Page 2 of 5
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2023 4:45 pm
by Monster
FWIW
https://twitter.com/the_bball_index/status/1622641272484921344?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
This one from a few days earlier you can actually see were Rivers is.
https://twitter.com/piotter_matt/status/1622649298172117015?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
I think Rivers is a good defender overall doesn't do well against some matchups but is a pretty good team defender. Both he and Prince have value because they can do a little of everything and typically don't do stupid stuff. Prince does have a dumb turnover here and there but he is pretty steady. He can get you a bucket every once in a while with some nice game that you weren't exactly expecting. Rivers has those multiple fakes on the perimeter and then drives if he got what he wants. I think Prince is more meh as a defender than Rivers but he does that from a guy that can meh guard some guys 2-4. Like Rivers some matchups are simply not going to end well partly because he doesn't have the physical tools.
I remember Avery Bradley especially later in his career was a guy that had poor defensive stats but that made zero sense if you watched him play. He wasn't a stopper but he seemed to be an asset on that end.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2023 5:16 pm
by Q-is-here
monsterpile wrote:FWIW
https://twitter.com/the_bball_index/status/1622641272484921344?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
This one from a few days earlier you can actually see were Rivers is.
https://twitter.com/piotter_matt/status/1622649298172117015?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
I think Rivers is a good defender overall doesn't do well against some matchups but is a pretty good team defender. Both he and Prince have value because they can do a little of everything and typically don't do stupid stuff. Prince does have a dumb turnover here and there but he is pretty steady. He can get you a bucket every once in a while with some nice game that you weren't exactly expecting. Rivers has those multiple fakes on the perimeter and then drives if he got what he wants. I think Prince is more meh as a defender than Rivers but he does that from a guy that can meh guard some guys 2-4. Like Rivers some matchups are simply not going to end well partly because he doesn't have the physical tools.
I remember Avery Bradley especially later in his career was a guy that had poor defensive stats but that made zero sense if you watched him play. He wasn't a stopper but he seemed to be an asset on that end.
Good stuff Monster. Yeah, I think Rivers is a "good soldier", so coaches can't help but play him as Abe points out. Tries hard on defense, doesn't screw up much on offense, big enough to guard 1-3 on most opposing teams. Just an easy guy for a coach to plug in and trust.
But despite the coach-friendly qualities, the advanced stats on him are pretty miserable overall. Are we sure a guy like NAW can't help us more??? We'll find out.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2023 6:26 pm
by Monster
Q-was-here wrote:monsterpile wrote:FWIW
https://twitter.com/the_bball_index/status/1622641272484921344?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
This one from a few days earlier you can actually see were Rivers is.
https://twitter.com/piotter_matt/status/1622649298172117015?s=46&t=fYSoMhj6YyORk5MM5-iZ_A
I think Rivers is a good defender overall doesn't do well against some matchups but is a pretty good team defender. Both he and Prince have value because they can do a little of everything and typically don't do stupid stuff. Prince does have a dumb turnover here and there but he is pretty steady. He can get you a bucket every once in a while with some nice game that you weren't exactly expecting. Rivers has those multiple fakes on the perimeter and then drives if he got what he wants. I think Prince is more meh as a defender than Rivers but he does that from a guy that can meh guard some guys 2-4. Like Rivers some matchups are simply not going to end well partly because he doesn't have the physical tools.
I remember Avery Bradley especially later in his career was a guy that had poor defensive stats but that made zero sense if you watched him play. He wasn't a stopper but he seemed to be an asset on that end.
Good stuff Monster. Yeah, I think Rivers is a "good soldier", so coaches can't help but play him as Abe points out. Tries hard on defense, doesn't screw up much on offense, big enough to guard 1-3 on most opposing teams. Just an easy guy for a coach to plug in and trust.
But despite the coach-friendly qualities, the advanced stats on him are pretty miserable overall. Are we sure a guy like NAW can't help us more??? We'll find out.
One thing Rivers has going for him which is partly because he moves the ball and picks his spots...he rarely turns the ball over. NAW on the other hand does turn the ball over more like an actual PG or someone who is a higher usage lead guard.
I think the way NAW gets on the floor is because of his defense and hopefully that 3 point shot doesn't completely tank. At the very least he will be better than Wendell Moore and better defender than Forbes...and being better on offense than what Forbes did this year unfortunately isn't too hard. I think NAW can go out and get some buckets to some extent more than Rivers at this point which could be handy. He could take some of Matt Ryan's minutes too especially if he keeps shooting reasonably well from 3. I think it's also likely Conley plays a couple minutes less than Russell so there is a little more opportunity for minutes as well especially till McLaughlin is good to go in terms of health. I think the guy that needs to watch out losing minutes to NAW is Nowell.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2023 6:52 pm
by Lipoli390
I was a big NAW booster in the 2019 draft. As a result, I followed him pretty closely his first two years hoping I could say "I told you so." Now I readily admit I was wrong about him. He's just not very good. He's not terrible athletic or quick, yet now long or skilled enough to make up for his lack of athleticism and quickness. So far in his career he's shot under 40% from the filed and a 33.7% three-point shooter. While he's shooting much better than those averages this season, it's on a very low volume. better from behind the arc this season. I've just finished watching a bunch of his video highlights from this season and I see the same lack of quickness and athleticism I noticed following him his first three seasons in the League. I know readily admit I was wrong about him back in 2019. At best, he's an end of bench guy.
https://youtu.be/0MYdI1nUCfs
After you've watched this video, I think you'll conclude that Nowell has nothing to worry. NAW simply doesn't play at Nowell's level. Honestly, I think Moore as a 21 year old rookie is as good as the NAW at age 24 in his 4th season. I'll add that Moore is physically stronger at 217 pounds compared to NAW's 204 and has a significantly longer wingspan at 7'0.5 compared to 6'9.5.
Let's not kid ourselves about NAW's role in this deal. He was a throw in. From the Wolves perspective, this deal was all about (1) getting Conley as a better fit Gobert, (2) preserving DLO's salary slot in the face of uncertainty surrounding re-signing DLO, and (3) restocking the Wolves depleted draft cupboard. NAW will spend most of his time on the Wolves bench the rest of this season. After the season, the Wolves won't extend a qualifying offer and he'll become a free agent looking to catch on with a team at a minimum salary.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 8:37 am
by Sundog
Man, I don't know, he did look pretty lost in that one game. But looks much better in this one (not perfect, a couple of bad turnovers): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RolFOEZS2Vw
I'm not ready to write him off, just like I was y ready to write Nowell off earlier this year.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 8:42 am
by Carlos Danger
Camden wrote:Carlos Danger wrote:Camden wrote:Chris Finch and Tim Connelly love Austin Rivers. He's not getting waived.
Fair enough. I like/trust VORP, but certainly realize it's not the end all (although Forbes was team worst VORP and so I was happy to see him cut).
Do you know or have an opinion why Rivers (and Prince) show up so poorly in VORP? They seem to be exceptions as people here seem to really like their game. Granted, we are literally talking about fractions of VORP in both their cases i.e. (.01) - so pretty much neutral vs. terrible is how I read that.
Value Over Replacement Player (VORP) converts the value of the Box Plus-Minus (BPM) into an estimate of the player's contribution, which is parameterized with respect to the Replacement Player.
If a player doesn't perform well in BPM, it's likely he won't show well in VORP either. Of course, availability/playing time is accounted for so sometimes they don't match up. For instance, a high usage player might have a high BPM but replacement level VORP if they've missed a number of games. Similarly, an end of the bench player that doesn't play very much typically won't be represented well in VORP no matter their BPM.
BPM is a consolidation of all the advanced metrics Basketball Reference keeps track of (USG%, TS%, AST%, TRB%, STL%, BLK%, TOV%, 3PAr, etc.), Offensive Rating of the Player
and Team, and Net Rating. Minutes, Team Minutes, and Games Played are incorporated as well.
BPM is a very solid catch-all metric, as is VORP, in my opinion. There's always going to be some noise in plus-minus or net rating derived statistics, though. You just have to find the ones that have lower error rates than others -- EPM/eW is very good. RPM is good as well, but has the occasional misrepresented player. It's usually a good idea to reference multiple catch-all's and see if they're pointing the same way. That's usually a solid indication that a player is positive, negative, or neutral, in my opinion.
Specifically as it pertains to Taurean Prince and Austin Rivers, I don't think they grade well because they only impact a few areas of the game well. Rather, they don't produce much in box score categories given their roles -- floor spacers, perimeter defenders. Their scores are also highly-affected by what the team's output is when they're on the floor since they aren't consistently involved.
This is also why players like Kentavius Caldwell-Pope, for example, grade out better than they probably should. He spends most of his minutes next to Nikola Jokic who is a dominant, dominant player, and the Net Rating then gets baked into KCP's values. Call it the Jokic multiplier, if you will.
I hope that helped in some way.
OK - thanks for the reply. I should have been more specific. I'm aware of the technical definition of VORP as explained in a glossary definition. I'm certainly not an expert on all the pieces of the formula. But, if I were explaining to a two year old, I'd simply say it attempts to capture the important box score statistics of a player and applies a weighting system which values some of those stats more than others which results in "Value Over Replacement Player" (VORP) final figure.
I'm sure you guys have all read the glossary definition too. It's a pretty amazing and encompassing equation. And that's why I like it. You don't have to do any additional analysis. The formula does that for us. And it's pretty damn accurate. Not perfect. But if anyone can provide me a better ranking system to value an individual player I'd love to hear it (and test it side by side with VORP).
But back to Austin Rivers/Prince. I agree, they don't show up much in the box score stuff and that's why they don't rate well in VORP. How much value they provide as floor spacers and defenders might be debatable because there isn't a great way track, measure or assign value for that stuff. It's similar to assigning value to "veteran mentoring". I'm not saying there's no value to those things. I'm just saying...how the hell can we really know and measure it without data?
You stated TC and Finch love him so he's not going anywhere. Do you have a source for that? I tend to agree with you that they like him. I just haven't read anything definitive enough to go on record that they would never cut him if a better player came available to replace him. IMO, Patrick Bev would be better than Rivers. But, with only like 20 games to go, it probably doesn't really matter at this point as neither guy is going to have a huge impact based on what would likely be limited roles.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 8:57 am
by Carlos Danger
Q-was-here wrote:Cam lays out VORP pretty well above. What folks that love VORP need to understand - and Basketball Reference literally states this in their glossary section on BPM/VORP - is that it undervalues individual defense. So if you have a wing defender that doesn't fill up the box score with points, rebounds, assists, etc. but is very good at defense, this simply won't show up in BPM or VORP or PER for that matter.
This is why BPM and VORP over-values players like Bones Hyland (seemingly a board darling) and under-values players like Jaden McDaniels. According to BPM and VORP, these guys are valued similarly. Now what GM in his or her right mind would value Bones and Jaden at the same level??? The answer is none would.
Austin Rivers is somewhat of a curious case though. Theoretically he's a 3&D guard and is similarly not valued by BPM and VORP. However, the more advanced defensive metrics also don't think that highly of him. So although he is certainly a better defender than Nowell, Bones, or DLO, he probably doesn't give us as much on that end as we ideally need for someone who otherwise is fairly limited offensively. This is why I think NAW could be an upgrade in that perimeter defender off the bench slot.
There's a lot to unpack with the glossary definitions. Can you link me to where it literally says "BPM/VORP undervalues individual defense"? Again - I'm far from an expert on the full equation. But the part I noted regarding defense in the BPM definition is:
"There are limitations on all box score stats - if the box score doesn't measure a particular contribution, a box-score-based metric can only approximate that contribution. This is not a great hindrance on the offensive side, as nearly everything of importance on offense is captured by the box score (only missing things like screen-setting), but on defense the box score is quite limited. Blocks, steals, and rebounds, along with what little information offensive numbers yield about defensive performance are all that is available.
Such critical components of defense as positioning, communication, and the other factors that make Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan elite on defense can't be captured, unfortunately.
What does this mean? Box Plus/Minus is good at measuring offense and solid overall, but the defensive numbers in particular should not be considered definitive. Look at the defensive values as a guide, but don't hesitate to discount them when a player is well known as a good or bad defender."
I don't interpret that as "undervaluing individual defense". I think it's simply saying it measure what it can measure but recognizes there can be some things impossible to capture which might make a difference. But how much value is there really to things like defensive positioning and communication vs. actual production stats like blocks, steals and rebounds? That's going to be up for debate. I think VORP does a pretty dang good job. There's always going to be a little room for debate, but as I wrote in my other post to Cam, give me another all inclusive stat that you think does a better job and I'll test it to VORP.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 8:57 am
by AbeVigodaLive
Beverley is a double-edged sword as we all know.
As somebody noted, if Edwards (and Towns) really wanted him, maybe something would be done. Otherwise, would his jolt of antics really be warranted at this point? And what it would it say about Rivers, who would be entirely redundant and even possibly cut to make room to Beverley. "hey thanks for being the adult in the room for two or three months, but we prefer the grown man antics of this other guy"
I know it's a league of wealthy professionals, but it would send an odd message.
As for NAW... he'll get his chance soon enough. I think there's only about a 5% chance of Rivers sticking beyond this season in MN.
1) He isn't a great player. There are also valid reasons he's been with so many teams.
2) He's voiced his displeasure with MN (weather) multiple times on his podcast and has lamented that MN would not be a place he ever thought he'd be.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 9:03 am
by Carlos Danger
AbeVigodaLive wrote:Beverley is a double-edged sword as we all know.
As somebody noted, if Edwards (and Towns) really wanted him, maybe something would be done. Otherwise, would his jolt of antics really be warranted at this point? And what it would it say about Rivers, who would be entirely redundant and even possibly cut to make room to Beverley. "hey thanks for being the adult in the room for two or three months, but we prefer the grown man antics of this other guy"
I know it's a league of wealthy professionals, but it would send an odd message.
As for NAW... he'll get his chance soon enough. I think there's only about a 5% chance of Rivers sticking beyond this season in MN.
1) He isn't a great player. There are also valid reasons he's been with so many teams.
2) He's voiced his displeasure with MN (weather) multiple times on his podcast and has lamented that MN would not be a place he ever thought he'd be.
The Patrick Beverley stuff seemed to have some steam immediately following the trade deadline, but it appears to be fading fast. I'm not expecting anything at this point in that regard. I'm sure the are fine with Rivers. And at the end of the day, Beverley and/or Rivers are not going to make much difference on the results of this team. It's on the starting five and SlowMo, Nowell and hopefully Towns.
Re: The return of Patrick Beverley
Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2023 4:25 pm
by Lipoli390
Sundog60 wrote:Man, I don't know, he did look pretty lost in that one game. But looks much better in this one (not perfect, a couple of bad turnovers): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RolFOEZS2Vw
I'm not ready to write him off, just like I was y ready to write Nowell off earlier this year.
I've never been inclined to write off Nowell. Watching Nowell, you seen an NBA caliber player even when his shot's not falling. He has a tremendous burst of quickness and knack for finishing around the basket. He also has a terrific looking mid-range shot. He looks like an NBA player. I really liked NAW coming out of college but I just don't see more than an end-of-bench guy watching him against NBA competition even in the clips that are all selectively positive. But Finch apparently likes NAW and he's more of an expert than I am.