Q12543 wrote:Wiggins has played better in the playoffs than the regular season, but the bar is fairly low. Here are his playoff numbers using a few well-respected metrics:
TS% - 54% (good for Wiggins, barely average in today's NBA, keeps missing too many FTs)
PER - 14.3 (about average)
WS/48 - .054 (below average)
Net Rating -13.3 (only Teague's is worse)
.....and this is from our "best" player in the playoffs. Not good enough.
How about Otto Porter?
TS% - 60%
PER - 18.1
WS/48 - .161
Net Rating -.1
Or Joe Ingles?
TS% - 62%
PER - 14.4
WS/48 - .141
Net Rating +22.2
Or OG Anunoby?
TS% - 80% (!)
PER - 18.9
WS/48 - .215
Net Rating +4.6
It's all small sample sizes, but I don't see anything particularly special in terms of what Wiggins has done. In fact, it's decidedly meh.
The 3rd quarter last game destroyed
net ratings this series for our starters. That would need weeks of basketball to correct. Wiggins has significantly more responsibilities on the court than Ingles and OG so they aren't proper comparisons. His two way play was a major reason we won game 3 and why game 1 was even a game at all. Sometimes you just have to watch the games to see the impact and not always look at the stat sheet when just a quarter can skew those stats for a series good or bad.
Butler has a Net Rating of -.9, yet he was on the floor during that meltdown. KAT and Gibson also have better Net Ratings than Wiggins.
As for Wiggins' role, I will agree he has more responsibility than OG, but certainly not Ingles. That dude has played a major role in Utah's success. How much is he being paid next year versus Wiggins?
Butler played the 4th in garbage time. Wiggins sat the entire 4th. Their variance is easily explainable. Plus Wiggins is repeatedly the only starter playing in the beginning of the second quarter which can be a highly variable unit in terms of performance. Net rating should not be used as a 4 game stat in my mind.
Q12543 wrote:Wiggins has played better in the playoffs than the regular season, but the bar is fairly low. Here are his playoff numbers using a few well-respected metrics:
TS% - 54% (good for Wiggins, barely average in today's NBA, keeps missing too many FTs)
PER - 14.3 (about average)
WS/48 - .054 (below average)
Net Rating -13.3 (only Teague's is worse)
.....and this is from our "best" player in the playoffs. Not good enough.
How about Otto Porter?
TS% - 60%
PER - 18.1
WS/48 - .161
Net Rating -.1
Or Joe Ingles?
TS% - 62%
PER - 14.4
WS/48 - .141
Net Rating +22.2
Or OG Anunoby?
TS% - 80% (!)
PER - 18.9
WS/48 - .215
Net Rating +4.6
It's all small sample sizes, but I don't see anything particularly special in terms of what Wiggins has done. In fact, it's decidedly meh.
The 3rd quarter last game destroyed
net ratings this series for our starters. That would need weeks of basketball to correct. Wiggins has significantly more responsibilities on the court than Ingles and OG so they aren't proper comparisons. His two way play was a major reason we won game 3 and why game 1 was even a game at all. Sometimes you just have to watch the games to see the impact and not always look at the stat sheet when just a quarter can skew those stats for a series good or bad.
I think you're shorting Ingles a bit.
The guy is guarding Paul George in that series... and chipping in an efficient 14 ppg. For the regular season... he did a bit of everything...
12 / 4 / 4. And many advanced stats are kind to the guy, including positive OBPM, DBPM and a 3.3 VORP. Wiggins was negative in all of those categories... and that's part of the dichotomy between Ingles and Wiggins.
Wiggins LOOKS like a basketball player. He LOOKS like he's good. Ingles looks like us at the YMCA. Yesterday, there was a great moment in the game with OKC when George and Ingles were going at it... and George pressured Ingles hard... who crossed him over and made a nice dish for a dunk/layup. You could see the disdain written in Ingles' face going back downcourt... basically...
"What the fuck man... you think I can't dribble? That it's a fluke I've played big minutes in 170+ straight games for a playoff team...?"
You see guys like Ingles at your YMCA? Let me know where you play I'll try and avoid playing against 6'9" dudes that can shoot NBA 3's and guard almost another on a switch.
Of course I'm joking around you make a good point. I'll say this about Wiggins compared to a couple of those players listed. He is younger and this is his first playoff series. Before this string of games the most consequential games were the last game of the season (or stretch of games) or I guess the tourney with Kansas. Joe Ingles played in more consequential games in Europe than Wiggins did before this season. Porter has played in the playoffs 4 out of 5 games in his career. OG has basically been the terrific complimentary player some folks here thought he could be and done it quickly. It's been impressive. A bunch of teams are kicking themselves for passing on him...including the Wolves.
The question is whether what we saw from wiggins this playoffs is a step in the direction of where he will accend to or is it another tease? If it's the former it's pretty promising. We just have to wait and see. Q is right the stats don't show anything too special but man there were times Wiggins was literally everywhere in a good way...he reminded me of Jimmy Butler at times. Honestly I was pretty surprised with it and I've been optimistic about him for a long time. The vision of 2 nasty 2 way players that can really take it to you on both ends seemed somewhat realistic for the first time. I'm interested in seeing more. I have a hard time seeing a team giving up enough in a deal to move Wiggins but sure i'd listen.
I do agree we've seen more juice out of Wiggins than we have before. That's great. The results are still not very impressive. They aren't bad, they just aren't that great.
As long as we have a PG and SF that can't hit 3's in volume, Wiggins is a poor fit on this roster...unless he himself becomes a really good 3-point shooter. It's just tough to match up with a Houston or Golden State when all of your main perimeter players are low-volume 3 point shooters.
So Wig is the poor fit. Not the PG or the SF. I see how that works.
With the money we have to spend, where are we going to find a PG that offsets the lack of accurate volume 3 shooting from Butler and Wiggins? Whether we kept Rubio, keep Teague, or eventually promote Tyus Jones, none of those guys are volume sharp shooters.
So now it's down to Butler vs. Wiggins. If you are absolutely confident that Wiggins will be a two-way stud some day that can handle the rock and make plays for others and be a top tier wing defender, then by all means, look to trade Butler for a sharp shooter. I'm certainly not in that camp.
Q12543 wrote:Wiggins has played better in the playoffs than the regular season, but the bar is fairly low. Here are his playoff numbers using a few well-respected metrics:
TS% - 54% (good for Wiggins, barely average in today's NBA, keeps missing too many FTs)
PER - 14.3 (about average)
WS/48 - .054 (below average)
Net Rating -13.3 (only Teague's is worse)
.....and this is from our "best" player in the playoffs. Not good enough.
How about Otto Porter?
TS% - 60%
PER - 18.1
WS/48 - .161
Net Rating -.1
Or Joe Ingles?
TS% - 62%
PER - 14.4
WS/48 - .141
Net Rating +22.2
Or OG Anunoby?
TS% - 80% (!)
PER - 18.9
WS/48 - .215
Net Rating +4.6
It's all small sample sizes, but I don't see anything particularly special in terms of what Wiggins has done. In fact, it's decidedly meh.
The 3rd quarter last game destroyed
net ratings this series for our starters. That would need weeks of basketball to correct. Wiggins has significantly more responsibilities on the court than Ingles and OG so they aren't proper comparisons. His two way play was a major reason we won game 3 and why game 1 was even a game at all. Sometimes you just have to watch the games to see the impact and not always look at the stat sheet when just a quarter can skew those stats for a series good or bad.
I think you're shorting Ingles a bit.
The guy is guarding Paul George in that series... and chipping in an efficient 14 ppg. For the regular season... he did a bit of everything...
12 / 4 / 4. And many advanced stats are kind to the guy, including positive OBPM, DBPM and a 3.3 VORP. Wiggins was negative in all of those categories... and that's part of the dichotomy between Ingles and Wiggins.
Wiggins LOOKS like a basketball player. He LOOKS like he's good. Ingles looks like us at the YMCA. Yesterday, there was a great moment in the game with OKC when George and Ingles were going at it... and George pressured Ingles hard... who crossed him over and made a nice dish for a dunk/layup. You could see the disdain written in Ingles' face going back downcourt... basically...
"What the fuck man... you think I can't dribble? That it's a fluke I've played big minutes in 170+ straight games for a playoff team...?"
You see guys like Ingles at your YMCA? Let me know where you play I'll try and avoid playing against 6'9" dudes that can shoot NBA 3's and guard almost another on a switch.
Of course I'm joking around you make a good point. I'll say this about Wiggins compared to a couple of those players listed. He is younger and this is his first playoff series. Before this string of games the most consequential games were the last game of the season (or stretch of games) or I guess the tourney with Kansas. Joe Ingles played in more consequential games in Europe than Wiggins did before this season. Porter has played in the playoffs 4 out of 5 games in his career. OG has basically been the terrific complimentary player some folks here thought he could be and done it quickly. It's been impressive. A bunch of teams are kicking themselves for passing on him...including the Wolves.
The question is whether what we saw from wiggins this playoffs is a step in the direction of where he will accend to or is it another tease? If it's the former it's pretty promising. We just have to wait and see. Q is right the stats don't show anything too special but man there were times Wiggins was literally everywhere in a good way...he reminded me of Jimmy Butler at times. Honestly I was pretty surprised with it and I've been optimistic about him for a long time. The vision of 2 nasty 2 way players that can really take it to you on both ends seemed somewhat realistic for the first time. I'm interested in seeing more. I have a hard time seeing a team giving up enough in a deal to move Wiggins but sure i'd listen.
I do agree we've seen more juice out of Wiggins than we have before. That's great. The results are still not very impressive. They aren't bad, they just aren't that great.
As long as we have a PG and SF that can't hit 3's in volume, Wiggins is a poor fit on this roster...unless he himself becomes a really good 3-point shooter. It's just tough to match up with a Houston or Golden State when all of your main perimeter players are low-volume 3 point shooters.
So Wig is the poor fit. Not the PG or the SF. I see how that works.
With the money we have to spend, where are we going to find a PG that offsets the lack of accurate volume 3 shooting from Butler and Wiggins? Whether we kept Rubio, keep Teague, or eventually promote Tyus Jones, none of those guys are volume sharp shooters.
So now it's down to Butler vs. Wiggins. If you are absolutely confident that Wiggins will be a two-way stud some day that can handle the rock and make plays for others and be a top tier wing defender, then by all means, look to trade Butler for a sharp shooter. I'm certainly not in that camp.
What about getting more shooting at another position like PF?
Barnes has that huge deal... but it's a player option after next season... and will still be less than Wiggins next year.
Probably not. You don't think he takes that option? Barnes is kind of similar to Wiggins in that Dallas has sort of made him a top offensive option, but he just isn't that great of a shot maker or play maker for others.
Q12543 wrote:Wiggins has played better in the playoffs than the regular season, but the bar is fairly low. Here are his playoff numbers using a few well-respected metrics:
TS% - 54% (good for Wiggins, barely average in today's NBA, keeps missing too many FTs)
PER - 14.3 (about average)
WS/48 - .054 (below average)
Net Rating -13.3 (only Teague's is worse)
.....and this is from our "best" player in the playoffs. Not good enough.
How about Otto Porter?
TS% - 60%
PER - 18.1
WS/48 - .161
Net Rating -.1
Or Joe Ingles?
TS% - 62%
PER - 14.4
WS/48 - .141
Net Rating +22.2
Or OG Anunoby?
TS% - 80% (!)
PER - 18.9
WS/48 - .215
Net Rating +4.6
It's all small sample sizes, but I don't see anything particularly special in terms of what Wiggins has done. In fact, it's decidedly meh.
The 3rd quarter last game destroyed
net ratings this series for our starters. That would need weeks of basketball to correct. Wiggins has significantly more responsibilities on the court than Ingles and OG so they aren't proper comparisons. His two way play was a major reason we won game 3 and why game 1 was even a game at all. Sometimes you just have to watch the games to see the impact and not always look at the stat sheet when just a quarter can skew those stats for a series good or bad.
I think you're shorting Ingles a bit.
The guy is guarding Paul George in that series... and chipping in an efficient 14 ppg. For the regular season... he did a bit of everything...
12 / 4 / 4. And many advanced stats are kind to the guy, including positive OBPM, DBPM and a 3.3 VORP. Wiggins was negative in all of those categories... and that's part of the dichotomy between Ingles and Wiggins.
Wiggins LOOKS like a basketball player. He LOOKS like he's good. Ingles looks like us at the YMCA. Yesterday, there was a great moment in the game with OKC when George and Ingles were going at it... and George pressured Ingles hard... who crossed him over and made a nice dish for a dunk/layup. You could see the disdain written in Ingles' face going back downcourt... basically...
"What the fuck man... you think I can't dribble? That it's a fluke I've played big minutes in 170+ straight games for a playoff team...?"
You see guys like Ingles at your YMCA? Let me know where you play I'll try and avoid playing against 6'9" dudes that can shoot NBA 3's and guard almost another on a switch.
Of course I'm joking around you make a good point. I'll say this about Wiggins compared to a couple of those players listed. He is younger and this is his first playoff series. Before this string of games the most consequential games were the last game of the season (or stretch of games) or I guess the tourney with Kansas. Joe Ingles played in more consequential games in Europe than Wiggins did before this season. Porter has played in the playoffs 4 out of 5 games in his career. OG has basically been the terrific complimentary player some folks here thought he could be and done it quickly. It's been impressive. A bunch of teams are kicking themselves for passing on him...including the Wolves.
The question is whether what we saw from wiggins this playoffs is a step in the direction of where he will accend to or is it another tease? If it's the former it's pretty promising. We just have to wait and see. Q is right the stats don't show anything too special but man there were times Wiggins was literally everywhere in a good way...he reminded me of Jimmy Butler at times. Honestly I was pretty surprised with it and I've been optimistic about him for a long time. The vision of 2 nasty 2 way players that can really take it to you on both ends seemed somewhat realistic for the first time. I'm interested in seeing more. I have a hard time seeing a team giving up enough in a deal to move Wiggins but sure i'd listen.
I do agree we've seen more juice out of Wiggins than we have before. That's great. The results are still not very impressive. They aren't bad, they just aren't that great.
As long as we have a PG and SF that can't hit 3's in volume, Wiggins is a poor fit on this roster...unless he himself becomes a really good 3-point shooter. It's just tough to match up with a Houston or Golden State when all of your main perimeter players are low-volume 3 point shooters.
So Wig is the poor fit. Not the PG or the SF. I see how that works.
With the money we have to spend, where are we going to find a PG that offsets the lack of accurate volume 3 shooting from Butler and Wiggins? Whether we kept Rubio, keep Teague, or eventually promote Tyus Jones, none of those guys are volume sharp shooters.
So now it's down to Butler vs. Wiggins. If you are absolutely confident that Wiggins will be a two-way stud some day that can handle the rock and make plays for others and be a top tier wing defender, then by all means, look to trade Butler for a sharp shooter. I'm certainly not in that camp.
What about getting more shooting at another position like PF?
Yeah, that's the other dilemma we should probably spend more time talking about. A lot of elite shooting PFs aren't necessarily known as great defenders (e.g. Ryan Anderson). With KAT as our Center, our paint defense has been pretty damn weak. Gibson has been HUGELY important in making us less bad down there. If I thought KAT would become a much better defensive Center, I'd feel better about going out and finding a PF that can really shoot it. Or we could just play Bjelly more and tell him to shoot the damn ball every time he has a crack of day light!
CoolBreeze44 wrote:But then, we got better as a team and he became a bad fit.
We became better as a team because we added Jimmy Butler and Taj Gibson.
This is true, still don't see why that makes Wig a bad fit. Maybe we have too many 23 year old world class players on our team that have averaged 20 points over 4 years? Or too many guys that are long and quickly becoming a defensive stopper?
