2016-2017 NBA Game Thread
- Thread starter Kliq
- Start date
They have to be considering tanking to save their pick. Right? Despite all their talk?
Ingram was - 45 for the game. That's......... A lot
In a lot of ways they are like the Celtics in that they are stockpiling assets that they can either build around or make a big trade. They don't have the veteran talent that the Celtics have obviously, but they have had better luck in the lottery and have some real foundational pieces. They are having a shitty year but the franchise is still trending upwards, they just had a bit of fools gold at the beginning of the season, so now that they look like a bunch of 20 year olds playing together it is turning people off.
In short, I don't think they have to expressly tank to keep their pick, if you are getting blown out by 50 to Dallas you pretty much can go on cruise control.
Ingram has been playing better of late, anyway. Kris Dunn had a good game last night too for a guy being labeled a bust already. 10 points, 8 rebounds, 9 assists, 3 steals and a block.
Per 36 minutes this season:
27.4 pts
.658 true shooting (41 points better than Harden, 57 points better than LeBron, 115 points better than Westbrook)
9.0 rebounds
5.0 assists
2.3 turnovers (better ast/tov ratio than Harden, LeBron or Westbrook)
1.8 blocks
1.2 steals
• Best player on by far the best team in the league, having his best season ever
• Context-independent, the best basketball player in the world (see last couple of Olympic and FIBA tourneys for reference)
• Zero games missed (knock wood)
• Co-anchor of the league's #1 defense with Green (see chart above)
But sure, let's exclude him from all MVP discussion for all eternity cos he fails the all-important criterion of "his team would abjectly suck without him."
Last edited:
He's excluded because a guy is averaging a triple double and people like pretty things. It's the Miguel Cabrera effect.
I can totally see giving it to Harden or Kawhi, since the teams they're carrying would not only suck without them but are also, you know, really good with them. I can't even see a little bit of an argument for Westbrook over Harden or Leonard (beyond the "ten-is-a-nice-round-number" silliness). His team is barely better than .500 by Pythag (+0.8 PD), and at least part of the reason for that is his own mediocre scoring efficiency (.543 ts), obscene turnover rate (5.7 per 36), and mediocre-at-best defense.
Factoring in the "basketball is about using your possessions efficiently," "basketball is 50% defense," and "it's all about winning games" truisms, I think my current ballot would go:
1. Durant
2. Leonard
3. Harden
4. James
5. Westbrook
Factoring in the "basketball is about using your possessions efficiently," "basketball is 50% defense," and "it's all about winning games" truisms, I think my current ballot would go:
1. Durant
2. Leonard
3. Harden
4. James
5. Westbrook
You can't compare efficiency rates outside the context of usage rates. Westbrook has a ridiculous 41.9% usage rate, which is by far the highest in the league and would be the highest ever if he keeps it up (besting Kobe's 2005-06 of 38.7). Of course Durant is going to be more efficient, he's carrying a smaller load, picking and choosing his spots more, and deferring to his team's other great players when he faces more marginal situations.
That doesn't mean Durant has been worse, just that it's not so simple. Maybe Westbrook has to have the ball in his hands so much because his teammates can't create shots. Or maybe he's a total ball hog who should be giving up the ball more. But efficiency numbers on their own don't resolve anything.
That doesn't mean Durant has been worse, just that it's not so simple. Maybe Westbrook has to have the ball in his hands so much because his teammates can't create shots. Or maybe he's a total ball hog who should be giving up the ball more. But efficiency numbers on their own don't resolve anything.
What is true shooting percentage and how does it differ from traditional shooting percentage?
Per 36 minutes this season:
27.4 pts
.658 true shooting (41 points better than Harden, 57 points better than LeBron, 115 points better than Westbrook)
9.0 rebounds
5.0 assists
2.3 turnovers (better ast/tov ratio than Harden, LeBron or Westbrook)
1.8 blocks
1.2 steals
• Best player on by far the best team in the league, having his best season ever
• Context-independent, the best basketball player in the world (see last couple of Olympic and FIBA tourneys for reference)
• Zero games missed (knock wood)
• Co-anchor of the league's #1 defense with Green (see chart above)
But sure, let's exclude him from all MVP discussion for all eternity cos he fails the all-important criterion of "his team would abjectly suck without him."
Lol, solid argument. I have him in my top 5, just not top 4. I think I explained pretty clearly (and soberly?) why I wouldn't put him above Durant, Harden, LeBron or Kawhi. Winning games matters to me, and has traditionally to MVP voters. When was the last time the MVP (or even a top 4 MVP) was awarded to a player on a team with a < 1 point PD?
Just a simple measure of how many points you score per possession used (factoring in three-pointers and using an all-purpose multiplier of .44 of a possession for free throw attempts). FG% (assuming that's what you mean by "traditional shooting percentage") doesn't factor in free throw attempts or three-point shooting, which are clearly huge parts of scoring efficiently — and by extension, winning basketball games.
Harden, for example, looks fairly mediocre by traditional FG% (.448) but makes up for that by shooting a high percentage of his shots from three and by being beastly at getting himself to the FT stripe. Result: a .617 true shooting percentage, and the key cog in a #3-ranked offense that is putting up 112 points per 100 possessions.
Last edited:
One caveat about true shooting percentage. It's baked in with some assumptions about what the expected outcomes, namely how frequently a free throw attempt occurs as a result of a shot attempt. The metric was developed sometime in the nineties (maybe earlier) when the ratio of FTA/FGA was roughly 33%.
These days that ratio is closer to 27% so I'm not sure the .44 adjustment holds anymore. A rigorous test would be to look at the frequency of "and-1" plays but I think this is a good proxy.
These days that ratio is closer to 27% so I'm not sure the .44 adjustment holds anymore. A rigorous test would be to look at the frequency of "and-1" plays but I think this is a good proxy.
Oh, I totally agree. But with the added context of scoring volume (which I provided) scoring efficiency tells a pretty compelling story. KD is averaging 27.4 pts per 36 to Westbrook's 31.9, a marginal difference that is dwarfed by Russ's massive edge in usage, shots and possessions used. As you note, whether that's by necessity or ballhoggery is another question. A bit of both, I'd guess.
Give Russ a nod for being his team's primary ballhandler and assist leader, but subtract a bit for his profligate turnover rate.
Give KD a huge nod for impacting the game defensively in a way Russ cannot dream of doing: nearly 2 blocks a game, locking up opponents in the paint and on the perimeter (again, see chart above), co-leading a defense which is #1 in the league in blocks and #1 overall.
Last edited:
I mean, I can buy that. But if "team would suck without him" is your overriding factor, I'd still take Harden and Kawhi by a fair margin over Westbrook.
Harden is pretty difficult to judge as he is all of a sudden in a situation where the coach and the personnel are a perfect fit for him, I think HOU is probably the deepest team in the league right now, they go ten deep when healthy. Ryan Anderson was sick last game and Dekker started for him and scored 30, Harrell filled in when Capela was out, etc. Their ideal team is probably:
Capela
Anderson
Ariza
Harden
Beverley
Gordon
Harrell
Nene
Dekker
Brewer
Capela
Anderson
Ariza
Harden
Beverley
Gordon
Harrell
Nene
Dekker
Brewer
Based purely on historical precedent — as estimated by B-R’s MVP tracker — the odds are currently:
1. Harden 43.4%
2. Durant 29.2%
3. James 5.6%
4. Leonard 5.4%
5. Westbrook 5.0%
I just think it’s interesting that the mainstream pundits who seem convinced that it’s a simple "two man race" between Harden and Westbrook are not just ignoring the stat-nerds who care about stuff like efficiency, but are also ignoring basic historical NBA precedent. Testament to the silliness of the "triple-double" stat and the power of a seductive narrative ("Westbrook good, Durant evil," e.g.)
1. Harden 43.4%
2. Durant 29.2%
3. James 5.6%
4. Leonard 5.4%
5. Westbrook 5.0%
I just think it’s interesting that the mainstream pundits who seem convinced that it’s a simple "two man race" between Harden and Westbrook are not just ignoring the stat-nerds who care about stuff like efficiency, but are also ignoring basic historical NBA precedent. Testament to the silliness of the "triple-double" stat and the power of a seductive narrative ("Westbrook good, Durant evil," e.g.)
I think what's more interesting than the possible MVP vote is how guys would be drafted today in a vacuum if we were just concerned about this season. I think LBJ, Durant and Leonard would probably all be picked ahead of Harden/Westbrook because of their skills on both ends (and to be clear, Westbrook has been my single favorite player for a long time now, maybe 4-5 seasons).
LeBron is still the best player in the league, as we saw in the Finals last year, and would go first in any draft based on winning this year. He just runs on cruise control in the regular season and saves himself for the playoffs, because he's already got four MVPs and has nothing left to prove.
Agreed with all of that, except that Leonard outplayed him head-to-head in two Finals already and is much better now than he was then.
I didn't know you had this hatred of Russell Westbrook. When Harden is not on the floor, Houston outscores opponents by 7.5 points per 100 possessions and when he is off the floor...they outscore opponents 3.8 points per 100 possessions, a difference of a little under 4. The Thunder's ratio is 15.8 when Westbrook is and isn't on the floor.
The Spurs would suck more without Kawhi than OKC would suck without Westbrook? The fucking Spurs could start you and me at the 4 and 5 and win 45 games.
I think you could make a case for KD over LeBron mostly based on age: in the NBA, it's way better to be 28 than 32; and KD is at the top of his game (especially defensively), whereas LeBron, incredible as he is, has dropped off ever so slightly from where he was 2-3 years ago. It's probably most noticeable in his true shooting %, which has dipped from a peak of .650 to .580-.600 over the last couple seasons, partly I think due to his inability to just fly by and dunk over people quite as explosively as he did in his 20s.
It sure did seem like LeBron stepped up a notch to peak level in last year's playoffs, though. Could be that he was taking it easy the regular season, or the huge amount of rest he got in between series when the Cavs were sweeping teams, or some extra visits to his, er, pharmacist in Miami, or some combo of the above.
Either way ... yeah, if the question is just "who's the best player in the world right now?" I think LeBron and Durant are clearly 1A/1B, and have been for 5-6 years now (with possibly a one-year interruption by Curry's 2015-16 best offensive season ever).
It sure did seem like LeBron stepped up a notch to peak level in last year's playoffs, though. Could be that he was taking it easy the regular season, or the huge amount of rest he got in between series when the Cavs were sweeping teams, or some extra visits to his, er, pharmacist in Miami, or some combo of the above.
Either way ... yeah, if the question is just "who's the best player in the world right now?" I think LeBron and Durant are clearly 1A/1B, and have been for 5-6 years now (with possibly a one-year interruption by Curry's 2015-16 best offensive season ever).
Last edited:
lol, me neither. Dude's an absolute freak of nature and amazing to watch. I have him #5 -- same spot as B-R's nominally neutral MVP Tracker.
You gotta factor in quality of teammates and replacements into that calculus, though. The Rockets have a much better supporting cast than OKC, who trot out guys like Cameron Payne and Semaj Christon when Russ sits. By RPM, which tries to correct for quality of teammates and replacements, Westbrook is currently +6.55 and Harden is +5.29 — pretty close to the margin of error for a half-season's sample.
Haha, could be, because Popovich alone. But I wasn't saying the Spurs would suck more without Kawhi than OKC without RW. I was just saying that "whose team would suck most without them" does not necessarily have to be, and has not historically been, an overriding criterion in MVP selection.
Fwiw, I think the Spurs would be significantly worse with Westbrook and a replacement level SF than they are with Kawhi. And even if we stick to guys who play the same position: I think the Thunder would probably be better than they currently are with a starting backcourt Curry and Oladipo, and the Warriors would probably be a bit worse with Westbrook in place of Curry.
Last edited:
You can debate the MVP on a statistical level, but as an award that is voted on by writers the "narrative" always wins out. If Westbrook averages a triple double and his team competes at a high level, he wins. However if the Thunder finish in the middle of the pack his individual accomplishments will probably play negatively (i.e. "he was incredible, but didn't make his team better"). Noting this, it'll probably be Harden or Kawhi. I don't see any way that Durant or Lebron gets in the conversation seriously as both are seen (perhaps unfairly) as cogs in teams laden with All-Stars. Their individual accomplishments will always be downgraded because of how their teams are viewed.
All I know is I'm gonna laugh my ass off if Westbrook's assist or rebound average drops to 9.9 and his MVP support suddenly collapses.
Huh? Certainly not in 2013. In the 2013 Finals LeBron averaged 25.3/10.9/7.0, with 2.0 SPG/.9B PG, with .529 TS% on 29.7% USG. And he had a triple-double in Game 6, followed by 37/12 in Game 7, both of which his team won. Kawhi had 14.6/11.1/.9/2.0/0.4, with .583 TS% on 17.5% USG.
LeBron probably outplayed Kawhi in 2014 too. LeBron had a .679 TS% on 32.9% UGS, while Kawhi was .753 on 20.5. Kawhi was insanely efficient, but I'll take LeBron's greater volume -- he carried a much bigger burden. Kawhi was neither the Spurs' primary scorer nor primary ball-handler (Tony Parker had greater usage and greater FGA), while LeBron was both. The idea that Kawhi somehow shut down LeBron in the Finals is a total myth. The Spurs just had a much better overall team that year.
The overall stats I think mask the game by game specifics, this piece gets into it some:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2611673-lebron-james-kawhi-leonard-rivalry-evolving-into-battle-of-equals
1) You specifically referenced the 2013 and 14 finals, that article is mostly about what's happened since then.
2) That's a wonderfully cherry-picked article, since it highlights in detail the games where Leonard outplayed James while it ignores or only casually alludes to all the 13-14 Finals games where James outplayed Leonard.
I mean, it's apples and oranges to an extent (much like Westbrook to Harden to Curry), since they had different roles, but my original point was just that I don't think it's so clearcut that LBJ is a better choice for a single playoff series than Leonard in 2017.
Zaza Pachulia just bitch slapped Luke Babbitt. He is so getting a technical.
Edit: Babbitt got a T and Zaza got a flagrant one.
I love that Pachulia has embraced his role as an NBA super-villain.
Edit: Babbitt got a T and Zaza got a flagrant one.
I love that Pachulia has embraced his role as an NBA super-villain.
Last edited:
Please with your snowflake drama. He put a hard foul on Westbrook who sold the shit out of it after Westbrook fouled him hard before and he retaliated on Luke Babbitt who shiver-screened him. I mean, he is a goon but he is no worse than than those two and countless of other NBA players who make their fouls count.
In other news, Dion Waiters annual emergence from his hole to see his shadow, plus the combination of Jrue Holiday and Terrence Jones taking down the Cavs despite Kyrie going for 49 (Charles on New Orleans: "There are lot of side streets Shaq and I have been down that you haven't been down Ernie") as well as Giannis and Jabari (59 points combined) taking down Houston make this one of the more awesome late January nights in the Association in a while.
As a side note, this was Waiters message to a contender that they need to trade for him. I am almost certain someone will bite too. We want Dion Waiters in the playoffs. We need him there!
Zaza has always been a goon, he embraced his role as an Eastern European (well, Cossack) villain a long time ago. I don't see what there is to love about a guy taking liberties on non-basketball plays but whatever.
The New Orleans game was insane, no AD but Terrence Jones plays the game of his life and outplays LeBron and they beat Cleveland.
The New Orleans game was insane, no AD but Terrence Jones plays the game of his life and outplays LeBron and they beat Cleveland.
Were you watching when KG screened him into another dimension during the last game of the 2008 Hawks/Celtics playoff? Zaza gooned it up back then too but KG gives as good as he gets - and that wasn't a basketball play either. I thought it was awesome but I am ok with the physical aspects of the game.
Its worth noting that the plays that are called flagrant fouls today were maybe common fouls and often not called at all back in the day. Hell, the Bad Boys and the 1990s Knicks were built specifically to inflict physical beatings on other teams. And the 1980s Celtics and Lakers were no finesse teams either.
You'd love him if he were your goon, tho. That's the thing about goons.
Warriors push their regular season streak of games without consecutive losses to 131 with the loss in Miami. Props to Dion for being totally unconscious and to Spoelstra for keeping that team feisty.
I blame the road B2B, the absence of Andre, and possibly the South Beach clubs...
Warriors push their regular season streak of games without consecutive losses to 131 with the loss in Miami. Props to Dion for being totally unconscious and to Spoelstra for keeping that team feisty.
I blame the road B2B, the absence of Andre, and possibly the South Beach clubs...
How long would it take for Zaza and Varejao to complete a game of 1-on-1 to 15?
Cleanly and without falling to the ground on every possession? Infinity. Perhaps beyond...
January 23rd with a full evening the night before spent in Miami (Draymond's Snapchat showed them en route yesterday afternoon). I would use language "more probable than not" in this case and feel very good about it.
I love KG but he was a dirty player and a fake tough guy and I thought that at the time (although I was in 8th grade so you wouldn't have heard from me on SoSH). The Bad Boys and 90s Knicks played a rough game that consequently led to horrible basketball games that hardly resembled the sport. Just because something was tolerated in the past doesn't make it okay to do in the present. Night Train Lane used to obliterate guys over the middle but that still doesn't make Vontez Burfict not a piece of shit when he does the same thing today. Of course I'm talking to the guy who thought it wasn't a big deal that Draymond punched LeBron in the nuts in Game 5 so...
1. I am not arguing that the 1990s basketball was a great product nor am I arguing that trying to hurt guys on purpose is a good thing. All I am saying is that you are acting as if Pachulia's two fouls I referenced - the one on Westbrook, who fouled Pachulia first and the one this evening where he retaliated via open face slap against Babbitt after Babbitt unnecessarily blind-sided him at the line - are nothingburgers in the context of what used to be considered fouls. I prefer the modern NBA product to be clear but its still a physical game and guys get grabbed, slapped, elbowed and manhandled on just about every sequence. As side note, Westbrook has vowed to get Zaza back so were aren't done their battles yet.
2. Draymond didn't "punch" LeBron in the nuts. He swiped at him. There is a difference. I wasn't defending him and it ultimately cost the Warriors a championship. But as was the case with Adams in the prior series, people ignore that these guys are playing their asses off against one another every sequence and, per my paragraph above, shit happens all game, every game. Hell, LeBron and Draymond have history going back years and LeBron is physical as hell with everyone so while Draymond was clearly stupid there, there may have been years of frustration in that ill advised move. However we don't know who is innocent and who is dirty just because the cameras and the viewers don't watch what is going on between guys in every sequence.
3. I like rivalries and I like rancor and I like shit talking. It makes sports more fun. I prefer it to guys dapping up after every game and meeting each other for dinner or at the club. At the end of the day, they are all a bunch of millionaires with little to no attachment to the cities the play in so anytime we get some real subplots or beef, it makes the games more interesting.
I think the best example is the McHale clothesline of Rambis. That play was incredibly dirty but we all loved it because fuck Rambis and his stupid goggles. If Draymond did something similar, this board would implode. Unless it was against Carmelo because then it would be funny.
Sixers beat the Clippers... Down 19 in the third go on a 62-32 run the rest of the way.
Embiid and Okafor out...
Embiid and Okafor out...