Two Player +/- Stats -- Trends
[I'm running on empty today after the back-to-back game nights, so thought I'd bump this up from the diaries for further discussion. Thanks, Hawk42! -TexSUN]
One of my favorite sites is 82games.com. The +/- stat can be misapplied, and you cannot project a trend when low minutes are involved. However, the stats tell us some very interesting things...
(Beware -- you can spend a long time on this site)
Here is the link:
http://82games.com/0708/0708PHOP.HTM
My observations with grades:
Steve Nash - Nash plays well with just about anyone. Note his assists are highest when playing with Stoudemire. I still say that is the most lethal 1-2 punch in the game. His assists are lowest when playing with Boris, probably because Diaw's passing cuts into that a bit. Steve's shooting percentage is best when Boris is in the game, probably because Boris is setting him up well. A-
Marcus Banks - Marcus plays really well with Grant Hill. Grant is far and away Banks' best +/- partner. This is because Hill sets him up well. He will drive and bring the defense, and kick it to Marcus. Note the very respectable shooting percentage. Another thing I noticed - he is almost always on the court with Hill and/or Diaw, which shows us D'Antoni's lack of confidence in him as a playmaker. D+
Leandro Barbosa - Barbosa with Nash is a lethal combination. They average a plus 10 points per game, easily Leo's best partner, and Hill is second at 7. There is a surprise here, with LB doing well with Amare, but of course Nash or Hill are probably on the court during those minutes also. Leo's highest minutes are with Marion or Diaw, but the +/- is quite a dropoff from his play with Nash. This suggests that Boris may not have yet caught up with LB's speed, and, of course, Marion and LB on the court at the same time with no distributor is a bad idea. B+
DJ Strawberry - What sticks out here in his limited minutes is that DJ has a negative stat with everyone but Barbosa, and it's not even close. The +6.2 suggests that this may be an effective backcourt some day. BTW, take a look at DJ's 40 minute steals projection. Not bad!! B+
Raja Bell - Raja's numbers are pretty steady with anyone. He shoots more with Skinner in the game, and he shoots best paired with Amare. That makes sense, since he needs to score more with Brian in the game, and less with Stoudemire in there. He does not do as well paired with Barbosa, which makes sense, since they are both shooters. B-
Eric Piatowski - It is hard to tell since the sampling of minutes is so low, but Pike obviously needs Nash or Hill. The fact that all of the bench players do much better with Hill than Diaw is proof that Diaw should start, and Grant would be more valuable with the second unit. But that depends on Boris showing some heart. F
Grant Hill - Hill does well with everyone, with a high winning percentage. Curiously, he does not seem to pair well with Skinner. So if He plays with the bench, Skinner should start. As noted in the Banks comments, Grant is the only one that makes a successfull pairing with Marcus, and the stats bear that out, with Grant shooting a blazing 56% with Marcus in the game, easily his best pairing for shooting. And his highest assist total is with Banks. A+
Alando Tucker - Tucker's stats aren't enough to tell us much of anything, although he must have had one heck of a five minute run with Barbosa. wonder which game(s) that 5 minutes was/were in. Incomplete
Shawn Marion - The Nash/Marion pairing is the best on the team, and the 3rd rated tandem in the league behind Garnett/Pierce and Prince/Billups. That alone should make Shawn think twice about wanting to leave Phoenix, since his numbers with Barbosa, the supposed backup PG, aren't nearly so effective. Translated: If Shawn wants to win, his best chance is with Steve. He does well with Hill also, but not so well with Boris, who brings his shooting percentage way down from that with all ofther players with appreciable minutes. B+
Boris Diaw - Boris has a bad net +/- with everyone except Nash and Hill, which is irritating, since D'Antoni is always harping on Boris' ability to make decisions and facilitate. It is clear he is not the man to quarterback the bench, that should be Hill's job. He is best as the secondary playmaker. Also, he needs to figure out how to play well with Amare, or we need to dump him. What is strange, is that his best scoring average, and by far his best shooting, come when paired with stoudemire. But it does not translate to a good +/-. What's even more puzzling in the light of my saying Boris should start and Grant should lead the bench, is that Boris is most effective playing with Hill! See the composite winning percentage. C+
Sean Marks - Sean hasn't even played a whole game yet (42 min). He has an awful +/- with everyone, but that 11 minutes with Bell must've been when he hit those two three pointers. He should not be on the team. F
Brian Skinner - Brian's numbers suggest he is a 'hold the fort' type of player who can help us tread water while giving people a rest. Looking deeper, however, it is clear he is most effective with Nash and Stoudemire. He shoots more with Steve and Amare in the game, and the percentage is over 60%, a number not approached when paired with other players. A-
Amare Stoudemire - His only negative +/- is with Diaw or Banks, further debunking the myth that either is a primary distributor. His best pairing is with Raja Bell. I can only guess as to why that is. Perhaps Raja's few assists go to Amare. Also, Raja may spread the floor better for STAT's forays to the basket. He gets the most free throws and highest scoring average playing with Grant Hill, which throws a monkey wrench in the strategy to let Hill play with the bench. He becomes a rebounding beast when playing with Skinner, producing our best rebounding lineup, and he is reduced to a shell of himself when paired with Marcus Banks, not exactly a ringing endorsement of Marcus' playmaking abilities. A-
Check the page out, and let me know what you think.
0 recs |
17 comments
Comments
Nope
Now adjusted +- stats? They make me weak in the knees. How I love them so!
by rosewood on Jan 22, 2008 5:30 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
Italics
by rosewood on Jan 22, 2008 5:31 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I think this is an unfortunate side-effect
With auto format turned on, it takes anything between two slash marks (/) and turns it into italics. You can either set the format to plain text (if you don't need to include any HTML stuff link links, lists, etc), or you can set the type to HTML and manually type any HTML links,etc.
If it's in a post and not a comment, you can also post the original in auto format, then go back and edit it to fix the italics. (I'll do that for this post as soon as I finish up this comment).
by TexSUN on Jan 22, 2008 5:45 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
adjusted/unadjusted
by Hawk42 on Jan 22, 2008 5:45 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hope you don't mind...
by TexSUN on Jan 22, 2008 5:52 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Unadjusted plus-minus
I mean, the Barbosa and Nash combo means one thing when Bell is hurt, Barbosa is starting and they're at home, beating the Kings (without Artest, Martin, and Bibby) by twelve in the second quarter and quite another when Bell is on the floor with them and they're losing to the Kings by 4 in Sacramento with six minutes left in the fourth quarter and Martin, Artest, and Bibby are all on the floor. So unless you adjust the plus-minus for each situation's variables, it's silly to just gob them together as plus-minus statistics as if they are indicative of similar playing patterns.
82games is a great site, but the chart would be a lot more interesting if all the minutes played together had at least been adjusted per game (if not per minute) and then the adjusted numbers compiled. Taken as is, it essentially negates the point of plus-minus statistics, which is to indicated the efficiency of teamwork when player X is on the floor. But that efficiency can only be understood in its proper context which unadjusted numbers ignore.
And adjusted numbers are no more subjective than unadjusted. It's more or less the same formulas. Just more of them.
by rosewood on Jan 22, 2008 9:35 PM MST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mind
by Hawk42 on Jan 22, 2008 6:10 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
rosewood gets it
by DrStrom on Jan 23, 2008 5:59 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
I agree
With guys like Marks and Banks and DJ at some point I think you have to trust the coaches. I usually watch the game the first time through for fun and often go back to key portions and watch plays in slo mo. Several times. Watching what Marcus does with out the ball. How did DJ go over or under the screen. Etc.
There's a million things going on the court at the same time and if you aren't a professional basketball expert with time to study each game film for hours I don't know how much we really can know about a player's value. The +- stats provide some insight but for a guy like Banks w so little playing time? At some point I figure the coaches know best from all their time watching film and of course seeing the player in practice, etc.
by Phoenix Stan on Jan 23, 2008 11:46 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
little used players hard to read
by Hawk42 on Jan 23, 2008 12:27 PM MST reply actions 0 recs
I'm Not Sure What it All Means ... but
That said, these seem to support the idea that Hill should be coming off the bench. He's the #2 playmaker on the team and would seem to solidify the second unit. This would be especially important during Nash's two rests during the games.
The last 8 games have shown that, for whatever reason, Boris likes to start. I do have to say, too, that he plays sly defense. Watch him. He's very good at guarding smaller post players (but bigger ones eat him up). I'd hate to "reward" him like that, but that may be the best fit.
Skinner in the starting role? I'd love to see that, too. He doesn't have to play 30 minutes. He can start and still play 15-20 minutes. With him in the game at the same time as Amare for 15, that'd really open things up for Amare on both ends.
by JSun on Jan 25, 2008 9:31 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
You got my point...
The Hill/Diaw discussion (who to start) has become a real concern, especially since it appears that D'Antoni has made a serious error in plugging Grant right back into the lineup. We struggled and barely won against Milwaukee, and of course, completely imploded against the Timberwolves. Why couldn't coach at least wait till we got back home to put Grant in? I agree with your assessment.
We need to consider our unit out on the court at any one time. How well they play together, etc.. I think Coach Mike, like most coaches, likes to think he can use any combination of players. But I think the good coaches understand the unit, the five on the court.
by Hawk42 on Jan 25, 2008 9:45 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Hill/Diaw
In the long run, I think Hill is the guy you want on the floor at the end of the game w/ Nash and Amare b/c he gives you that ability to create his own shot and his clutch.
I like bringing Diaw and LB in together to replace Hill and Nash like coach D has been doing. I dont' think Hill is the better play maker. I mean he certainly can make plays and is the much better offensive weapon but Diaw w/ the ball running the offense and setting up LB is the better option. Last game aside - ths has been working well. It takes the ball out of LB's hands and lets him be a finisher either at the rim or for 3 and forces Diaw to be more aggressive. Again, all this month this has been working well (aside from the last game).
Watch Diaw closely. He usually makes good decisions and his D is solid. Of course he can't guard a 7ft 250lb center in the block. Neither can Marion. And btw neither can Skinner. Skinner got torched 1:1 against Jefferson just like everyone else. In fact, I think Skinner hasn't been playing all that well lately. He seems to have dropped off but so far that's just a general feeling and not based on anything firm....
by Phoenix Stan on Jan 25, 2008 9:59 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Hill
If, for example, Skinner starts, he probably won't be in there at the end of the game. Skinner's apparent drop-off seems (to me) to be getting less solid minutes; i.e., consecutive minutes, its getting a bit more spotty and random.
Jefferson would've probably torched anyone the other night. The problem was more with the miscommunication on defense in regard to the doubles than the one-on-one defense. Sometimes, one-on-one simply doesn't work.
Don't think that Jefferson is emblematic of a larger problem with other bigs in the leauge. Defending TD and Jefferson are two different things. TD doesn't have the explosive strength that Jefferson put on display last night. While he's got other strengths, I think a smart defender (Skinner, Amare not being stupid) can contain TD enough so that he doesn't have to be doubled and Parker/Ginobli don't go off. Aggressively doubling Jefferson worked when the guys were on the same page, but aggressively doubling TD can be ruinous.
by JSun on Jan 25, 2008 10:53 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Boris and Grant
Grant has scored 8 an 11 points the last two games, about all you could expect from a guy coming off of that surgery. This lineup will be OK in the long run, I just think we are going to lose a few games getting Grant acclimated again. And these bad games against bottom feeders are going to be the difference between a #1 seed and possibly a #6 (If we don't win the Pacific).
by Hawk42 on Jan 25, 2008 10:30 AM MST reply actions 0 recs
Boris v Grant
by Phoenix Stan on Jan 25, 2008 11:18 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs
Boris passing
Maybe Boris passes 'too' well. He makes the correct pass, but not always the right pass. This can lead to overpassing, which he does all the time. Even in the limited times a game is televised into Dallas, it I can picture many times where Boris surprised his team mates, or passed up a shot, which can lead to 3 seconds, or a rushed 3 pointer. No matter how correct the pass, it will still lead to a negative result if your team mates are expecting someting else. I would suggest that players know more what to expect from Nash and Hill.
by Hawk42 on Jan 25, 2008 11:40 AM MST up reply actions 0 recs

by 















