For those who understand BPM better than I do (probably most posters here), what do you make of Okafor, who has improved, having a BPM of -4.1?
It's only oe data point, but looking at 1st and 2nd year players over the past 25 years with more than 500 minutes and usage rate greater than 23% (which is DLo's USG%), Okafor's BPM places him in company with guys like Harold Minor, Tyler Hansborough, and Michael Beasley when they first entered the league. Some guys in his current BPM ranking cohort were serviceable NBA players like Lamond Murray, and Ced Ceballos - who was terri-bad his first two seasons in the league - made one All-Star team. But the only really good player in the group was Rip Hamilton, who looked like he really struggled during his first two seasons in DC.
Again, it's just one data point, but I'm trying to reconcile a 20 year old putting up 17/7 with such a mediocre BPM (and RPM for that matter). Because if Okafor continues his current pace and finishes with more than 1800 minutes and a 27 USG%, he and Michael Beasley would be the two lowest ranked young players by BPM in the past 25 years. But he does have 35 games left to improve.
Here is the formula for raw BPM, for the purposes of the rest of my post. Raw BPM is a player's BPM before the Team Adjustment:
Okafor doesn't do well in BPM because he doesn't score efficiently (51.8%, when the league average is 53.7%), that scoring inefficiency is exacerbated by high usage, he doesn't get assists or steals at a high rate (few bigs do), and that isn't compensated for by high rebound or block rates, which most bigs have. Okafor is just a bit over the league average in categories where bigs usually have a significant advantage over wings and guards.
When people say he's going to 17/7 on the year as a way of advocating for him, my first thought is that the "7" is a mark against him. Here are some of
Okafor's rankings amongst the 41 qualifying centers (20 games played, 10mpg) in the NBA:
Aside from Turnover Rate (I didn't realize he had improved this much in this area), what does he do better than other bigs? Not in an aesthetic, "look at those post moves" sort of way, but in a tangible one. This is why his VORP (-0.7) is so low.
Thank you for the detailed breakdown and the discussion with fiendishoc up above. This is good future ammo for the "Okafor rulez" arguments, if you don't mind me appropriating it.
Thank you for the detailed breakdown and the discussion with fiendishoc up above. This is good future ammo for the "Okafor rulez" arguments, if you don't mind me appropriating it.
Not at all. The thing about Okafor is that he fits into so many old school paradigms that it isn't any wonder that he's a darling of that crowd. "He put up [insert points] and [insert rebounds] on [insert FG%], and did it with some sweet post moves! What a prospect!"
GT imma need your opinion on one Myles Turner sir.
And additionally if you'd be willing to trade a top 3 pick for him in Indy was interested.
Turner looks damn good. He's the 2nd best Center in the draft behind Towns.
I'd trade #3 for him, but not #1 or #2.
Thanks GT.
For me I'm willing to go up to #1. He gets an added boost for me because of fit, and I had no clue his motor was so high.
His rebounding concerns me, but he's an efficient scorer on high usage and can swat a bit. Damn good player, just wouldn't give up Ingram or Simmons for him.
Having seen GT's stats, I think seeing Oak in person really confirms a lot of things (I had seats pretty close to the court in Philly). He is almost never hustling back on transition defense. Doesn't cover ground at all on defense. Mopes around until he gets the ball then he starts dancing post-move wise (and he's REALLY superb at that. Thing of beauty).
I can see why up close, the Lakers weren't thrilled with him despite his amazing post game. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35813 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2016 12:45 pm Post subject:
yinoma2001 wrote:
Having seen GT's stats, I think seeing Oak in person really confirms a lot of things (I had seats pretty close to the court in Philly). He is almost never hustling back on transition defense. Doesn't cover ground at all on defense. Mopes around until he gets the ball then he starts dancing post-move wise (and he's REALLY superb at that. Thing of beauty).
I can see why up close, the Lakers weren't thrilled with him despite his amazing post game.
Why should he want to hustle when the team is intentionally losing games? _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
Having seen GT's stats, I think seeing Oak in person really confirms a lot of things (I had seats pretty close to the court in Philly). He is almost never hustling back on transition defense. Doesn't cover ground at all on defense. Mopes around until he gets the ball then he starts dancing post-move wise (and he's REALLY superb at that. Thing of beauty).
I can see why up close, the Lakers weren't thrilled with him despite his amazing post game.
Why should he want to hustle when the team is intentionally losing games?
So why is Noel/(and the rest of the team) hustling and he isn't? _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Having seen GT's stats, I think seeing Oak in person really confirms a lot of things (I had seats pretty close to the court in Philly). He is almost never hustling back on transition defense. Doesn't cover ground at all on defense. Mopes around until he gets the ball then he starts dancing post-move wise (and he's REALLY superb at that. Thing of beauty).
I can see why up close, the Lakers weren't thrilled with him despite his amazing post game.
Why should he want to hustle when the team is intentionally losing games?
So why is Noel/(and the rest of the team) hustling and he isn't?
There's no excuse. He's immature and used to getting what he wants(winning). I do believe he will turn it around while in a better situation but there's still no excuse for him being lazy now. His best defensive game was against Towns which is a sign that he is worried about Jahlil and not the 76ers IMO.
GT imma need your opinion on one Myles Turner sir.
And additionally if you'd be willing to trade a top 3 pick for him in Indy was interested.
Turner looks damn good. He's the 2nd best Center in the draft behind Towns.
I'd trade #3 for him, but not #1 or #2.
Thanks GT.
For me I'm willing to go up to #1. He gets an added boost for me because of fit, and I had no clue his motor was so high.
His rebounding concerns me, but he's an efficient scorer on high usage and can swat a bit. Damn good player, just wouldn't give up Ingram or Simmons for him.
Gotcha. That's why I like Randle next to him since he can cover for the rebounding weakness. And Turner can be the floor spacer between them.
Hopefully with some added strength he can get more boards.
But yeah it's probably pipe. I doubt Indy lets him go
GT imma need your opinion on one Myles Turner sir.
And additionally if you'd be willing to trade a top 3 pick for him in Indy was interested.
Turner looks damn good. He's the 2nd best Center in the draft behind Towns.
I'd trade #3 for him, but not #1 or #2.
Thanks GT.
For me I'm willing to go up to #1. He gets an added boost for me because of fit, and I had no clue his motor was so high.
His rebounding concerns me, but he's an efficient scorer on high usage and can swat a bit. Damn good player, just wouldn't give up Ingram or Simmons for him.
Gotcha. That's why I like Randle next to him since he can cover for the rebounding weakness. And Turner can be the floor spacer between them.
Hopefully with some added strength he can get more boards.
But yeah it's probably pipe. I doubt Indy lets him go
That's true, he and Randle would be a superb fit. I just think Ingram & Simmons are elite talents.
Is ingram really that close to Durant? I haven't seen an ounce of his play (not even highlights).
I can't motivate myself to go through another year of combing college bball to see who we should pick.
I feel similar to the way that you do. I'm not investing much time in the prospects until I know we're keeping our pick.
That said, Ingram's legit. Is he KD? Probably not, but KD is gonna go down as a Top 20 player in NBA history. But he's really good, at a really young age. And if the fit of a guy like Myles Turner is important to you (it's less important to me at this point), Ingram is a a perfect fit with our current roster. He's similar to KD in that he can score without having the ball in his hands for big chunks on the shot clock. Catch & shoot, catch & drive, cut & finish, etc. Not particularly ball dominant, although I have seen some 1-on-1 ability recently.
Gotcha, so he fits the mold in what we need at SF.
Yeah, once we find out for sure whether we keep our pick, I'll deep dive in. I'm looking for someone who also has some defensive attitude.
Back on topic, for this year's rookie class, lots of people seem to be really high on them. There are lots of guys who show a lot of skill at a young age. I enjoy looking up highlights for the other rooks
Cameron Payne has been playing extremely well for OKC, and hasn't gotten much attention for it.
His per-36 numbers are disgusting, and he's easily the second best PG in the draft (sorry, TJ McConnell). He deserves more minutes than Waiters, but I don't know if Donovan recognizes it yet.
Cameron Payne has been playing extremely well for OKC, and hasn't gotten much attention for it.
His per-36 numbers are disgusting, and he's easily the second best PG in the draft (sorry, TJ McConnell). He deserves more minutes than Waiters, but I don't know if Donovan recognizes it yet.
When WB comes to the Lakers he will play more. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Cameron Payne has been playing extremely well for OKC, and hasn't gotten much attention for it.
His per-36 numbers are disgusting, and he's easily the second best PG in the draft (sorry, TJ McConnell). He deserves more minutes than Waiters, but I don't know if Donovan recognizes it yet.
Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2016 12:11 am Post subject:
GoldenThroat wrote:
fiendishoc wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
For those who understand BPM better than I do (probably most posters here), what do you make of Okafor, who has improved, having a BPM of -4.1?
It's only oe data point, but looking at 1st and 2nd year players over the past 25 years with more than 500 minutes and usage rate greater than 23% (which is DLo's USG%), Okafor's BPM places him in company with guys like Harold Minor, Tyler Hansborough, and Michael Beasley when they first entered the league. Some guys in his current BPM ranking cohort were serviceable NBA players like Lamond Murray, and Ced Ceballos - who was terri-bad his first two seasons in the league - made one All-Star team. But the only really good player in the group was Rip Hamilton, who looked like he really struggled during his first two seasons in DC.
Again, it's just one data point, but I'm trying to reconcile a 20 year old putting up 17/7 with such a mediocre BPM (and RPM for that matter). Because if Okafor continues his current pace and finishes with more than 1800 minutes and a 27 USG%, he and Michael Beasley would be the two lowest ranked young players by BPM in the past 25 years. But he does have 35 games left to improve.
I'm not a big fan of BPM, primarily because of the team adjustment that goes into it. The team performance moves the BPM number of everyone on the team equally, so it's kind of a blunt instrument. That said, that's just one part of why Oak and Beasley's ratings are so low. I think the overall number tends to reward efficiency and versatility (stuffing the box score in multiple categories) rather than usage. So if you're not putting up a lot of assists, steals, blocks, etc while turning it over and shooting a low TS%, you're not going to look great even if your point average is pretty good. The worry is that for front court players, its not that easy to improve these categories dramatically.
As for RPM, for most of the season, Oak made almost every unit he was a part of worse. That's partially because of fit, especially with Noel, but also because of his defensive issues and the ball stickiness and space hogging nature of his offensive tendencies. These have improved recently, as the team as a whole has improved. Maybe they're starting to figure out the best way to use him or have him adapt to a more effective style. It's still so early that I would hesitate to make projections based heavily on the numbers.
I disagree. The Team Adjustment is normalized by a 120% multiplier for the purpose of translating them to a league average team.
Quote:
The team's efficiency differential, adjusted for strength of schedule, is known. It is, by definition, the true sum of all players' contributions. BPM is adjusted such that the minute-weighted sum of individual players' BPM ratings on a team equals the team's rating times 120%. The team adjustment is simply a constant added to each player's raw BPM and is the same for every player on the team. The constant does 3 things: it adds the intercept to the BPM equation, it adjusts roughly at the team level for things that cannot be captured by the box score (primarily defense), and it also adjusts for strength of schedule. The formula for this adjustment looks like this:
BPM_Team_Adjustment = [Team_Rating*120% - S(Player_%Min*Player_RawBPM)]/5
So if a team has a rating of +8, and the player BPM terms sum to +7, the team adjustment, applied equally to all players on the team, would bump their rating by [(8)*120%-7]/5=+0.52.
Where did the 120% come from? Jeremias Engelmann has done extensive work on how lineups behave, and he discovered that lineups that are ahead in a game play worse, while lineups are behind play better – even if the exact same players are playing. Perhaps it's an effort thing? While the source is unclear, the effect is both significant and linear. He incorporates that effect into his RPM model, adjusting to a neutral environment, and BPM does the same. At the team level, a team that is always ahead is actually better than its final results indicate by about 20%, and a team that is usually behind is worse by 20%. Therefore, the team adjustment accounts for this effect.
What the 120% does, effectively, is to translate players from the team they are on onto a league average team, a team that is ahead and behind equal amounts during the season. Because of this adjustment, though, team-level analysis will need to divide that 120% back out – if a particular team would sum to +15 via adding up the BPM values, we would expect that team to actually perform at a +12.5 level – since they would usually be ahead in games. At the lineup level things are more tricky, since it is hard to predict how far ahead or behind a lineup typically is in normal game situations.
I don't see where that is contradictory. The BPM_Team_Adjustment is the same for every player on the Sixers. The 120% is there to magnify the team rating (to account for the garbage time effect), which must be quite negative for the Sixers. They then subtract the total raw BPM (Noel raw + Oak raw + Covington raw + etc) for the team from the 1.2*team rating and then divide by five, which I assume is to split the contribution equally among the five players on the court.
So if that number turns out to be -2, then it would move Noel from +2.1 raw to +0.1 and Oak from -2.1 raw to -4.1.
Is ingram really that close to Durant? I haven't seen an ounce of his play (not even highlights).
I can't motivate myself to go through another year of combing college bball to see who we should pick.
I feel similar to the way that you do. I'm not investing much time in the prospects until I know we're keeping our pick.
That said, Ingram's legit. Is he KD? Probably not, but KD is gonna go down as a Top 20 player in NBA history. But he's really good, at a really young age. And if the fit of a guy like Myles Turner is important to you (it's less important to me at this point), Ingram is a a perfect fit with our current roster. He's similar to KD in that he can score without having the ball in his hands for big chunks on the shot clock. Catch & shoot, catch & drive, cut & finish, etc. Not particularly ball dominant, although I have seen some 1-on-1 ability recently.
Me three ya'll. .....what kind of impact can Ingram make on the defensive end?....and how would he look along side Randle & Whiteside?
Brandon Ingram is about 6'10 but extremely thin not even 200 lbs. He has range on his shot, nice release he has college 3 range not sure if he has true NBA range just yet. But will as he fills out.
He's a sf in the NBA , could play some sg with a true point guard. I've only seen him a couple times, as a long time Pacer fan he reminds me, physically of a taller Reggie Miller. His release seemed very quick against my Indiana Hoosiers as he destroyed them from behind the college 3.
To me he is the #2 pick in the draft but will take him a couple years to bulk up before he's a 30 minute a night player. But he will be rotation player 18-25 minutes a night right off the start in the NBA.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2016 9:50 am Post subject:
indy_dave000 wrote:
Brandon Ingram is about 6'10 but extremely thin not even 200 lbs. He has range on his shot, nice release he has college 3 range not sure if he has true NBA range just yet. But will as he fills out.
He's a sf in the NBA , could play some sg with a true point guard. I've only seen him a couple times, as a long time Pacer fan he reminds me, physically of a taller Reggie Miller. His release seemed very quick against my Indiana Hoosiers as he destroyed them from behind the college 3.
To me he is the #2 pick in the draft but will take him a couple years to bulk up before he's a 30 minute a night player. But he will be rotation player 18-25 minutes a night right off the start in the NBA.
He's over 200lbs. now. There's a big difference with his upper body strength from the end of his senior year of US until now.
He has true NBA range, but doesn't exhibit it yet. Keep in mind, he just recently turned 18.
As for defense, he may get pushed around by SFs a bit, but has the elite length and stride length to recover and make an impact. If he's smart, he'll attack passing lanes more effectively along the perimeter, and not just show defense trying to protect the rim all of the time. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Just rematched the final 7 minutes of the 76ers game. Amazing 15-2 run. No way they could do that with Oak. The footspeed, defense and vertical threat (alley oops) was simply amazing for Noel. I think oak went something like 6-7 and 13 points in 20 minutes but didn't play much of the 4th when they went on the run. Interesting decisions to make. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
