stock in being able to cause matchup problems, draw your defender away from the basket, etc. But the bottom line with West is that he is not an extremely efficient scorer, and not a top 25 rebounder. It’s hard to call him an elite player. I think he is bound to get pretty much all the credit for the Hornets success that doesn’t, rightfully, go to Chris Paul. That’s because he does a lot of scoring, and that is how credit gets distributed. But to me Chandler is definitely the second best player on that team. Reply to this comment.

21. Alee - May 4th, 2008 at 1:09 pm I’ve been waiting patiently for the draft lottery, but I’ve been thinking. There really is only one player that we need on this team to turn things around. Although Beasly will be a beast, we already have two big men who score very well but play no defense. Beasley fits into that mold. He’s a great scorer rebounds well but doesnt do it on the other end. If we dont secure the top pick (to obviously get Rose) I would trade the pick and package it with an untradable contract i.e. Curry, Randolph, Jeffries, James I could go on … if we could do that, hopefully moving Curry in the process and take on contracts that expire in the 2010-11 season we can make a run at the guy we all know we need. Any thoughts??? Reply to this comment.

22. Z - May 4th, 2008 at 1:10 pm David West… …he’s no Rick Carlisle. Reply to this comment.

23. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 2:10 pm “But to me Chandler is definitely the second best player on that team.” I have a technical stat question: if a rebound is tipped out by a big man and captured by a guard, who gets credit for that? Chandler does this all the time, and it seems to me that the guard gets the credit, that’s how Chris Paul had a triple double in one game against Dallas. Reply to this comment.

24. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 2:48 pm Jon, you are right, that reb goes to the guard. Reply to this comment.

25. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 2:58 pm yeah, that needs to be fixed. at the very least, it should be split between the two. Reply to this comment.

26. njhoop - May 4th, 2008 at 4:10 pm Sorry, I got a little carried away with my David West comments, but I really like the way the guy plays. He understands the game, takes good shots and plays solid D. I think he and Chandler compliment each other perfectly, and either one would be the best player on the Knicks right now. Reply to this comment.

27. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 4:59 pm Now that’s more like it! I’d still take david lee over west, but I could see the case either way. Hornets are really fun to watch… Before playoffs began I guessed the spurs to make the conf finals but NOLA has looked awesome… At this point I think I am rooting for them to take it all. And now that boston has won a series, they can reclaim their rightful place as most hated. Who would win a posturing scream-a-thon, KG or LeBron? Reply to this comment.

28. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 5:04 pm Btw, why do people still think of scott skiles as competent? Running chandler out of town was just one of his prize moves. At least he realized that curry is no great shakes.. But skiles is one of those guys who values veteran ’savvy” over actually being able to play. That’s what worries me about avery johnson, tho his case is not as severe as skiles’… Reply to this comment.

29. Latke - May 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pm I thought it would be interesting, instead of arguing back and forth about who we need to get rid of first, to just look at some stats from this season. I don’t know if this has been done before… the only thing on here that I think is kind of confusing is “differential b/w ‘knicks FG% differential’ and ‘opponent’s overall avg. differential’”. THe number you see there is the difference between how much these opponents usually outshot or undershot opponents (IE there avg overall fg differential), and how much they outshot or undershot the knicks in these games. I should say that all the no curry or randolph games came after mar. 8, when the knicks were playing young guys, and focused on losing. And also, “games without curry and randolph” were included in the stats for both “w/o curry” and “w/o randolph sections”. Curry really only got to play in 8 games without Randolph. knicks overall record: 23-59 win%=28.0 pt. dif=-6.6 fg%=43.9 opp. fg%=47.4 differential= -3.5 knicks record w/o randolph: 0-13 win%=0 pt. dif=-9.5 avg of opponents’ overall fg%=45.969 avg of opponents’ overall fg defense: 45.815 differential (avg of how much opponent outshoots all opponents by): +0.154 avg of opponents’ fg% vs knicks=49.023 knicks avg. fg% in these games=44.108 differential (how much knicks outshot opponents by): -4.915 differential b/w knicks avg in these games and opponents’ avg in these games=-4.905 differential vs. overall knicks avg fg%=+0.208 opp. FG% in these games vs. their avg overall FG%=+3.1 differential b/w ‘FG% differential in these games’ and ‘opponent’s overall avg. differential’: -5.069 adjusted for knicks overall avg suckiness (adding the 3.5% the knicks lost by on avg): -1.569 Conclusions: WIthout Randolph, playing against better overall defenses and better overall teams, the knicks were bad. They were outshot by opponents by 5% more than those opponents usually outshot opponents. Their offense, however, was actually slightly better than average, and surprisingly was better than they were in the curryless games, which were played against worse defensive teams. It was the defense that suffered most with Randolph out. Fancy that. knicks record w/o curry: 6-17 win%=27.27 pt dif=-6.125 avg of opponents’ overall fg%=45.335 avg of opponents’ overall fg defense: 45.865 differential: -0.55 opp avg. fg% vs knicks=47.696 knicks avg. fg% in these games=43.752 differential b/w knicks avg in these games and opponents’ avg in these games =-3.944 differential vs. overall knicks avg fg%=-0.148 opp. FG% vs. their avg overall FG%=+2.4 differential b/w ‘FG% differential in these games’ and ‘opponent’s overall avg. differential’: -3.4 adjusted for knicks overall avg suckiness: +0.1 Without Curry the knicks look very similar to the knicks overall average across the season. They are slightly better defensively than they were without randolph, but worse than they were overall. knicks record w/ neither of them: 0-5 win%=0 pt. dif=-10.8 avg of opponents’ overall fg%=45.5 avg of opponents’ overall fg defense: 46.48 differential: -0.98 opp avg. fg% vs knicks=50.78 knicks avg. fg% in these games=44.34 differential b/w knicks avg in these games and opponents’ avg in these games: -6.44 differential vs. overall knicks avg fg%=+0.44 opp. FG% vs. their avg overall FG%=+5.28 differential b/w ‘FG% differential in these games’ and ‘opponent’s overall avg. differential’: -5.46 adjusted for knicks overall avg suckiness: -1.96 These stats are probably pretty meaningless, as the knicks were in tank mode, but their defense was horrific, worse than in any of these other situations, and their offense looked about the same. Add to that that they were playing bad teams, and its an even uglier picture. Record with either curry or randolph but not both: 6-25 win%=19.3 pt. dif=-6.774 avg of opponents’ overall fg%=45.57 avg of opponents’ overall fg defense: 45.74 differential: -0.17 opp avg. fg% vs knicks=47.75 knicks avg. fg% in these games=43.77 differential b/w knicks avg in these games and opponents’ avg in these games: -3.98 differential vs. overall knicks avg fg%=-0.13 opp. FG% vs. their avg overall FG%=+2.18 differential b/w ‘FG% differential in these games’ and ‘opponent’s overall avg. differential’: -3.81 adjusted for knicks overall avg suckiness: -0.31 I’m not gonna do the knicks’ avg for both of them playing because A) we know keeping both is foolish, and B) the numbers would be greatly skewed because the knicks were still playing to win, pretty much until curry went down, so they should have better #s. but in case you’re curious about some basics: knicks record w/ both of them: 17-34 - win%=33.33 not all that impressive anyway. Reply to this comment.

30. cwod - May 4th, 2008 at 7:59 pm small sample size? Reply to this comment.

31. nj hoop - May 4th, 2008 at 8:01 pm Whoa, Caleb, I can’t let that David Lee comment slip by. If you think Lee could put up 30 points against the Spurs, I want what you’re smoking. He may be a slightly better rebounder than West, but beyond that, it’s not even close. Reply to this comment.

32. Owen - May 4th, 2008 at 9:27 pm Here is David Lee and David West head to head. Lee averages 2.7 rebounds more per 36, and scores 8% in ts%. http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=leeda02&y1=2008&p2=westda01&y2=2008 It always comes down to the same thing, would you rather have the guy who takes has the ability to score five more points on six more shots. The guy who can score more or the guy who can score better. Reply to this comment.

33. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 10:01 pm David Lee hasn’t played a truly meaningful NBA game in his life. it’s hard enough to compare guys from the top Western and guys from the top Eastern teams these days, but comparing numbers of one of the key players on a title contender to a guy who hasn’t proven he can play 35 minute games for one of the worst teams in the league strikes me as pretty ludicrous. Reply to this comment.

34. caleb - May 4th, 2008 at 10:34 pm “Whoa, Caleb, I can’t let that David Lee comment slip by. If you think Lee could put up 30 points against the Spurs, I want what you’re smoking. He may be a slightly better rebounder than West, but beyond that, it’s not even close.” My extended comment was down in this thread… And then we argued about it here… http://www.knickerblogger.net/index.php/2008/04/19/coach-of-the-year/ But basically, David West is a below-average scorer for someone who touches the ball as much as he does — and David Lee is far above average for someone who touches it as much as HE does. IMO they’re about even in scoring ability (details at the bottom here!) As others have pointed out, David Lee in his off-year is a 25 percent better rebounder than David West in his career year. Defense is harder to measure, but based on the numbers, and subjectively, West looks better — but not THAT much better. Don’t forget, Lee would probably look better if he Chandler behind him and the league steals leader next to him. Oh what the hell, save ya the trouble, here are some highlights of past threads: Rebounding: Big edge to Lee, 12.2/40 vs. 9.5 (and a lot bigger difference last year). Passing/Turnovers: West gets the edge, 2.4 assists/40 vs. 1.6, and slightly fewer turnovers as well. But last year they were almost exactly even, so I don’t know that it’s a huge difference. Defense: West is getting a lot more blocks than Lee this year, but he’s almost double his career average. Lee gets (slightly) more steals (per minute). West’s defensive +/-: -1.7. Lee: -1.8.” AND… “Last year, David Lee’s rebounding rate (percent of missed shots grabbed) was 20.7. Tyson Chandler’s rate was 20.7. It was a career high for both players. Chandler, fyi, played about 25% more minutes. This year, Chandler’s rebound rate is 19.5; Lee’s is 17.4. Even now, Lee is a lot closer to Chandler in the board department than he is to David West, whose RR the past two years were 12.9 and 13.8, respectively.” AND… “Lee has a usage rate of 14.4, and scores 14.5 points per 40 minutes. An unquesionably bad offensive player, Jared Jeffries, has the ball almost as much as Lee – a usage rate of 12.1; he scores 8 points per 40. Lee’s scoring rate, per touch, is 50 percent higher. David West has a totally different role in his team’s offense. His usage rate is 24.0 – Zach Randolph territory. (In fact his career TS% is just slightly higher than Zach’s). He scores 21.5 points per 40 minutes. If David Lee maintained his level of efficiency, while touching the ball as much as David West, he would score 23.8 points per 40 minutes. Intuition tells us that probably wouldn’t happen. If the offense ran through Lee, the defense would pay more attention to him and his efficiency would go down. But even if he sank to level of Jared Jeffries for all those additional touches – as he soared to a usage rate of 24.0 – Lee’s scoring rate, per 40, would be 20.7. If his efficiency dropped just 10 full points, from one of the top TS% in the league to well below average, his scoring rate would be around 22. Remember, David West is at 21.5. Is David West really a much better scorer than David Lee? Is he a better scorer at all? And even if you grant a small edge for ballhandling and defense, does it make up for Lee’s huge edge in rebounding? p.s. This is all based on Lee’s numbers THIS year. In other words, if 2007-2008 reflects his true level of play, and last season was a total fluke, he’s still as good as David West. He doesn’t “have” to improve, to be extremely valuable. That said, I think DL’s true level is probably somewhere in between…” Reply to this comment.

35. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 11:15 pm “Is David West really a much better scorer than David Lee? Is he a better scorer at all? ” yes, yes, yes and yes. please watch more basketball games not involving the Knicks. Reply to this comment.

36. jon abbey - May 4th, 2008 at 11:31 pm I mean, the thing about comparing numbers like that, like I said above, is that you have guys in entirely different situations. the bottom line is that if Lee and West had flipped teams this past season, it’s pretty clear to me that New Orleans would be worse and the Knicks probably wouldn’t be too much different. NO needs West to score in the precise way that he does, pick and roll jumpers and one-on-one post moves 8-10 feet from the basket. Lee has many strengths in his game, but he is not capable of scoring like that. Reply to this comment.

37. Owen - May 4th, 2008 at 11:53 pm “NO needs West to score in the precise way that he does, pick and roll jumpers and one-on-one post moves 8-10 feet from the basket.” I don’t know, I think this is a just-so-story. I think Lee would have a great time getting open for Paul’s feeds. With as well as he moves off the ball it might be a match made in heaven… Reply to this comment.

38. Thomas B. - May 5th, 2008 at 2:45 am Jon had a good point about West’s tip outs. Should West not get some credit for the tip outs that result in a possesion for his team? Is that action functionally the same as a rebound? If so, that would bring West closer to Lee in rebounding (assuming that you could quantify tip outs and assuming Lee’s tip outs are not equal to or greater than West’s…hell thats too confusing, forget it.) I would trade Lee for West without question. I like Lee but until I see him play in a big game, and with a center that is interested in rebounding, I cant say he is better than West. What we need is a simulator that trades Lee to the Hornets, lets him play 20 seasons with the team and we then take the average and see if it beats West’s production. Hell thats confusing too. Why dont we just agree that I’m right and end the debate. Reply to this comment.

39. Thomas B. - May 5th, 2008 at 2:51 am Caleb, Could the diff in Lee and JJ’s scoring per 40 be due to Lee’s ft%, which is something like 30% higher than JJ’s? Also, JJ plays a lot of sf and he ends up takin shots outside of the paint, which he should not do. Not defending JJ but it is an apple-orange comp you got there IMO. Reply to this comment.

40. jon abbey - May 5th, 2008 at 5:16 am my point was about Chandler’s tipouts, not West. Chandler is the one who does that seemingly 5-10 times a game, I don’t remember seeing West do it at all. Reply to this comment.

41. Frank - May 5th, 2008 at 7:40 am jon abbey - as you well know we’ve had this same argument about David Lee v whoever about 50 times on this board. You will never convince the more statistically minded people here that there is an inherent value to be able to take the ball in your own hands and score a bucket when your team needs it, irregardless of the offensive game plan. I for one think the ability to create a good shot when the offense breaks down is one of the most difficult things to do in offensive basketball. Again, not taking anything away from Lee, who is excellent at playing off other people’s action. Being able to create a good shot out of a not-ideal situation and knowing how to be available for a good pass and being able to finish it — they are two different skills that players have to varying extents. I just think it’s harder to find the former than the latter, but that’s just me. Reply to this comment.

42. NIck - May 5th, 2008 at 8:39 am I wish the numbers guys on Lee would actuallhy look at the numbers instead of distort them in favor of Lee. As the breakdown shows West is better both outside and inside. The only thing the numebers show Lee being better at is on dunks which make up 18% of his offense. So to constantly minimize things by saying oh I don’t weant a guy who shoots 5% better on jump shots when I could have an efficient player, is either a man crush on Lee or a miscomprehension of both the actual numbers and the game of basketball itself. Can we please inject a dose of reality into these arguments. David Lee New York Knicks 2007-2008 NBA Season Player Stats | 5-Man Units | By Position | On/Off Court | Clutch Play Floor Time statistics Min Net Pts Off Def Net48 W L Win% 59% -245 96.8 101.8 -5.0 29 47 38.2 These stats represent how the team performed while the player was on the floor. The Net48 number shows the average +/- net points over a full game. Scoring By FG. FGA FG% eFG% Ast’d Blk’d FTM Pts Game 4.2 7.6 .553 .553 59% 13% 2.4 10.8 Shooting Details Shot selection Shot Att. eFG% Ast’d Blk’d Pts Jump 26% .405 67% 8% 1.6 Close 53% .515 48% 20% 4.1 Dunk 18% .944 77% 2% 2.5 Tips 4% .296 0% 0% 0.2 Inside 74% .603 57% 14% 6.8 Shot clock usage Secs. Att. eFG% Ast’d Blk’d Pts 0-10 42% .607 45% 10% 3.9 11-15 22% .543 75% 14% 1.9 16-20 24% .476 71% 18% 1.7 21+ 11% .529 68% 11% 0.9 Crunch 35% .493 70% 16% 2.6 David West New Orleans Hornets 2007-2008 NBA Season Player Stats | 5-Man Units | By Position | On/Off Court | Clutch Play Floor Time statistics Min Net Pts Off Def Net48 W L Win% 72% +409 102.0 95.2 6.8 49 25 66.2 These stats represent how the team performed while the player was on the floor. The Net48 number shows the average +/- net points over a full game. Scoring By FG. FGA FG% eFG% Ast’d Blk’d FTM Pts Game 8.3 17.2 .482 .484 57% 6% 3.9 20.6 Shooting Details Shot selection Shot Att. eFG% Ast’d Blk’d Pts Jump 65% .434 62% 4% 9.7 Close 28% .540 51% 10% 5.2 Dunk 5% .881 62% 0% 1.4 Tips 3% .441 0% 3% 0.4 Inside 35% .576 50% 8% 7.0 Shot clock usage Secs. Att. eFG% Ast’d Blk’d Pts 0-10 26% .554 54% 5% 5.0 11-15 26% .479 63% 6% 4.2 16-20 29% .492 56% 5% 4.9 21+ 19% .383 56% 8% 2.5 Crunch 48% .449 56% 6% 7.4 Reply to this comment.

43. z-man - May 5th, 2008 at 9:06 am I would describe the difference between West and Lee as follows: West is a complete basketball player with no glaring weaknesses; Lee is an excellent athlete who has glaring weaknesses on both the offensive and defensive end. Caleb starts from the conclusion that Lee is great and then uses stats selectively to back up his case. For example, he says that 2.4 to 1.6 is only a small difference in assists, but percentage-wise it is a 50%increase, or a huge difference compared to Lee’s rebounding edge. Also, there are many “in the flow” hidden intangibles that the stats he uses doesn’t consider. For example, guys like West and, to mention another, Turkoglu, don’t have the luxury of hanging around the boards, they MUST score from the perimeter for their teams to be successful; this lowers their rebound numbers. Also, Lee’s shots from naywhere beyond point blank range are rarely contested and he never draws attention from any defender other than his own, who can often drop back to prevent penetration without worrying that lee might burn them with a medium range (or in Turkoglu’s case a long range) jumper. And, the fact that West has way more blocked shots than Lee and considerably more steals indicates that he is the superior defensive player by a large margin. Lee also did not get much better this year, and might have actually regressed, so it is highly debatable how much upside he has. Any GM who would even entertain the thought of trading West for Lee would be laughed out of the business. It would be almost as stupid as trading 2 lottery picks for a fat, lazy, one-dimensional center…. Reply to this comment.

44. retropkid - May 5th, 2008 at 9:09 am Lee cannot run the floor with Paul. West can. I am a Lee fan, but West has more ability to create his own shot, and to fill lanes on th break. For all the success Tim Duncan has had, I laugh when people call him fundamentally sound. He has had big TO games throughout his career, very erratic with touches. And he is a lousy free throw shooter….and certainly his club didn’t make NO pay for the double teams — he is lousy at hitting the open man once the ball gets into him too. That said, I would be surprised if Spurs/Celts doesn’t happen. And we’ll see where KG stacks up in the bright hot lights. I think this might be his year. Reply to this comment.

45. o_boogie - May 5th, 2008 at 10:13 am “For all the success Tim Duncan has had, I laugh when people call him fundamentally sound. He has had big TO games throughout his career, very erratic with touches. And he is a lousy free throw shooter….and certainly his club didn’t make NO pay for the double teams — he is lousy at hitting the open man once the ball gets into him too.” even jordan had high turnover games, its gonna happen. duncan makes less mistakes and is more efficient than any active power forward and possibly of alltime. when teams double down on duncan in the post, it rarely seems like he forces a bad shot. duncan does an excellent job passing out of the double, up there with guys like shaq, webber and divac. the reason people call duncan fundamentally sound is because of said skillset and the fact he is so effective without all the flash and pizazz of guys like d-wade, lebron, shaq or kobe. Reply to this comment.

46. z-man - May 5th, 2008 at 10:32 am Again, stats, while telling part of the story, do not tell all. There is no substitute for watching the games and seeing how individuals affect the outcome in all areas of the game, as well as in situations where the game is in the balance. Duncan has proven himself time and time again to be a winning player who leaves a monstrous footprint on each game regardless of what his stat line says. He can take over a game, or make it easier for other players to take over, depending on the flow of the game. To me, it is his ability to do this that makes him fundamentally sound. Reply to this comment.

47. caleb - May 5th, 2008 at 10:33 am “You will never convince the more statistically minded people here that there is an inherent value to be able to take the ball in your own hands and score a bucket when your team needs it…” Speaking for myself, of course there is value in being able to create a shot. But how much? David West’s offensive numbers (volume, efficiency, points) are almost identical to Jamal Crawford. A decent offensive player, sure… All-Star scorer? You expect efficiency to go down when you shoot more, because it does take work to create shots. Likewise, if you shoot less, you should be more more efficient. But Nick misses the forest for the trees. The blizzard of numbers he has thrown out — the bottom line is that Lee manages to score a decent amount, at an extremely efficient rate. This is essentially becacuse he does not take bad shots — an underappreciated talent. He COULD take a lot more shots, and score more. I think he would score about as much as West. Maybe not - maybe it would only be 18 a game, not 20. (and maybe it would be 22!) But unless you think he is utterly incompetent, worse than Jared Jeffries incompetent, it’s pretty obvious that if he tacked on enough shots to shoot as much as David West, he would score close to 20 ppg. “Caleb starts from the conclusion that Lee is great and then uses stats selectively to back up his case. For example, he says that 2.4 to 1.6 is only a small difference in assists, but percentage-wise it is a 50%increase, or a huge difference compared to Lee’s rebounding edge.” 1. I listed #s in every category - not selective. 2. There was a relatively large difference in assists this year, but not in past years, which makes me question whether it’s a fluke. 3. In relative terms, it;s a 50% difference; in actual terms it is 0.8 assists per game, compared to a difference of almost 3 rebounds per game (both adjusted for equal minutes) “Not defending JJ but it is an apple-orange comp you got there IMO.” My only point was a reductio ad absurdum — despite what some people have argued, David Lee is not a BAD offensive player; a bad offensive player puts up numbers and looks like Jared Jeffries. “Any GM who would even entertain the thought of trading West for Lee would be laughed out of the business. It would be almost as stupid as trading 2 lottery picks for a fat, lazy, one-dimensional center….” David West is very good player, and of course different teams have different needs, but when you factor in age and salary, his trade value is nowhere near David Lee. Reply to this comment.

48. caleb - May 5th, 2008 at 10:38 am *** WARNING — POTENTIALLY OFFENSIVE COMMENT *** The fetish for players who score 20 ppg reminds me of the way 16-year-old kids feel about giant breasts. It doesn’t matter if they’re fake — doesn’t matter what the rest of the body looks like — doesn’t matter if you share the same interests, or have the same sense of humor — you look at them, and it’s the only thing that matters in the world. But with a little more experience, you start to understand what really goes into a good relationship, or good sex for that matter… Reply to this comment.

49. caleb - May 5th, 2008 at 10:45 am “Again, stats, while telling part of the story, do not tell all. There is no substitute for watching the games and seeing how individuals affect the outcome in all areas of the game,” Not to come across as someone who doesn’t appreciate watching the game — but there’s not a stastical method out there (aside from points-per-game!) that doesn’t show Tim Duncan as one of the very best players in the league. Then again, Duncan isn’t as good as David West, who not only outscored him but is much better at putting the ball on the floor, and has a nicer-looking jumper, to boot. Reply to this comment.

50. Deke - May 5th, 2008 at 10:50 am Frank, “You will never convince the more statistically minded people here that there is an inherent value to be able to take the ball in your own hands and score a bucket when your team needs it, irregardless of the offensive game plan. I for one think the ability to create a good shot when the offense breaks down is one of the most difficult things to do in offensive basketball.” There are actually two camps on this. Berri values rebounds highly and does not place value on being able to create shots. His model has some problems, though. For an extreme example, a team made up of Chandler, Lee, Josh Childress, Ronnie Brewer, and Antonio Daniels playing the majority of the minutes would be predicted to win around 70 games (probably more, assuming that they have even semi-productive backups) according to Berri. Those players are all guys I like, and they fit their roles to a T, but that is a bit much. On the other hand, PER and other stats may overemphasize the ability to create shots, arguably overrating players like 76ers Iverson or Tracy McGrady of the last few years. To me, the ability to create offense is a very valuable skill, especially if a player can do so while avoiding turnovers, like David West can. Lee is fantastic and I would want him on my team, but someone made the argument that if Lee got the touches that West did and his efficiency held up, he would score a lot more. Frankly, that’s a pretty ridiculous point to make. Lee’s TO rate is higher than West’s with half the offensive responsibility, and he shoots higher percentages because he doesn’t receive as much defensive attention and usually isn’t forced to take bailout shots like West sometimes is. Lee’s lack of offensive skill relative to West would probably result in more turnovers and a lower FG% if they had the same offensive responsibilities. Reply to this comment.

51. Nick - May 5th, 2008 at 10:50 am Caleb, If efficiency goes down as usage goes up than why is Lee less efficient than West at every aspect of office but dunking despite taking less shots. Lee is a good player but really more of a Kurt Rambis type. I still don’t get the doesn’t take bad shots as being a sign of skill it’s a sign of timidity, lack of ability or giving him the benefit of the doubt in Lee’s case unselfishness. But neither Joel Pryzbilla or Dikembe Motumbo take bad shots but I don’t think you would argue that they are good or even competent offensive players and certainly not talented. A more accurate guage of Lee would be to compare his numbers to the league average from the various ranges. I don’t get the Jamal-West comparision. Jamal shot 80% jump shots and 41% whereas West shot 65% and .48%. So despite both takign 17 shots to get their 20.6 a game it’s from completely different styles. Reply to this comment.

52. caleb - May 5th, 2008 at 11:03 am “why is Lee less efficient than West at every aspect of office but dunking despite taking less shots.” This is what I mean by missing the forest for the trees.. Lee has a TS% over 60 (65 last year); West is at 53 - career high. Efficiency-wise, there’s no comparison. “I don’t get the Jamal-West comparision. Jamal shot 80% jump shots and 41% whereas West shot 65% and .48%. So despite both takign 17 shots to get their 20.6 a game it’s from completely different styles.” You are talking about style and I am talking about effectiveness. Deke summarizes the various camps well, except… “someone made the argument that if Lee got the touches that West did and his efficiency held up, he would score a lot more…” My actual argument was that he doesn’t need to maintain his efficiency on the additional shots; to score as much as West (on equivalent touches), he only needs to be as efficient as Jared Jeffries, to score as much as West. (assuming he still got the garbage points, fast-break points, etc. that he does now– and why wouldn’t he?) A question for those who say shot-creation is REALLY important: in the PER formula, if you take 10 additional shots, and miss them all, your PER goes up. Is this a feature or a bug? Reply to this comment.

53. caleb - May 5th, 2008 at 11:06 am “For an extreme example, a team made up of Chandler, Lee, Josh Childress, Ronnie Brewer, and Antonio Daniels playing the majority of the minutes would be predicted to win around 70 games (probably more, assuming that they have even semi-productive backups) according to Berri…” There is a law of diminishing returns… you can’t have 5 players on the court who do the same thing, because while they’re not doing that thing, they would just be standing around. Most people understand this intuitively, which is why they’re all squawking about how you wouldn’t win with five David Lees… …but the law of diminishing returns is equally (or more) true of scorers. If Isiah had realized this… Reply to this comment.

54. cwod - May 5th, 2008 at 11:14 am “Lee is fantastic and I would want him on my team, but someone made the argument that if Lee got the touches that West did and his efficiency held up, he would score a lot more. Frankly, that’s a pretty ridiculous point to make. Lee’s TO rate is higher than West’s with half the offensive responsibility, and he shoots higher percentages because he doesn’t receive as much defensive attention and usually isn’t forced to take bailout shots like West sometimes is. Lee’s lack of offensive skill relative to West would probably result in more turnovers and a lower FG% if they had the same offensive responsibilities.” I’m pretty sure the point has been that Lee’s efficiency wouldn’t remain constant with increased touches. However, the point has been argued that, even if Lee’s efficiency sank to Jared Jeffries levels with the added touches, which, given how awful Jeffries is, is unlikely, he would still score almost as much as West. “I still don’t get the doesn’t take bad shots as being a sign of skill it’s a sign of timidity, lack of ability or giving him the benefit of the doubt in Lee’s case unselfishness.” So, if Lee *did* take more bad shots, would that be a sign of confidence, of an abundance of ability, or of selfishness, even if those shots are terrible and hurt the team’s overall offense? I don’t follow. To me, shot selection, which is what people are basically talking about, is a skill that many other players could learn from, like Zach and Jamal. If, like Lee, they had a better grasp of their strengths and weaknesses, they’d take fewer jumpers and see an increase in their offensive efficiency. But of course, not taking bad shots would show that they’re timid and lack ability. I haven’t seen enough of West to know what kind of player he is. From afar, he seems like a nice piece, with maybe a more well-rounded game than Lee. Of course, we’ll have to see if this season was a fluke, as people have argued, or just nice improvement in a few categories. Reply to this comment.

55. Frank - May 5th, 2008 at 11:24 am “My actual argument was that he doesn’t need to maintain his efficiency on the additional shots; to score as much as West (on equivalent touches), he only needs to be as efficient as Jared Jeffries, to score as much as West.” This statement in itself should really make you question how you use your stats. This is just clearly not true in the real world no matter how you use stats to justify the statement. In order for Lee to get a higher usage rate/have more shots than he has now, he would be forced to do things that he is NOT efficient at — post ups, drives, shots. Assuming that he is successful at this, the other team would no longer guard him not at all or would switch a better defender to him, which would degrade his efficiency further. In addition, if he were to be a focal point of the offense, he would no longer be in as good position to get offensive rebound tip-ins etc. So to extrapolate his efficiency or scoring ability to the # of shots David West gets when the vast majority of Lee’s buckets come in very limited ways is extremely questionable to me. Reply to this comment.

56. W.C. - May 5th, 2008 at 11:34 am >It always comes down to the same thing, would you rather have the guy who has the ability to score five more points on six more shots. The guy who can score more or the guy who can score better< This is exactly correct! However, what the stats don’t tell you is that you NEED some guys that can create their own shots. Naturally you want them to be as efficient as possible, but the idea that a highly efficient guy is always better is wildly flawed. If you put 5 highly efficient guys on the court, but each didn’t have much ability to create his own shots etc… the team would be horrible offensively and the efficiency of all the supposedly efficient players would drop dramatically. They would all be forced to take way more horrible shots or watch the 24 second clock expire. Being able to create your own shot and score a lot of points is a valuable skill onto itself. The problem is that many of the players that have that skill wind up taking too many bad shots. Others are “forced” to take too many bad shots because the supposedly “more efficient” players on the team CAN’T CREATE for themselves and someone has to shoot. Reply to this comment.

57. Deke - May 5th, 2008 at 11:37 am I see what you’re arguing. Obviously, the team I proposed was ridiculous, but from what I have seen from Berri’s trade evaluations, he pretty much does transplant a player’s production from their old team to the new one, which doesn’t really take into account whether skillsets will overlap either. Given Lee’s current efficiency and West’s, the overall effectiveness of their scoring is probably closer than you’d think, but West is able to produce around the league average in TS% (I think) at a much higher volume with fewer turnovers. He’s also afforded more defensive attention, which has been one key for the Hornets this season. PER wouldn’t make someone who missed that many shots look good, but it might underrate the extent to which wild shooting hurts teams. I think there’s merit to both sides, and I’m somewhere in between. Even if I don’t really like Berri sometimes, he is never uninteresting. Reply to this comment.

58. Nick - May 5th, 2008 at 11:56 am “So, if Lee *did* take more bad shots, would that be a sign of confidence, of an abundance of ability, or of selfishness, even if those shots are terrible and hurt the team’s overall offense? I don’t follow. To me, shot selection, which is what people are basically talking about, is a skill that many other players could learn from, like Zach and Jamal. If, like Lee, they had a better grasp of their strengths and weaknesses, they’d take fewer jumpers and see an increase in their offensive efficiency.” To the extent that I came off as expressing a preference for Zach or Jamal or players of their ilk I apologize. There’s a difference between taking stupid shots ala Zach and Jamal and passing up makeable shots, just passing off to someone else or being a non-participant in the offense. I’m not suggesting that Lee or anyone would be better by taking contested jumpers with more than 5 seconds left on the shot clock, it’s more when you get under ten seconds or when you have an open look really the possession almost demands that you take it unless there is one that is immediately better rather than passing off. Reply to this comment.

59. cwod - May 5th, 2008 at 12:16 pm Okay. Sorry. I was confused, because your original post used the phrase “bad shots.” Reply to this comment.

60. Thomas B. - May 5th, 2008 at 12:22 pm “my point was about Chandler’s tipouts, not West. Chandler is the one who does that seemingly 5-10 times a game, I don’t remember seeing West do it at all.” Sorry, I’ll have to stop trying to post while I’m giving my son his 2 a.m. bottle. Reply to this comment.

61. Owen - May 5th, 2008 at 1:05 pm “However, what the stats don’t tell you is that you NEED some guys that can create their own shots.” That stats in fact tell you that you need scorers. Berri will tell you that they are crucial, that every teams needs a few players who can score at a high rate. But the stats also tell you that scoring by itself is not actually that rare of a skill. You can bring Deshawn Stevenson in out of obscurity and he can pick up the slack when Gilbert Arenas gets injured. Not that he is a better player, but he did have a higher efg% this year than Gilbert did last year. Arenas took 19 shots per game last year. The Wizards managed to survive losing him and his last second shot taking ability very comfortably. There are a million examples of this phenomenon. It’s not as hard to “create shots” as most people think. The NBA is full of guys who can fill it up. It’s in fact full of guys who have spent their entire lives being the primary scoring option on their team. Reply to this comment.

62. retropkid - May 5th, 2008 at 1:32 pm “Again, stats, while telling part of the story, do not tell all. There is no substitute for watching the games and seeing how individuals affect the outcome in all areas of the game, as well as in situations where the game is in the balance. Duncan has proven himself time and time again to be a winning player who leaves a monstrous footprint on each game regardless of what his stat line says. He can take over a game, or make it easier for other players to take over, depending on the flow of the game. To me, it is his ability to do this that makes him fundamentally sound.” No question Duncan is one of the best players in the league, and a first ballot HoFer. But it is his demeanor that is old school/fundamental, not his game. His foul shooting alone disqualifies him from being really “fundamentally sound” — or at least more sound than peers like KG or Karl Malone. By that definition, Shaq is fundamentally sound with a monstrous footprint, too, (and probably better passer out of doubles) but nobody ever uses “fundamentally sound” to describe Shaq. Why? Demeanor, image, temperatment, not skills… Duncan has an inordinate number of games with 4, 5 or more TOs in his career…he is fundamentally erratic, like Shaq, like Wilt!!… — and a tremendous ball player anyway. Reply to this comment.