2015 Draft a Franchise (NBA): Discussion Thread

[gabefergy]

I'm not going to side with either argument because I think it's an unknown until we see whether or not Cousins' game would skyrocket when paired with an All-Star playmaker. However, I want to say this paragraph is certainly in line with what I'm currently thinking about Blake. He's been an All-Star and more than solid performer for a while, but this playoffs was an absolute step up to a new level of superstar for him in my eyes. He was amazing, especially against SA. I just hope he doesn't fall into a situation where he becomes the next Carmelo or McGrady or even Chris Paul when something just prevents him from lifting his team to any meaningful stage of the postseason. That total team collapse against Houston was brutal, and their performance in postseason play this year will mean a lot to the legacies of the players on that team.

While the Clippers collapse was very disappointing to watch, the way they battled against the Spurs and the Rockets with a depleted lineup was phenomenal imo. They should have finished off the Rockets when they had a chance and that 4th quarter collapse was one of the worst I have seen, but it was kind of a freak occurrence. The Clippers couldn't make wide open buckets while the Rockets role players were draining 3s. After that game, the drain of playing essentially a 7 man rotation caught up the Clips and they were toast. They just weren't deep enough.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

May be a bit early for Ender... Andrew but he's got the makings of a future star. His ceiling was way too much to pass up at this point. He's already an excellent defender and a good scorer. He needs to develop a more consistent 3-point shot but he is extremely promising. Having a guy like Paul next to him should only help him

[-Truth-]

Really thought I'd get Butler

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Carmelo Anthony was already selected.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

While the Clippers collapse was very disappointing to watch, the way they battled against the Spurs and the Rockets with a depleted lineup was phenomenal imo. They should have finished off the Rockets when they had a chance and that 4th quarter collapse was one of the worst I have seen, but it was kind of a freak occurrence. The Clippers couldn't make wide open buckets while the Rockets role players were draining 3s. After that game, the drain of playing essentially a 7 man rotation caught up the Clips and they were toast. They just weren't deep enough.

Phrasing Boom......

 

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Carmelo Anthony was already selected.

Yeah... If Melo was there he would've easily had been my pick. Even if I share the same opinion of Melo as I do of Harden

[Mt. Crushmore]

CalvinSmoke goes out of order in the NFL DaF and chooses a player already selected in the NBA DaF all in the span of a few minutes.  Ouch.

[-Truth-]

lol @ the pictures of Kawhi Leonard and Jimmy Butler abusing LeBron James. Looks like we're continuing the trend from last year.

[CalvinSmoke]

CalvinSmoke goes out of order in the NFL DaF and chooses a player already selected in the NBA DaF all in the span of a few minutes. Ouch.

ya know lmao

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

The numbers don't back-up that assessment. In fact, if your team is below average in terms of scoring it actually benefits an individual player in the win shares formula because his contribution is greater.

 

That's not true at all man. I'm not sure why you think that. 

 

via basketball reference:

 

Win Shares [are] directly proportional to team wins. In his system, a baseball team that wins 80 games will have exactly 240 Win Shares, a baseball team that wins 90 games will have exactly 270 Win Shares, etc. In my system, a basketball team that wins 50 games will have about 50 Win Shares, give or take.

 

 

 Team record is absolutely accounted for, so I'm not sure how you can say that. That's why role players on good teams often have more win shares than good players on worse teams. 

 

Overall, win shares taken out of context are pretty vague, and I really wouldn't rely on that stat for an argument. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by BALTIMOREFLACCO

[gabefergy]

That's not true at all man. I'm not sure why you think that. 

 

via basketball reference:

 

 Team record is absolutely accounted for, so I'm not sure how you can say that. That's why role players on good teams often have more win shares than good players on worse teams. 

 

Overall, win shares taken out of context are pretty vague, and I really wouldn't rely on that stat for an argument. 

That is not correct. The formula does not account for team wins at all:

 

Taken from basketball reference

 

Offensive Win Shares are credited to players based on Dean Oliver's points produced and offensive possessions. The formulas are quite detailed, so I would point you to Oliver's book Basketball on Paper for complete details. The process for crediting Offensive Win Shares is outlined below (usingLeBron James of the 2008-09 Cleveland Cavaliers as an example):

1. Calculate points produced for each player. In 2008-09, James had an estimated 2345.9 points produced.
2. Calculate offensive possessions for each player. James had an estimated 1928.1 offensive possessions in 2008-09.
3. Calculate marginal offense for each player. Marginal offense is equal to (points produced) - 0.92 * (league points per possession) * (offensive possessions). For James this is 2345.9 - 0.92 * 1.083 * 1928.1 = 424.8. Note that this formula may produce a negative result for some players.
4. Calculate marginal points per win. Marginal points per win reduces to 0.32 * (league points per game) * ((team pace) / (league pace)). For the 2008-09 Cavaliers this is 0.32 * 100.0 * (88.7 / 91.7) = 30.95.
5. Credit Offensive Win Shares to the players. Offensive Win Shares are credited using the following formula: (marginal offense) / (marginal points per win). James gets credit for 424.8 / 30.95 = 13.73 Offensive Win Shares.

[gabefergy]

As you can see, Offensive Win Shares are calculated by Marginal Offense (player vs league)/marginal points per win (which accounts for team performance)

 

However, if you look at the formula you will see that the only place where team performance is adjusted for is in "team pace" which is in the numerator of a multiplier to calculate Marginal points per win. 

 

Therefore, a lower team pace is actually going to decrease the denominator in calculating Marginal points per win which using simple math places a higher value on the player's Marginal offense.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

Kids gather around its time to play Gabe vs respected board member. This week: BALTIMOREFLACCO the Texas Turnaround takes on Gabe. Will he prosper? Will he falter? Same bat time. Same bat channel.

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

That is not correct. The formula does not account for team wins at all:

 

Taken from basketball reference

 

Look at the formula you just posted. If a team performs better offensively, that team has more total offensive win shares. It skews the stats. Same thing on defense. Like I just posted, team performance directly correlates.  

 

The majority of advanced stats point to Cousins as the better all around player. If you want to focus on the two (one that is flawed when comparing players on different teams) that favor your guy, so be it. If I wanted to milk a total rating for a player, I could easily point to PER, where Cousins decisively trumps Blake. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by BALTIMOREFLACCO

[beanfigger]

While the Clippers collapse was very disappointing to watch, the way they battled against the Spurs and the Rockets with a depleted lineup was phenomenal imo. They should have finished off the Rockets when they had a chance and that 4th quarter collapse was one of the worst I have seen, but it was kind of a freak occurrence. The Clippers couldn't make wide open buckets while the Rockets role players were draining 3s. After that game, the drain of playing essentially a 7 man rotation caught up the Clips and they were toast. They just weren't deep enough.

That's what I'm saying. I hope a "freak occurrence" doesn't become the norm for Blake like it has for the other stars I mentioned. I thought Paul hitting that shot the finish off SA was gonna be like him breaking through the glass ceiling and lead to a deep run, and then it was immediately followed by a huge collapse. I'm hoping Blake can help break Paul out of this type of thing instead of becoming part of it. However, Blake in the postseason this year was a HUGE step forward for his career and standing in the league.

[MoveThoseChains]

This pick was tough. I had a few other guys in mind, each who would've changed the outlook of my team from the start. But Draymond is the type of player I want if I were to build a franchise. Many Warriors said he was the heart and soul of the team. He's an elite versatile defender who does whats needed to win a game. He may not be a top 25 talent in the NBA, but I need a passionate defender and teammate to go alongside Harden. I think his all-around offensive game will grow into next year. Theirs only a few players like Draymond in the NBA, and I like him alongside Harden. 

[gabefergy]

Look at the formula you just posted. If a team performs better offensively, that team has more total offensive win shares. It skews the stats. Same thing on defense. Like I just posted, team performance directly correlates.  

 

The majority of advanced stats point to Cousins as the better all around player. If you want to focus on the two (one that is flawed when comparing players on different teams) that favor your guy, so be it. If I wanted to milk a total rating for a player, I could easily point to PER, where Cousins decisively trumps Blake. 

Team performance correlates, but that doesn't make it causative. The only team stat that is in that formula is PACE, and it is only a way of measuring how the team performs compared to the rest of the league. If the team is not doing well, it INCREASES the contribution of an individual player. 

 

The problem that you are seeing is that Boogie actually isn't an exceptionally effective offensive player.

 

Here is why - his usage rate is massive, 34.1. So he is having a very high impact on the offensive outcome. However, his TO% is also very high at 16.3%. He has a good TS% at 54.5% but it is not elite, and similarly he has a high AST% for a big man at 20.4% but when viewed in conjuction with his Usage rate and TO% it is not a good number.

 

In comparison Blake has a high usage rate at 28.4, but not close to Cousins. Where Blake is far superior is his TO% at 10.2% and AST% at 26.2%. Blake also has a higher TS% at 55.1% although that number is marginal.

 

So for Cousins, he is a huge component of the offense, but he is a good not great scorer and turns the ball over nearly as much as he creates offense for teammates. Blake on the other hand is a slightly better scorer and has 2.5:1 ratio of Assists to TOs, which is a MASSIVE difference.

 

PER is a far more flawed stat because it is just an efficiency stat, role players who play 15-20 minutes per game are often amongst the leaders.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

This pick was tough. I had a few other guys in mind, each who would've changed the outlook of my team from the start. But Draymond is the type of player I want if I were to build a franchise. Many Warriors said he was the heart and soul of the team. He's an elite versatile defender who does whats needed to win a game. He may not be a top 25 talent in the NBA, but I need a passionate defender and teammate to go alongside Harden. I think his all-around offensive game will grow into next year. Theirs only a few players like Draymond in the NBA, and I like him alongside Harden.

Ron Artest is upset that he couldn't select modern day Ron Artest

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

Team performance correlates, but that doesn't make it causative. The only team stat that is in that formula is PACE, and it is only a way of measuring how the team performs compared to the rest of the league. If the team is not doing well, it INCREASES the contribution of an individual player. 

 

The problem that you are seeing is that Boogie actually isn't an exceptionally effective offensive player.

 

Here is why - his usage rate is massive, 34.1. So he is having a very high impact on the offensive outcome. However, his TO% is also very high at 16.3%. He has a good TS% at 54.5% but it is not elite, and similarly he has a high AST% for a big man at 20.4% but when viewed in conjuction with his Usage rate and TO% it is not a good number.

 

In comparison Blake has a high usage rate at 28.4, but not close to Cousins. Where Blake is far superior is his TO% at 10.2% and AST% at 26.2%. Blake also has a higher TS% at 55.1% although that number is marginal.

 

So for Cousins, he is a huge component of the offense, but he is a good not great scorer and turns the ball over nearly as much as he creates offense for teammates. Blake on the other hand is a slightly better scorer and has 2.5:1 ratio of Assists to TOs, which is a MASSIVE difference.

 

PER is a far more flawed stat because it is just an efficiency stat, role players who play 15-20 minutes per game are often amongst the leaders.

 

I've already acknowledged countless times that Blake is the better offensive player. That goes back to my original post. Cousins is the more complete player and the marginal difference on offensive production vs. the big difference in supporting cast isn't enough for me to value Blake over Cousins. PER is a flawed stat, as most advanced stats are, but so are win shares. That's why I posted a ton of different stats. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by BALTIMOREFLACCO

[gabefergy]

I've already acknowledged countless times that Blake is the better offensive player. That goes back to my original post. Cousins is the more complete player and the marginal difference on offensive production vs. the big difference in supporting cast isn't enough for me to value Blake over Cousins. PER is a flawed stat, as most advanced stats are, but so are win shares. That's why I posted a ton of different stats. 

Except it's not a marginal difference in their offense. Blake is considerably better on that end of the court. Cousins may be more complete in that he is a better defender, but he also plays a different defensive role. So you are comparing one player that is a lot better offensively and one that is a lot better defensively. That doesn't make Cousins more complete, it makes him better at defense.

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

Except it's not a marginal difference in their offense. Blake is considerably better on that end of the court. Cousins may be more complete in that he is a better defender, but he also plays a different defensive role. So you are comparing one player that is a lot better offensively and one that is a lot better defensively. That doesn't make Cousins more complete, it makes him better at defense.

 

Cousins averaged more points on a marginally worse TS% (.545 vs. .551). He turned the ball over more and had less assists, but look at who he is passing the ball to. His usage is higher because he's the ONLY legitimate offensive player on his team.

 

You don't think that if he had Chris Paul, JJ Redick, Jamal Crawford and DJ around him that his usage would be lower and his efficiency would be a little better?

 

I agree that Blake is a better offensive option, but the difference isn't as much as you're saying. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by BALTIMOREFLACCO

[gabefergy]

Cousins averaged more points on a marginally worse TS% (.545 vs. .551). He turned the ball over more and had less assists, but look at who he is passing the ball to. His usage is higher because he's the ONLY legitimate offensive player on his team.

You don't think that if he had Chris Paul, JJ Redick, Jamal Crawford and DJ around him that his usage would be lower and his efficiency would be a little better?

I agree that Blake is a better offensive option, but the difference isn't as much as you're saying.

Sure, Blake had better players around him, but that doesn't mean Cousins gets a pass for his turnover rate or that Blake shouldn't be credited for his assist rate. Trust me, Blake should have way more assists than he actually gets based on the wide open shots he creates. Redick is really the only lights out shooter on the Clips.

Getting back to the Cousins/Blake offensive comp though...just going off the numbers Blake creates 13 more points per 100 player outcomes. That is a significant number.

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

Sure, Blake had better players around him, but that doesn't mean Cousins gets a pass for his turnover rate or that Blake shouldn't be credited for his assist rate. Trust me, Blake should have way more assists than he actually gets based on the wide open shots he creates. Redick is really the only lights out shooter on the Clips.

Getting back to the Cousins/Blake offensive comp though...just going off the numbers Blake creates 13 more points per 100 player outcomes. That is a significant number.

 

This is all true, but going back to your other post I just can't accept that Cousins isn't an elite all around player.

 

Advanced stats aside, he averages 24 pts, 12.7 reb, 3.6 ast, 1.5 stl and 1.7 blks  and is top-3 in fouls drawn, top-5 in ppg, top-3 in rebounds per game and top-3 among centers for assists–though he does turn it over a lot. That's elite production any way you spin it.

 

While he's less efficient offensively than Blake, which I've repeated over and over, he's still a top offensive player in the league and that's undeniable. You've acknowledged that he's a better defender and rebounder, and the advanced stats other than turnovers love him. 

 

Cousins is an elite player and the best all around big in the game besides Davis. 

Edited July 3, 2015 by BALTIMOREFLACCO

[MoveThoseChains]

Ron Artest is upset that he couldn't select modern day Ron Artest

 

I like your Wiggins pick, I was considering him at my pick until you took him. Do you think I took Draymond too early? I doubt he would've been available in my third round pick, so I feel like I had to reach a little for the type of player I wanted. 

[gabefergy]

This is all true, but going back to your other post I just can't accept that Cousins isn't an elite all around player.

Advanced stats aside, he averages 24 pts, 12.7 reb, 3.6 ast, 1.5 stl and 1.7 blks and is top-3 in fouls drawn, top-5 in ppg, top-3 in rebounds per game and top-3 among centers for assists–though he does turn it over a lot. That's elite production any way you spin it.

While he's less efficient offensively than Blake, which I've repeated over and over, he's still a top offensive player in the league and that's undeniable. You've acknowledged that he's a better defender and rebounder, and the advanced stats other than turnovers love him.

Cousins is an elite player and the best all around big in the game besides Davis.

Ok, well you can't just ignore TOs, especially when a player takes such a significant portion of a team's possessions. It's directly detrimental to offense.

Part of the reason why his numbers are so high is because his usage rate is so high. He's among the best bigs in the league, but the numbers indicate that Blake is better. For their respective careers it isn't even close either.

[-Truth-]

We're drafting coaches too, right?

(Kidding)

 

You are on the clock.

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

Ok, well you can't just ignore TOs, especially when a player takes such a significant portion of a team's possessions. It's directly detrimental to offense.

Part of the reason why his numbers are so high is because his usage rate is so high. He's among the best bigs in the league, but the numbers indicate that Blake is better [offensively]. For their respective careers it isn't even close either.

Fixed.

We are clearly not getting anywhere here, so I'll sum up my argument by saying that Cousins is slightly less efficient offensively and turns the ball over more--partly because he gets more touches, is doubled more often and draws more focus due to inferior teammates.

Turnovers considered, he's still an elite offensive player in both advanced and raw stats, yet he's marginally worse than Blake. His defense and rebounding are significantly superior though, which makes up for being turnover prone in my eyes.

I take Cousins any day of the week.

[gabefergy]

Fixed.

We are clearly not getting anywhere here, so I'll sum up my argument by saying that Cousins is slightly less efficient offensively and turns the ball over more--partly because he gets more touches, is doubled more often and draws more focus due to inferior teammates.

Turnovers considered, he's still an elite offensive player in both advanced and raw stats, yet he's marginally worse than Blake. His defense and rebounding are significantly superior though, which makes up for being turnover prone in my eyes.

I take Cousins any day of the week.

You're still ignoring the stats you don't like, but whatever, you can have your opinion. Blake has done far more in his young career than Cousins has. He isn't a head case, and is a better offensive player by a considerable margin. I'll take the player that has proven he can play at an elite level when it counts the most.

[LosT_in_TranSlatioN]

For me.

I value good defense very highly.

Cousins > Blake. Sorry Gabe. Not a big Blake fan.

[Inqui]

For me.

I value good defense very highly.

Cousins > Blake. Sorry Gabe. Not a big Blake fan.

Cosigned.

[rmw10]

This guy will come in handy again...

 

 

I've been trying to follow this game, but once pick 6 passed, I was out haha

[gabefergy]

For me.

I value good defense very highly.

Cousins > Blake. Sorry Gabe. Not a big Blake fan.

That's fine. Lots of people don't realize how good he is.