DLO and Beasley

[Coolbreeze44]

Classic Cam, ending your post saying Jaden should never play the 4 ever again. He definitely looked overmatched during the series. I think you can make the argument with added strength and experience he might be able to handle some minutes at the 4 down the road. But no chance of that according to Cam.

Reasonable NBA observers could make an argument Dlo should never play Pg for the wolves again.

Cam how much worse would Dlo have had to play in the Memphis series for you to moderately change your stance on him?

We have seen DLO play some horrendous basketball at times, but there has never been even a hint of critical thought from Cam. So I wouldn't hold your breath.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Classic Cam, ending your post saying Jaden should never play the 4 ever again. He definitely looked overmatched during the series. I think you can make the argument with added strength and experience he might be able to handle some minutes at the 4 down the road. But no chance of that according to Cam.

Reasonable NBA observers could make an argument Dlo should never play Pg for the wolves again.

Cam how much worse would Dlo have had to play in the Memphis series for you to moderately change your stance on him?

We have seen DLO play some horrendous basketball at times, but there has never been even a hint of critical thought from Cam. So I wouldn't hold your breath.

This isn't actually true and we can revisit game threads as evidence if you'd like. I am guilty, however, of not piling on the guy after everyone's already pointed out the mistakes and/or poor play from him.

Once again, I'm not sure you should be speaking on any matter of favoritism, however. I'll leave it at that.

[Carlos Danger]

Here's where I have an issue with this response. I've presented facts to support my claim. You presented a criticism with one of my facts. I supported my claim further. Your rebuttal, if I can call it that, is to claim that it's coincidental while asking very particular questions that could apply to every team's record in every circumstance. Not to mention, the sample you referenced is already accounted for in the data that was shared prior. I'm just not seeing any kind of evidence that would support your point, whatever that might be. It makes me wonder what we're even doing here.

From my standpoint, we are debating the best way to determine a players value to the team. Is it by the Win/Losses in the games they played? Or, is it by looking at other statistics.

My opinion (which will not change) is that some of the other advanced stats are a better way to determine a player's value (PER, WS, VORP, +/-, on/off etc.) I see wins/losses as something determined not by one or two players, but by a combination of all players (on both teams). Obviously sometimes the team will win even though one of those players lays an egg. That's why I don't think W/L is the best measuring stick for determining individual player contributions.

[Monster]

While I understand why people promote the Wolves record with Towns/Russell, I'm not 100% sold that is the best measuring stick. Personally, I trust the advanced stats to determine a players worth. Based on that, Towns is by far our best player. So logically, anyone paired with him for the purposes of "record with Towns and Player X" should be better than the record when they don't play. But that's more because of Towns than whatever player you plug into that equation. What's the Wolves record when Towns/Jmac suit up? I don't have a site to get this info, but I did a manual count and came up with 34-21 (.618). Almost exactly the same as Towns/DLO. Now - even though I'm not a fan of DLO, I would concede DLO gave more value to the team this season than JMac (but not in the playoffs). The advanced stats support that. I'm just pointing out the team record with those two argument isn't an iron clad show stopper in my mind.

I'm not sure you actually do understand why the record with Towns and Russell is mentioned based on your take here. It's not really a measuring stick, and you could certainly pair X player's record with Towns (or Russell) to come up with solid findings. However, the record presented shows that when those two play the Wolves are competitive, and when one or both of them are unavailable they struggle. It's really that simple.

Russell was traded to Minnesota on February 7th, 2020. The Wolves, collectively, are 73-95 (.435) in regular season games since then.

In that timeframe, Minnesota is 58-61 (.487) when Russell plays and 15-34 (.306) when he doesn't.

In that timeframe, Minnesota is 63-62 (.504) when Towns plays and 10-33 (.233) when he doesn't.

In that timeframe, Minnesota is 6-26 (.188) when Russell plays, but Towns does NOT.

In that timeframe, Minnesota is 11-27 (.289) when Towns plays, but Russell does NOT.

In that timeframe, Minnesota is 52-36 (.591) when both Towns and Russell play.

That is a DRASTIC difference where both players together make a significant impact in the win-loss column. That is why it is mentioned.

No, I understand perfectly. But again, the records can be simply a coincidence. What were the records of the teams played in those samples? How were the Wolves playing over all during those samples? Were other (key) players out during those times? If I take the time to screw around with data, can I come up with other players that make DRASTIC differences in record?

As an example, the Wolves won 5 of the last 6 games DLO sat out. Now that's a very small sample. But they were playing well at the end of the year and it didn't seem to matter if DLO was in or not. I know they were not playing great at the start of the year when many were touting "we are 0-6 without DLO". That was also a very small sample. Again, I get why the pro-DLO guys do that. I don't fault them. I'm just saying like most things, we could probably dissect it further and possible come to another conclusion. I don't see myself getting sucked into the rabbit hole of spending a ton of time on this. We all have our opinions and they probably won't change anyway. So I'll leave that as my opinion/view of this matter.

Here's where I have an issue with this response. I've presented facts to support my claim. You presented a criticism with one of my facts. I supported my claim further. Your rebuttal, if I can call it that, is to claim that it's coincidental while asking very particular questions that could apply to every team's record in every circumstance. Not to mention, the sample you referenced is already accounted for in the data that was shared prior. I'm just not seeing any kind of evidence that would support your point, whatever that might be. It makes me wonder what we're even doing here.

I get what Carlos is going for here but the reality is that to assess what is being asked by him someone would need to go back to every game analyze so many factors. In addition to a strength of schedule type of thing someone would need to look at who was and wasn't playing in each game, possibly look at whether that team was playing well by looking at the past few games and if you REALLY wanted to know then you may need to watch every game to find out various nuances like did the other team or key players from that team play poorly...but was that due to defense or because they sucked or maybe there was an affect because Wolf officiating home and road games matchups and some of this is going to simply be subjective.

Any of these stats or numbers we can utilize to make sense of things and help us lead to a conclusion. Nobody here is saying one set of stats or data points is conclusive but some does feel pretty solid to make some sort of conclusion from. Pro Football Focus attempts to do a grading system for NFL players for fans benefit (and to make money lol). I think it's worth checking out but I don't completely buy into the numbers they have. Was it one person watching that game that graded it? Do they actually know what they are doing? How well can someone really evaluate what a RG or a QB does during a game and is that the same person grading those positions as they are the linebackers? Idk I'm not saying it's lame or not worth anything but I still have skeptical about it even if I do check the numbers right away when a guy I basically know nothing about I want to do some research on. I always feel like if PFF says the guy is really good he probably is above average. If they say he sucks pretty bad he probably is below average at least. It's a worthwhile jumping off point. I feel that way about a site like 538's RAPTOR stats. Is there something there I hadn't considered and is there something else I can find to back that up?

So Carlos having some skepticism about any stat is something I can get on board with. It would be fun to spend more time diving into analyzing some of these topics or stats even deeper but...I got other stuff I should be doing or want to do. Most professional sports teams now are looking at all kinds of data points that fans aren't or maybe don't even have easy access to. That doesn't mean they come to good conclusions. That why having people that look at things from various perspectives has a lot of value.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Here's where I have an issue with this response. I've presented facts to support my claim. You presented a criticism with one of my facts. I supported my claim further. Your rebuttal, if I can call it that, is to claim that it's coincidental while asking very particular questions that could apply to every team's record in every circumstance. Not to mention, the sample you referenced is already accounted for in the data that was shared prior. I'm just not seeing any kind of evidence that would support your point, whatever that might be. It makes me wonder what we're even doing here.

From my standpoint, we are debating the best way to determine a players value to the team. Is it by the Win/Losses in the games they played? Or, is it by looking at other statistics.

My opinion (which will not change) is that some of the other advanced stats are a better way to determine a player's value (PER, WS, VORP, +/-, on/off etc.) I see wins/losses as something determined not by one or two players, but by a combination of all players (on both teams). Obviously sometimes the team will win even though one of those players lays an egg. That's why I don't think W/L is the best measuring stick for determining individual player contributions.

That wasn't the debate on my end, but I will say that I don't disagree with any of what you said here and I have repeatedly promoted all-inclusive analysis using those metrics (and context) over honing in on any one statistical measure, such as using on/off numbers to either validate or invalidate a player's value, for example. I think your approach in determining that is agreeable, but at the end of the day win-loss record is still important and that's why I think it's fair to include, especially when the with/without is as extreme as it is for Karl-Anthony Towns and D'Angelo Russell. The record matches the eye test in that case too.

[Q-is-here]

The narrative did start to turn a bit in the second half of the season when the Wolves went 5-2 when DLO was out of the lineup. So may be he started becoming less critical to their success? Small sample size of course.

The thing that bugs the shit out of me is the shooting. There is no reason he shouldn't have been canning nearly 40% of 3's this season in a lineup that featured KAT and Ant. 34% just isn't going to cut it. I mean, Ant took a TON of difficult 3's and is by no means a pure shooter, yet he even made a higher percentage than DLO.

I'm still of the opinion that we just ride his contract out. Keep diversifying the offense by mixing DLO on and off ball, ensuring Lil' Mac is a regular rotation player from the start, and increasing Ant's play making workload. May be DLO's presence (or lack thereof) in the lineup will have a more neutral impact if we keep growing and strengthening the players around him.

[FNG]

Here's where I have an issue with this response. I've presented facts to support my claim. You presented a criticism with one of my facts. I supported my claim further. Your rebuttal, if I can call it that, is to claim that it's coincidental while asking very particular questions that could apply to every team's record in every circumstance. Not to mention, the sample you referenced is already accounted for in the data that was shared prior. I'm just not seeing any kind of evidence that would support your point, whatever that might be. It makes me wonder what we're even doing here.

From my standpoint, we are debating the best way to determine a players value to the team. Is it by the Win/Losses in the games they played? Or, is it by looking at other statistics.

My opinion (which will not change) is that some of the other advanced stats are a better way to determine a player's value (PER, WS, VORP, +/-, on/off etc.) I see wins/losses as something determined not by one or two players, but by a combination of all players (on both teams). Obviously sometimes the team will win even though one of those players lays an egg. That's why I don't think W/L is the best measuring stick for determining individual player contributions.

I completely agree with what you are saying here, Anthony. We are all Wolves fans here, and while that's great, it causes us to overvalue our players at times...it's what fans do. But unfortunately a deep dive into DLO's advanced stats doesn't present a very positive picture. We talk about DLO being a good shooter, but his TS% is consistently below the league average...and as Q points out below, that was inexcusable this season when defenses had to focus on Ant and KAT, 2 guys who were both more productive and more efficient than DLO. Secondly as I have documented many times before, DLO has had a negative net rating on basketballreference.com every year of his career, including this season (which I rate at his best) and his all-star season...only Andrew Wiggins has the same poor results using this measure, although he at least ended up this season neutral. Finally, although he finished this season with a positive on/off of 3.1, he has been negative by this measure in 4 of his previous 6 seasons...on/off is admittedly only one of many measures to evaluate a player's value, but it's telling when your team performs better when you are on the bench in over half of your seasons.

I have to admit I enjoy kekgeek's updates on how the Wolves do when KAT and DLO both play compared to when one of them is out...it helps me appreciate our two max guys a little more when I'm feeling down on them. After all, winning should be the most important thing. But Carlos is correct in saying this is a team game, and team performance might be one of the messiest measures of a player's worth...way too many variables involved. I think the Tyus Jones vs. Ja Morant discussion illustrates this best, and it's not a small sample size. Memphis was good this year when Ja was the starting PG, going 36-22 for a .621 winning percentage. But they were indisputably great in the 24 games Ja was out. With Tyus starting at PG the Griz went 20-4, for a remarkable .833 winning percentage! As much as Tyus's game is appreciated by many here, I rather doubt that anyone here is prepared to conclude he is better than Ja...nope. I look at the Wolves record when both KAT and DLO play the same way I look at the Grizzlies' record when Tyus starts in place of Ja...interesting and fun to talk about, but not very compelling when analyzing an individual player's value. Like Carlos, I much prefer relying on deep analytical data.

[kekgeek]

Here's where I have an issue with this response. I've presented facts to support my claim. You presented a criticism with one of my facts. I supported my claim further. Your rebuttal, if I can call it that, is to claim that it's coincidental while asking very particular questions that could apply to every team's record in every circumstance. Not to mention, the sample you referenced is already accounted for in the data that was shared prior. I'm just not seeing any kind of evidence that would support your point, whatever that might be. It makes me wonder what we're even doing here.

From my standpoint, we are debating the best way to determine a players value to the team. Is it by the Win/Losses in the games they played? Or, is it by looking at other statistics.

My opinion (which will not change) is that some of the other advanced stats are a better way to determine a player's value (PER, WS, VORP, +/-, on/off etc.) I see wins/losses as something determined not by one or two players, but by a combination of all players (on both teams). Obviously sometimes the team will win even though one of those players lays an egg. That's why I don't think W/L is the best measuring stick for determining individual player contributions.

I completely agree with what you are saying here, Anthony. We are all Wolves fans here, and while that's great, it causes us to overvalue our players at times...it's what fans do. But unfortunately a deep dive into DLO's advanced stats doesn't present a very positive picture. We talk about DLO being a good shooter, but his TS% is consistently below the league average...and as Q points out below, that was inexcusable this season when defenses had to focus on Ant and KAT, 2 guys who were both more productive and more efficient than DLO. Secondly as I have documented many times before, DLO has had a negative net rating on basketballreference.com every year of his career, including this season (which I rate at his best) and his all-star season...only Andrew Wiggins has the same poor results using this measure, although he at least ended up this season neutral. Finally, although he finished this season with a positive on/off of 3.1, he has been negative by this measure in 4 of his previous 6 seasons...on/off is admittedly only one of many measures to evaluate a player's value, but it's telling when your team performs better when you are on the bench in over half of your seasons.

I have to admit I enjoy kekgeek's updates on how the Wolves do when KAT and DLO both play compared to when one of them is out...it helps me appreciate our two max guys a little more when I'm feeling down on them. After all, winning should be the most important thing. But Carlos is correct in saying this is a team game, and team performance might be one of the messiest measures of a player's worth...way too many variables involved. I think the Tyus Jones vs. Ja Morant discussion illustrates this best, and it's not a small sample size. Memphis was good this year when Ja was the starting PG, going 36-22 for a .621 winning percentage. But they were indisputably great in the 24 games Ja was out. With Tyus starting at PG the Griz went 20-4, for a remarkable .833 winning percentage! As much as Tyus's game is appreciated by many here, I rather doubt that anyone here is prepared to conclude he is better than Ja...nope. I look at the Wolves record when both KAT and DLO play the same way I look at the Grizzlies' record when Tyus starts in place of Ja...interesting and fun to talk about, but not very compelling when analyzing an individual player's value. Like Carlos, I much prefer relying on deep analytical data.

I'm really curios on the net rating thing (I'm seeing what you are seeing on basketball reference). But according to cleaningtheglass.com Dlo had a +4.6 net rating. I know cleaning the glass doesn't use garbage time but that is almost an 8 pt difference in net rating. Also dlo had an on/off number of +3.1

[Carlos Danger]

Does anyone have a good site to pull data that we could rank DLO's advanced stats (against others at his position this season)? I guess even that might be controversial. Do we rank him as a PG or a SG? I'm just curious where he ranked for things like:

PER
Win Shares
VORP
+/-

My go to is Basketball Reference, but it looks like I can't filter by "qualified", so I would have to do a lot manual crap. And since I ain't getting paid for none of this crap - I'm hoping someone has an easier way.

[kekgeek]

Does anyone have a good site to pull data that we could rank DLO's advanced stats (against others at his position this season)? I guess even that might be controversial. Do we rank him as a PG or a SG? I'm just curious where he ranked for things like:

PER
Win Shares
VORP
+/-

My go to is Basketball Reference, but it looks like I can't filter by "qualified", so I would have to do a lot manual crap. And since I ain't getting paid for none of this crap - I'm hoping someone has an easier way.

According to NBA.com (with the filter of Gaurds, played 30 games and 30 minutes a game, 51 players qualified)

Dlo ranks
+/-: 13th
PIE: 27th

Vorp and win shares are not used on NBA.com

According to 538.com
Dlo ranked 63rd overall of all NBA players in Wins above replacement