View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Dr. Funkbot Star Player
Joined: 24 Sep 2001 Posts: 8188 Location: Eagle Rock
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
yinoma2001 wrote: | What's "elite work ethic?" Wiggins is clearly putting in the work in the gym, look at his body now.
Are you talking about motor? |
Going to the gym and lifting weights/being in shape is great, but you also have to be Koke like in your dedication to improve your skills as well.
To me wiggins has all of the physical parts down pat. But he has not been as effective on the the court as he could be. Mainly he seems to lack the focus/intensity/desire to be an impact defensive player.
Back to BI, from all accounts this kid has an elite work ethic. That is why I have not been too worried about him improving. _________________ R.I.P. Doc Buss |
|
Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001 Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Posts: 119487
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dr. Funkbot wrote: | yinoma2001 wrote: | What's "elite work ethic?" Wiggins is clearly putting in the work in the gym, look at his body now.
Are you talking about motor? |
Going to the gym and lifting weights/being in shape is great, but you also have to be Koke like in your dedication to improve your skills as well.
To me wiggins has all of the physical parts down pat. But he has not been as effective on the the court as he could be. Mainly he seems to lack the focus/intensity/desire to be an impact defensive player.
Back to BI, from all accounts this kid has an elite work ethic. That is why I have not been too worried about him improving. |
Still not sure how you extrapolate that though. Are there rumors that Wiggins isn't focused or not working hard? I think you may be talking about Wiggins's lack of defensive motor. That's been a big TWolves complaint for years. He thinks he's Kobe on offense and takes off defense. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
Back to top |
|
|
elbow Rookie
Joined: 12 Jul 2017 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
The per 36 numbers clearly show a great deal of improvement for Ingram compared to last year. However, it is possible that they are even better than they look.
One thing to keep in context about Ingram's development compared to last season, is that the team around him is different. Last year, Ingram was surrounded by more and better shooters. This year, however, we are last in the nba in three point shooting. While we were not a great 3pt shooting team last year, we clearly were better than this year. Considering that Ingram's game right now is primarily driving to the basket, I think it is even more impressive how much he has improved in that respect. This is because defenses can pack the paint even more than they did last year due to the lack of outside shooting. In addition, Ingram plays a large amount of time with Lonzo. While Lonzo can create some good looks for players, Lonzo's presence right now hurts Ingram's driving. Teams are continually going under screens and playing off of Lonzo daring him to shoot. This makes it easier for defenders to collapse on Ingram as he drives. Forcing more turnovers and making it harder for him to attack the basket. Despite that, he has greatly improved at attacking the basket compared to last season. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here are the Net Ratings of Ingram's 2-Man Lineups
Ingram + Caruso..........+39.5 (2 minutes)
Ingram + Ennis............+32.4 (16 minutes)
Ingram + Lopez..............-0.8 (491 minutes)
Ingram + KCP.................-4.1 (603 minutes)
Ingram + Randle.............-4.3 (232 minutes)
Ingram + Ball.................-5.2 (616 minutes)
Ingram + Clarkson..........-6.9 (231 minutes)
Ingram + Kuzma.............-7.6 (420 minutes)
Ingram + Bogut..............-8.1 (46 minutes)
Ingram + Nance..............-9.2 (269 minutes)
Ingram + Brewer...........-13.8 (80 minutes)
Ingram + Hart..............-15.2 (65 minutes)
Ingram + Deng.............-26.8 (13 minutes)
Ingram + Zubac............-55.5 (5 minutes)
Ingram + Blue.............-143.4 (2 minutes) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Inspector Gadget Retired Number
Joined: 18 Apr 2016 Posts: 46638
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ingram is more Jimmy Butler then Wiggins IMO. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144461 Location: The Gold Coast
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not what I expected to see _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
12 Star Player
Joined: 03 Sep 2010 Posts: 8617
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
GoldenThroat wrote: | Here are the Net Ratings of Ingram's 2-Man Lineups
Ingram + Caruso..........+39.5 (2 minutes)
Ingram + Ennis............+32.4 (16 minutes)
Ingram + Lopez..............-0.8 (491 minutes)
Ingram + KCP.................-4.1 (603 minutes)
Ingram + Randle.............-4.3 (232 minutes)
Ingram + Ball.................-5.2 (616 minutes)
Ingram + Clarkson..........-6.9 (231 minutes)
Ingram + Kuzma.............-7.6 (420 minutes)
Ingram + Bogut..............-8.1 (46 minutes)
Ingram + Nance..............-9.2 (269 minutes)
Ingram + Brewer...........-13.8 (80 minutes)
Ingram + Hart..............-15.2 (65 minutes)
Ingram + Deng.............-26.8 (13 minutes)
Ingram + Zubac............-55.5 (5 minutes)
Ingram + Blue.............-143.4 (2 minutes) |
Would you please be so kind and put this in English?
I'm not the sharpest crayon when it comes to +/-
I mean, I know the obvious. But I'm sure there's a lot more to this than meets the eye. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
babyskyhook Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Jul 2009 Posts: 18492 Location: The Garden Island
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
GoldenThroat wrote: | Here are the Net Ratings of Ingram's 2-Man Lineups
Ingram + Caruso..........+39.5 (2 minutes)
Ingram + Ennis............+32.4 (16 minutes)
Ingram + Lopez..............-0.8 (491 minutes)
Ingram + KCP.................-4.1 (603 minutes)
Ingram + Randle.............-4.3 (232 minutes)
Ingram + Ball.................-5.2 (616 minutes)
Ingram + Clarkson..........-6.9 (231 minutes)
Ingram + Kuzma.............-7.6 (420 minutes)
Ingram + Bogut..............-8.1 (46 minutes)
Ingram + Nance..............-9.2 (269 minutes)
Ingram + Brewer...........-13.8 (80 minutes)
Ingram + Hart..............-15.2 (65 minutes)
Ingram + Deng.............-26.8 (13 minutes)
Ingram + Zubac............-55.5 (5 minutes)
Ingram + Blue.............-143.4 (2 minutes) |
Thanks for posting GT.
I'm really surprised at the numbers when he's paired with Lopez and with Kuz. I thought those numbers would be reversed, with a relatively good number with Kuz and a relatively bad number with Lopez, but instead it's the reverse.
The Nance and Randle numbers came in more like I would have thought.
Any ideas on how the number with Lopez is relatively good, given what we know about the starters +/- as a 5 man unit ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
2019 Franchise Player
Joined: 03 Dec 2014 Posts: 10801
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
elbow wrote: | The per 36 numbers clearly show a great deal of improvement for Ingram compared to last year. However, it is possible that they are even better than they look.
One thing to keep in context about Ingram's development compared to last season, is that the team around him is different. Last year, Ingram was surrounded by more and better shooters. This year, however, we are last in the nba in three point shooting. While we were not a great 3pt shooting team last year, we clearly were better than this year. Considering that Ingram's game right now is primarily driving to the basket, I think it is even more impressive how much he has improved in that respect. This is because defenses can pack the paint even more than they did last year due to the lack of outside shooting. In addition, Ingram plays a large amount of time with Lonzo. While Lonzo can create some good looks for players, Lonzo's presence right now hurts Ingram's driving. Teams are continually going under screens and playing off of Lonzo daring him to shoot. This makes it easier for defenders to collapse on Ingram as he drives. Forcing more turnovers and making it harder for him to attack the basket. Despite that, he has greatly improved at attacking the basket compared to last season. |
Intersting and fair point.
His ability to get to the basket is pretty remarkable. He seems to be able to get there whenever he wants against whomever he wants. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
defense Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jan 2010 Posts: 39445
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What's a reasonable number of minutes to have to consider it a good predictor of how effective those line ups are?
How does those numbers account for strength of opponents or something like whether the team is leading or trailing big? For instance if the Lakers are trailing by say 15 in the middle of the 4th quarter, its stands to reason that more often than not they will make a run before the game is over. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006 Posts: 11823
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think I'll watch the game and see for myself |
|
Back to top |
|
|
The Juggernaut Star Player
Joined: 24 Aug 2017 Posts: 4572
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SocalDevin wrote: | I wouldn't blame Ingram for his perceived occasional lack of tenacity offensively. I've seen the same thing with Kuz, where he's now passing up opportunities to create and score because Luke might be in their heads a little bit.
Ball move, and look for teammates is what he preaches. I think they're trying to find balance. Of the two I'm more comfortable with Kuz taking a higher volume and being a bit more selfish. I actually like where Ingram is right now with just letting the game come to him. As his ability increases so will his assertiveness. |
He's 100% in their heads in this regard and I don't like it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
12 wrote: | GoldenThroat wrote: | Here are the Net Ratings of Ingram's 2-Man Lineups
Ingram + Caruso..........+39.5 (2 minutes)
Ingram + Ennis............+32.4 (16 minutes)
Ingram + Lopez..............-0.8 (491 minutes)
Ingram + KCP.................-4.1 (603 minutes)
Ingram + Randle.............-4.3 (232 minutes)
Ingram + Ball.................-5.2 (616 minutes)
Ingram + Clarkson..........-6.9 (231 minutes)
Ingram + Kuzma.............-7.6 (420 minutes)
Ingram + Bogut..............-8.1 (46 minutes)
Ingram + Nance..............-9.2 (269 minutes)
Ingram + Brewer...........-13.8 (80 minutes)
Ingram + Hart..............-15.2 (65 minutes)
Ingram + Deng.............-26.8 (13 minutes)
Ingram + Zubac............-55.5 (5 minutes)
Ingram + Blue.............-143.4 (2 minutes) |
Would you please be so kind and put this in English?
I'm not the sharpest crayon when it comes to +/-
I mean, I know the obvious. But I'm sure there's a lot more to this than meets the eye. |
1) This is how well the team plays when Ingram is on the court with other guys, per 100 possessions. The average Laker game has about 103 possessions in it, so this is roughly how much they outscore the other team over the course of a game when Ingram + the other guy is on the court.
2) Above all else, these sort of stats have a lot of noise in them, meaning that it's unwise to draw definitive conclusions. I consider them clues, not a smoking gun.
3) The biggest thing that stands out to me is that of the guys who get minutes, the team plays the best when Ingram & Lopez are paired together. This makes sense to me. They've had nice chemistry in pick & pops, and for as inconsistent as he's been, Lopez provides a scoring threat down low.
4) I'm surprised that his numbers w/Kuzma haven't been good, for similar reasons of having a second scorer next to him. My best guess is that Kuzma really thrives on ball movement, and ball movement reduces when Ingram's on the court.
Last edited by GoldenThroat on Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:01 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
VicXLakers wrote: | I think I'll watch the game and see for myself |
Not like games are decided by one team outscoring the other or anything. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
defense wrote: | What's a reasonable number of minutes to have to consider it a good predictor of how effective those line ups are?
How does those numbers account for strength of opponents or something like whether the team is leading or trailing big? For instance if the Lakers are trailing by say 15 in the middle of the 4th quarter, its stands to reason that more often than not they will make a run before the game is over. |
No, those stats don't account for that. I believe that RPM and BPM do, but tox would be a better person to ask.
I'd say that 150 or 200 minutes in a 2-man lineup is predictive, but that's just a guess. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006 Posts: 11823
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GoldenThroat wrote: | VicXLakers wrote: | I think I'll watch the game and see for myself |
Not like games are decided by one team outscoring the other or anything. |
got any stats for that? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
VicXLakers wrote: | GoldenThroat wrote: | VicXLakers wrote: | I think I'll watch the game and see for myself |
Not like games are decided by one team outscoring the other or anything. |
got any stats for that? |
That's what I've been posting. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006 Posts: 11823
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
no need to watch the game then... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
€H£M£$TR¥ Star Player
Joined: 03 Apr 2017 Posts: 3782
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RT, I respect analytics and its place in our sports, but I tend to side with Vic here. Everyone should be able to play with anyone. As a pro athelete, you gotta be able to read all of your teammates, know what you’re running, be on time with your cut and pass, and put the rock in the damn hole. On topic, I see BI getting comfortable with this years team. As long as he gets PT with Kuz and Zo, and those three get the lions share of minutes this year, they can be deadly... this year. _________________ DEAR BASKETBALL |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
VicXLakers wrote: | no need to watch the game then... |
You're right, I should really watch the Lakers more. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tox Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015 Posts: 17876
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GoldenThroat wrote: | defense wrote: | What's a reasonable number of minutes to have to consider it a good predictor of how effective those line ups are?
How does those numbers account for strength of opponents or something like whether the team is leading or trailing big? For instance if the Lakers are trailing by say 15 in the middle of the 4th quarter, its stands to reason that more often than not they will make a run before the game is over. |
No, those stats don't account for that. I believe that RPM and BPM do, but tox would be a better person to ask.
I'd say that 150 or 200 minutes in a 2-man lineup is predictive, but that's just a guess. |
Yeah, BPM tries to account for that with their term that scales by how good your team is. If a player puts up the same stats on the Warriors and the Bulls, his BPM on the Warriors will be better. The reasoning is that the opposing teams don't really try that hard against the Bulls, so those stats are easier to put up. Meanwhile, teams are always gearing up against the Warriors, so the stats are harder to put up. The scenario that defense mentioned (being down 15 = easier to have a positive +/-) *should* be accounted for by this term,
RPM doesn't factor in score differential (although that's actually a good idea for an RPM+ stat), so it wouldn't account for that. However, if you're down 15, you might be playing bench scrubs which bloat your +/-. RPM does account for that.
As for the question about number of minutes... who knows? No other way to say it. No one's ever (afaik) conducted any sort of rigorous statistical test to have an answer. 2 man stats are really noisy anyways, so you need to check against who the other three players are (as well as factor in whether they're garbage time minutes, crunch time minutes, against starters or bench players, etc.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 37474
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
€H£M£$TR¥ wrote: | RT, I respect analytics and its place in our sports, but I tend to side with Vic here. Everyone should be able to play with anyone. As a pro athelete, you gotta be able to read all of your teammates, know what you’re running, be on time with your cut and pass, and put the rock in the damn hole. On topic, I see BI getting comfortable with this years team. As long as he gets PT with Kuz and Zo, and those three get the lions share of minutes this year, they can be deadly... this year. |
Sure, in an ideal world everyone should be able to play with anyone, but the reality is that some guys play better with some guys than others. Hell, compatibility is part of real life too. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BennyLava Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2012 Posts: 3582
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
VicXLakers wrote: | GoldenThroat wrote: | VicXLakers wrote: | I think I'll watch the game and see for myself |
Not like games are decided by one team outscoring the other or anything. |
got any stats for that? |
I think he meant stats for how many games one team has won when they have outscored the other. Intriguing question.. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tox Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015 Posts: 17876
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
epak wrote: | Per 36:
Year 1: 11.7 pts, 5 rebs, 2.6 asst, 40% fg, 29% 3pt, 62% ft
Year 2: 17.1 pts, 5.8 rebs, 3.1 asst, 46% fg, 30% 3pt, 68% ft
That's pretty good. The thing that I thought would push him over to the Magic Johnson expectation was an increase in ftr. He's at .405 (5.6 fta per 36) compared to .312 (3.4 fta per 36) last year.
Just as a barometer, James Harden has a ftr of .43 this year; has been over .500 the last 7 years. I think the league cracking down on BS foul calls at the 3 point line is dropping his attempts. |
To be clear, Harden's FTR is still way more impressive than Ingram's. 50% of Ingram's FGA are within 5 feet, where most FTs are drawn. Harden is at 29.5%. That means that when Harden does drive, he's getting fouled at much higher rates than when Ingram does drive. In other words, Harden's FTR is deflated because he shoots so many 3s where he doesn't get fouled much (especially post-rule change), and yet it's still higher than BI's.
(You do get fouled outside of 5 feet as well so it's a little bit murkier than what I stated above, but by and large it's true.)
This isn't a diss on Ingram btw. Harden is unreal at getting to the line. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dao Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013 Posts: 5572
|
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GoldenThroat wrote: | 12 wrote: | GoldenThroat wrote: | Here are the Net Ratings of Ingram's 2-Man Lineups
Ingram + Caruso..........+39.5 (2 minutes)
Ingram + Ennis............+32.4 (16 minutes)
Ingram + Lopez..............-0.8 (491 minutes)
Ingram + KCP.................-4.1 (603 minutes)
Ingram + Randle.............-4.3 (232 minutes)
Ingram + Ball.................-5.2 (616 minutes)
Ingram + Clarkson..........-6.9 (231 minutes)
Ingram + Kuzma.............-7.6 (420 minutes)
Ingram + Bogut..............-8.1 (46 minutes)
Ingram + Nance..............-9.2 (269 minutes)
Ingram + Brewer...........-13.8 (80 minutes)
Ingram + Hart..............-15.2 (65 minutes)
Ingram + Deng.............-26.8 (13 minutes)
Ingram + Zubac............-55.5 (5 minutes)
Ingram + Blue.............-143.4 (2 minutes) |
Would you please be so kind and put this in English?
I'm not the sharpest crayon when it comes to +/-
I mean, I know the obvious. But I'm sure there's a lot more to this than meets the eye. |
1) This is how well the team plays when Ingram is on the court with other guys, per 100 possessions. The average Laker game has about 103 possessions in it, so this is roughly how much they outscore the other team over the course of a game when Ingram + the other guy is on the court.
2) Above all else, these sort of stats have a lot of noise in them, meaning that it's unwise to draw definitive conclusions. I consider them clues, not a smoking gun.
3) The biggest thing that stands out to me is that of the guys who get minutes, the team plays the best when Ingram & Lopez are paired together. This makes sense to me. They've had nice chemistry in pick & pops, and for as inconsistent as he's been, Lopez provides a scoring threat down low.
4) I'm surprised that his numbers w/Kuzma haven't been good, for similar reasons of having a second scorer next to him. My best guess is that Kuzma really thrives on ball movement, and ball movement reduces when Ingram's on the court. |
Lonzo-Pope-Ingram-Kuzma-Lopez has a 217 minute sample size (largest of any lineup) and a -2.8 net rating. For an 8-15 team that gets outscored by around 4 points per game, -2.8 net rating should be about what you expect.
The 2nd largest sample size in lineups that include Ingram and Kuzma is the Lonzo-Pope-Ingram-Kuzma-Randle lineup, which of course has a great net rating, though on a small sample size of 52 minutes.
When you throw Clarkson at PG, the Ingram/Kuzma numbers start to get ugly, with various lineups with tiny sample sizes.
Ingram and Kuzma seem to play just fine together imo. 2 man lineup data in a 5 man sport makes oversimplification very easy to do.
Last edited by dao on Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:41 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|