Is Nick Young an efficient volume shooter?
by Rook6980 on Apr 1, 2011 1:01 PM EDT
Email
Print
There has been much speculation, many arguments and lots of back and forth in the Kanter This, Kanter That fan post about whether Nick Young qualifies as an "efficient" scorer. Obviously, those who look at his current 53.8% True Shooting Percentage would argue that he's slightly below averag. Those folks (zl I'm pointing at you) would argue that because the League average True Shooting Percentage is 54.2% (hoopdata), that Nick Young is a below average efficiency scorer...
However, I've often maintained that a player that shoots less often will always have the advantage over a volume shooter. Players like Aaron Aflalo (62% TSP), Jodie Meeks (61.7% TSP) and Daequan Cook (59.1% TSP), who pick and choose when they want to shoot, and put up less than the League average 7.8 shots a night have the distinct advantage over players that are relied upon by their teams to be the main "go to" scorers every night.
So instead of comparing apples (Aflalo) to Oranges (Young), let's compare Nick Young to the other Guards in the League who are "volume" shooters.
First - how do we define a "volume" shooter? Well, league average is 7.8 shots per game - and the highest volume shooters in the NBA are Derrick Rose (20.2 shots per game) and Monta Ellis (20.2 shots per game). Let's split the difference and say that 14 or more shots per game constitutes a "volume" shooter. (I ran it with fewer shots, 12, 13, etc... there were more results, but the conclusions were the same)...
As you can see from the chart above, Nick Young looks better than Joe Johnson and Brandon Jennings - but not one of the top Guards in efficiency for volume shooters...
Why was I so adamant that Nick Young was one of the most efficient scorers in the League? What was I seeing on the court that these numbers don't show? Why does Nick's TSP look so pedestrian when compared to other volume shooting guards in that chart?
Context....
Prior to Nick's knee injury, his TS% was much higher. He sat out the Orlando game, just prior to the All-Star break. Came back after the break with a couple strong games against Miami and Golden State in between terrible shooting nights in the other three games - but then missed another game against Minnesota; and has been out of the line up 7 of the last 9 games. The point is that, since the All-Star break Nick has not looked "right"; at least he has not looked like the Nick Young we saw in the first 50 games.
If we look at Nick's True Shooting Percentage over time, we see that up until the All Star break, he was consistently around 56%-57% - he was one of the 5 or 6 most efficient volume shooting Guards in the NBA. Since the All-Star break, there has been a precipitous drop off... In games after the All Star break, his TS% is only 49.8% (Jordan Crawford territory). Obviously, a rational person could make a convincing argument that Nick's knee injury, which occurred just prior to the All-Star break, has contributed a great deal to the drop in his efficiency.
One could also argue that when healthy, Nick Young is one of the more efficient volume shooting guards in the NBA.
This represents the view of the user who wrote the FanPost, and not the entire Bullets Forever community. We're a place of many opinions, not just one.
62 comments
|
8 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nice Post. Thanks. Thats why i say we keep him.
him and john seem to work perfectly on the court together. if we dont keep him who will we replace him with next year thats equal or better than his value??? with crawford coming off the bench, all we need is a defensive stopper at the 2 spot that can knock down an open jumper to have a very nice backcourt for the next 3 seasons. and please draft KANTER!
Thanks for the analysis Rook.
Enjoy reading your posts.
What’s troubling for me is that he’s pretty much at the very bottom of that list in every non-scoring category (to be fair, he’s also averaging 3 to 8 minutes less per game than almost everyone else on the list).
Adding a third dimension to his game (to complement efficient scoring and perimeter defense) is crucial in his development IMO. That would elevate his worth tremendously. And I think that’s the real reason you don’t hear him mentioned with the others on that list. I mean even a gunner like Monta Ellis is averaging 5x the number of assists.
Hope I’m not moving the goalposts too much lol…
In a developmental season like this, a number of guys got the opportunity to put things on film in actual game situations (e.g. Young’s pick and roll, McGee’s post moves, Booker’s perimeter defense, etc.) and that shouldn’t be underestimated in the context of offseason film study, training, and development. I, for one, am excited to see some of the guys apply this season’s lessons to next year.
Adding a third dimension to his game (to complement efficient scoring and perimeter defense) is crucial in his development IMO.
An excellent point…. and one in which I wholeheartedly agree…. But it’s fortunate that Nick doesn’t get 5 boards a game and 3 assists (NOW)…. because if he did, his value would skyrocket – and the Wizards might not be able to afford to re-sign him.
The difference between my feelings about Nick Young and some others is that I see improvements in his OVERALL game – He seems much more in tune with the offense… where his shots are coming from… where he needs to be on defense…. how to use screens…. He’s not making mistakes… and other than the occasional bad shot, he’s helping the offense with his movement, shooting, and shot creation…etc…
AND I even see some little strides in improving his rebounding and floor vision. Not huge strides…. but for instance his rebound rate and his rebounds per 40 minutes have both increased from last year…. again, not huge increases…. but Nick doesn’t need to become a beast on the boards- he only needs to “help” on the glass.
Right now he’s averaging 3.4 rebounds per 40 minutes (up from 2.9 last year)… If he can increase that to 4.5 by the end of next year…. and add another half an assist to his admittedly pathetic 1.5 assists (per 40)…. WHILE continuing to shoot at an efficient rate – and play solid defense – I think he’ll be heading in the right direction….
Slow progress – that’s all I can hope for… If it comes faster, so much the better…..
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
those are a lot of ifs, though
Past NBA seasons have shown that rebounding is extremely consistent from year to year. Players tend to peak around 25, so I think expecting a marked improvement from Nick is unrealistic.
by zl on Apr 1, 2011 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah - and there are those that say that Nick
or any player after their 3rd year, couldn’t completely change their playing style either… but he did…
Let’s face it, the Wizards have never asked Nick to rebound… His job has always been to get out on the break on offense, making it difficult for him to rebound the ball on the defensive end…. John Wall has been asked to help on the defensive boards – hang back and take the outlet pass….. Because he plays the perimeter – and the Wizards SF is supposed to help on the defensive boards – Nick’s job is to leak out on the break.
When he’s on offense, Nick is supposed to be the first defender back on defense, making offensive rebounding difficult. Wall’s job is to penetrate (not get back on defense)… Blatche and McGee both crash the offensive boards. Leaving the “first defender back” job for Young.
However – I’ve noticed a subtle change on defense in the last month or so….. Nick is holding back more on defense – not leaking out on the break. I’ve also noticed a more sustained effort on the defensive boards… Not huge, YET… but it looks like Flip may have made a few adjustments to try to get more defensive rebounds; sending both Young and the SF to help on the defensive glass – and I believe it will eventually lead to more rebounds for the SG position.
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
I think Young's assist numbers will improve next year simply by virtue of playing with players who can better finish
Wall with a better jump shot, McGee’s more developed post game, and Young still has yet to really play with Crawford. Not to mention our Williams/Barnes/Kanter pick.
by Max Zamphirescu on Apr 1, 2011 9:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Where we disagree:
Where you see “Nick Young’s efficiency declines because he’s unhealthy”, I see “Nick Young’s efficiency regresses to the mean as the season progresses.” There’s no real way to settle that argument until next season (and seasons to come).
I’d also add that, even if Nick Young’s efficiency rebounds to 55-57% TS, he’s still a below average player. I’d be interested to see a similar comparison among guards comparing rebound and assist percentage. Nick Young would be near the bottom of the league. Very well done post, though, Rook. I disagree, but, as usual, your writing was great and your arguments were clear.
The reason I disagree with your 'regressing to mean' argument
is that post all star break there is a precipitous drop indicative of injury, not a slow and gradual decline. Pre-all star break, if you look at the graph, it starts at 57%, dips, rises, and is at almost exactly 57% prior to the injury.
I (and I assume Rook) look at it like a piecewise function of two horizontal lines, not a linear function sloping downwards. As you said though, we will really get a better sense when he starts off next year healthy. Also I disagree that Nick Young with 55-57% TS is below average. Within his specific role (scorer, perimeter defender) his rebounding and assist numbers are not as important.
Actually, the graph clearly shows gradual decline...
…at least to my eyes. Sure, there’s a huge dip right after the All Star game, but I’ll bet if you plotted a regression line through ONLY the first half of the season, its end point wouldn’t be much higher now than Young’s percentage now.
I’m with zl. I think the burden on Young (and his supporters) to show that he’s made a breakthrough is very high, and I don’t see enough evidence of it. And because some GMs love scorers, regardless of efficiency, he’s likely to command more than the very low salary the Wiz should be willing to pay him. Don’t overinvest in limited players.
As an aside, and I apologize if Rook or someone else has already addressed this, but I remember early in the season, someone analyzed Young’s shooting and noted that the only reason his TS% was up was because his percentage on long twos was way up, which looked aberrant and unsustainable since his other percentages were the same — it looked like luck or a hot streak, in other words. Anyone know whether the decline in his TS% is the result, in particular, of a lower long-two %? Or is it a broader decline, which would lend more support to injury?
nice post
I’ve been reading your post for a while now and i really enjoying reading your points and view, even when i disagree. As for Nick it all comes down to how much his market value around the league is gonna be, because we all know that Ernie is going to low ball him until he receives a better offer and we will have to debate about it again when the time comes.
I agree
A good defensive player with 55% TS with below average rebounding and a below average assist ratio is worth about the league average to me (somewhere around 5.5million under the current CBA). I would go no further than 6.5 million though.
"I'll be lounging on the couch, just chillin in my snuggie, klick to MTV so they can teach my how to douggie" (Buno Mars, The lazy song)
by Dutch Hoopfan on Apr 1, 2011 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Nick Young is inefficient
According to who? What are the variables? What are the premises? Some guy has a totally simplistic model for players and now says this one or that one is inefficient and people believe this as unquestioned truth. Then debate it. This must be the fantasy basketball section.
Zamp hit it, you missed part of it
Young gets into trouble when he forces shots. He forces shots when there are no other scorers on the floor. His assists are low because there are often no viable scoring options.
Assuming that the Wiz get a scorer at the 3 next year and define a clear role for Young such as catch and shoot off of screens, Young will have a very high TS%. His defense has improved quite a bit. As such, he’s a valuable piece of the overall puzzle.
why is true shooting percentage the best way to evaluate things? nick young does not get to the line much…in fact he is the lowest. isnt this true- if u are fouled shooting, then the shot does not count in your statistics? so free throws just pull up your average. and the players who get to the line more elevates their tsp
i cant comment on your observation that NY is shooting worse since the injury. makes sense and i trust your eyes. but i can simply point out…
you have 14 people listed…nick young is not in top or bottom three. in fact you take out and compare the middle chunk- the average shooter he rates this way
FG%-
top 3- .497, .475, 456
last 3- .387, .405, .413
NY- .441
middle 7 – .436 .441 .453 .439 .444 .450 .447 (.444 average)
So NY is roughly an average volume shooter this season
3pt%
top 3- .436 .390 .355
bottom 3- .290 .297 .302
NY- .387
middle 7- .315 .350 .337 .319 .332 .348 .325
So NY is a top 3 3pt shooter
Injury affects aside, three point shots are typically set shots (not moving when u catch and shoot)…so he probably is a better pure shooter. stephen curry is off the charts. and he was clearly off the charts in college…a shame we passed on our first round draft that year
since 3 pointers are generally set shots. regardless, his tsp is relatively lower compared to his accuracy because he does not get to the line as often as his volume shooting peers.
by les boulez bomber on Apr 2, 2011 11:25 AM EDT reply actions
Makes perfect sense that jump shooters
Especially shooters that are coming off screens, or shooting 3-pointers from the corner (like Nick Young) will get fewer attempts from the Free Throw line that say a Dwayne Wade or Eric Gordon, who continually take the ball to the basket.
True Shooting percentage is the fairest way to compare…. Straight FG percentage penalizes good 3-point shooters.. and doesn’t take Free Throws into consideration. TSP True takes into account not only two-point attempts, but also three-point attempts and free throws attempts to get an all inclusive idea of how efficiently a basketball player shoots.
Since he only gets to the line 3.6 times a game, it just means that Young’s 56% – 57% TSP is even more impressive. What it means is that as a pure jump shooter – he is extremely efficient, because he doesn’t get to the Free Throw line to help bump up his TSP; it means his TSP is a true reflection of his shooting ability….
I really do not understand the necessity to continually select a negative stat when talking about a player (foul shots)… Nick Young has his negatives.. his weaknesses…. (So does Steph Curry… My grandmother could score 40 on him) – but a volume jump shooter that has a TSP of 56% – 57% is VERY, VERY GOOD.
He doesn’t go to the line a lot, what it means is that (at 56% TSP) Nick Young hits shots…. he makes his jumpers at a highly efficient rate.
Now – if you want to look at the entire year (which is what you did in your “analysis”) looking ONLY AT STATS, without any context (the injury situation) – then YES, you are right… Nick is only average….
But by the same token – then by your own “analysis” – you have to concede that Nick was one of the BEST, most efficient shooters before the All-Star break….
Look at shooting percentages pre-All Star (45%)
Look at 3-point percentages pre All Star (39%)
Look at his shooting percentages post-All Star (40%)
Look at his 3-point percentages post All Star (36%)
Those are HUGE drops….
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
huh? i said i cant comment on pre-injury or post injury NY but i trust your eyes. if ur saying he is not the same, i believe you. but regardless, what he does on the court is what matters- not why. we do not get wins based on projections. the stats you provided showed he is an average shooter generally and a top 3 three point shooter. Can he be better than that…sure…a good scout might notice that he comes off screens more. and other guys dont as much. and nick makes a higher percentage when he is set. that is where the real scouting comes in…this stuff is a good place to start…it never tells the full story 100% completely.
i like nick…i think he has been slow to come around but he has done what i think they have asked him to do. if he plays hard defense regularly and can hit the open shot regularly i think we should sign him MLE or lower. I dont know how streaky he is…but u compare the standard deviation of his shooting percentage average per game to get a sense of that…then compare to other players to see how streaky he is
one thing i really like what u did and agree is that you can not compare a guy taking 20 shots a game with one taking 3 cherry picked ones
by les boulez bomber on Apr 2, 2011 2:39 PM EDT reply actions
but this TSP is not the end all to tell you if someone is an efficient scorer. it sounds like some guys getting together and over complicating something. averaging out a few different shooting percentages does not tell you what you really want to know. what you want to know is if nick young takes a shot, how many points are we going to score. that is all that really matters if you want to know if he is an efficient scorer, TSP can be misleading but generally seems ok. TSP overrates Joe Johnson and underratesTyreke Evans, who is much more efficient than John Wall. Using an excel spreadsheet, i calculated using the raw numbers. still the same conclusion- nick young is average. but there is a pretty wide difference between the top guys and the least efficient scorers, imho. here are the numbers:
Points per shot attempt
k martin 1.09
s curry 1.10
d wade 1.08
e gordon 1.05
d williams 1.02
k bryant 1.01
d rose 1.00
r westbrook 1.03
m ellis 0.99
j johnson 0.94
b jennings 0.89
j wall 0.92
t evans 1.01
average 1.01
n young 1.00
ps-
Points per shot attempt is total points/total shots for this season per nba.com
total points- 2 pts for every FG made, 3 points for 3 point shots, and a point for every free throw
total shot attempts is field goal attemps + 3 pt field goal attempts + (free throw attempts/2)
an and1 3 point play is not fully accounted for but it might not make that big of a difference as they are certainly less than 10% of all shot attempts. nick young does not have that many any ways, so everyone else might look a little better, he should still rate about average.
this does not change my opinion. i felt he was a good scorer. it is the other aspects of his game that combine to make him a good signing at the MLE or lower. i hope they do. i think they will try!
by les boulez bomber on Apr 2, 2011 3:50 PM EDT reply actions
Wait
AGAIN you are using full year numbers?
Even after I have said, over and over again, that PRE ALL-STAR GAME, Nick Young was one of the most efficient volume scoring Guards in the League?
So, to make your point – you take the full year numbers – AGAIN.
Pre All-Star game, Nick scored 878 points on 718 shots = 1.22 points per shot.
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
by Rook6980 on Apr 2, 2011 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Rook…i think you have a great post and a great, reasonable argument. But you cant prove a thing. and in the absence of not being able to substantiate your theory, you cant rely on it. u cant use it. u have to use the full year. look…we are trying to make judgements on players who will resign and play for years. he had 50 good games lets say. we just went through this with blatche last year. i believe he will come back next season healthy and shoot better than average. but right now, today, you cant make that claim because he is in fact shooting average for that peer group. when u are right, i will happily acknowledge you are right. i want you to be right. i think he is going to turn out to be a better than average shooter for that peer group. but he is not right now because he is not shooting at 57%TSP. You are not giving me credit for what i am not doing, which is not claim he is shooting at his current TSP- which is at the low of the year. In fact, that chart you posted is solidly trending down with no signs of stabilization. So when it starts heading up, then you have more merit. Right now, today, nick young has shot average for your peer group this season. he shot better at the beginning of the year. he is shooting worse now. he got hurt in between and may not be fully recovered. that is all we know. that is all we can claim to be true. great work…i think you made your main point which is that he is an efficient scorer. i like him and think he has a future with this team if in fact he consistently plays solid defense and can at least hit his open shots at an average clip…at the MLE or under.
by les boulez bomber on Apr 3, 2011 12:04 AM EDT up reply actions
Please use paragraph breaks
and capitalize your sentences.
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
Somehow I missed some of this. 1.22 is off the charts and would make him the most efficient scorer in the league by far. I dont know if you calculated it with the free throw adjustment I made, but it should not make that big of a difference with him. I am sure he would still rank at the top. I hope he returns to form soon! It might be a real testament to how good John Wall is at attracting coverage leaving Nick wide open. But that doesn’t really matter because that is the plan.
by les boulez bomber on Apr 3, 2011 12:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Points per shot attempt is an extremely misleading, nearly worthless statistic
It fails because it doesn’t account for the shot attempts take to earn those trips to the free throw line. TS% is an effort to account for those attempts.
Also, since we’re talking scoring efficiency, we should also factor that Nick Young has an insanely low turnover rate relative to his usage rate. He is actually more efficient than TS% suggests.
I accounted for that. what i posted has been adjusted to reflect it. its not perfect but it is close and i believe accurate +/- 5%
NY is v efficient
by les boulez bomber on Apr 5, 2011 8:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry
I didn’t read that part of your post carefully enough. Basically, your version of P/SA isn’t much different from TS%, except TS% makes an attempt to account for 3-point plays and technical fouls by adding a multiplier to the FTA figure. In a nutshell, TS% will favor guys who draw fouls slightly more than than P/SA will.
no worries =) i dont know the formula for TS%. but i always get a little leery when adjustment factors are based on some magic ratio. who says their multiplier is correct? at least for these guys, they are taking 20+ shots per game. the couple of scrap points they get from technical foul and three point plays (two and a foul shot) is negligible compared to the 20+ shots we know they take. so maybe its three points a game on average. so i made only the one major adjustment and left it at that. every two free throws resulted from a shot attempt where they were fouled. i think it is more representative. otherwise, you have to really watch and manually calculate it because nba.com did not offer the stats needed to really know. so i think what i did is more in the middle. it closely followed with TS% with the exception of Joe Johnson and Tyreke Evans. If u watch them u can tell me…my way suggests tyreke is a better shooter than jj. TS% is the opposite. if u have an opinion on that, let me know =)
by les boulez bomber on Apr 6, 2011 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
On the other hand
When a player shoots the technical free throws, it’s usually one of the best shooters on the team… Rewarding those guys with a minuscule bump in their TSP seems appropriate… and rewarding guys that get to the line because they draw fouls is especially appropriate…
Joe Johnson is the better shooter by the way.
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
there arent that many technicals. it should not be a major influence on TS%
so then my way might be more misleading than ts? it tracked it pretty closely which is good and gives me more confidence in it. nothing beats a good pair of eyes and time on your hands =)
by les boulez bomber on Apr 6, 2011 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions
but didnt u always say jj was really inefficient? doesnt matter. nick is stil a good shooter from what i have seen…which is not all that much really
by les boulez bomber on Apr 6, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions
You asked me who was the better shooter – Joe Johnson or Tyreke Evans…
My opinion = Joe Johnson….
but it has nothing to do with whether I think Johnson is efficient or not… only that I think he’s a better shooter than Evans…
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
thats cool. i didnt remember hearing shooting was one of his strengths when we looked into him for the draft.
nick is a role player. i hope we resign him for role player money. it’s an important role, but not important like odom is for the lakers.
in the end, until we get some true all star caliber big men…we will not be competing for a championship. the thunder are a good example…max out around 50 wins and a second round out.
i know u might say but they are still young…and i will reply what did they do…they traded a solid 3/4 for a legit 5. they know. top level inside play is the fastest path to competing for a championship. i like JW as a pick though =)
by les boulez bomber on Apr 7, 2011 3:13 PM EDT up reply actions
BTW this is a really good post! you really do a great job!
by les boulez bomber on Apr 2, 2011 3:54 PM EDT reply actions
finally…regarding:
Now – if you want to look at the entire year (which is what you did in your "analysis") looking ONLY AT STATS, without any context (the injury situation) – then YES, you are right… Nick is only average….
But by the same token – then by your own "analysis" – you have to concede that Nick was one of the BEST, most efficient shooters before the All-Star break….
Look at shooting percentages pre-All Star (45%)
Look at 3-point percentages pre All Star (39%)
Look at his shooting percentages post-All Star (40%)
Look at his 3-point percentages post All Star (36%)
YES! i agree. it appears to be injury related. you just cant prove it or guarantee whether he will ever return to those numbers. so i discounted it. he is average at minimum =) i dont think those numbers change his value to the team much. i think they have a dollar figure in mind already. and i hope it is not above the MLE
by les boulez bomber on Apr 2, 2011 3:58 PM EDT reply actions
AND - Nick's increase in productivity and efficiency is not solely limited to this year....
If you remember, before last year (2009-2010 season) Flip told Nick to practice shooting coming off screens in the summer of 2009…. Nick came into the season having completely changed his game… no longer catching the ball and dribbling the air out of it.. no longer shooting contested long 2 pointers… no longer trying to create shots out of thin air……. He was asked instead to catch-and-shoot, or pass the ball back to the Point Guard.
At first, his efficiency suffered , as he struggled to understand how to use picks, when to cut, etc… He rushed his shots… and sometimes reverted to the “Old Nick”… (Pre All-Star game 2009-2010 season, 53 games = 322 points on 289 shots = 1.11 points per shot) – AND I had almost given up on him….
Then about mid-way through the season, (I’m sure it had to do with continued Coaching from Flip), Nick seemed to “get it” – and not only did his defense improve drastically (games against Miami and D-Wade and Philly/Iguodala stick out in my mind) – but he seemed to really understand how to get his points out of Flip’s offense. He was shooting coming off screens, and when he was open in the corner for 3…. His efficiency started to go up (Post All-Star game 2009-2010 season, 32 games = 317 points on 269 shots = 1.18 points per shot)….
you just cant prove it or guarantee whether he will ever return to those numbers.
So now – we’ve seen an entire year (32 games last year post All-Star game, and 50 games pre All-Star game this year = 82 games) where Nick’s shooting efficiency has been elevated, and has continued to CLIMB…. and yet some folks seem to think it will “revert to the mean” …. or that he will never return to those numbers…. Like, all of a sudden, Flip will completely reverse field, and have Nick go back to dribbling the air out of the basketball and trying to create his own shots, and shooting contested long 2 pointers, like he did in 2008-09….
So if that doesn’t convince you that Nick Young’s game has permanently changed, then I doubt I’d be able to convince you that the sky is blue either….
I am of the opposite opinion to a lot of my BF brothers – with only 82 games under his NEW belt – I believe he can become EVEN MORE efficient….As he gets used to playing with John Wall – as he gets teammates that can actually set decent picks (Booker, Seraphin), as the Wizards get more scorers on the floor Nick should be EVEN MORE EFFICIENT, next year…..
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
Yammer Yammer Yammer
Is not about Nick Young.This isn’t about any one player. It is about winning a championship. Argue away, but that does not put another banner on the rafters. Think clearly. Ask yourself, whT
by hambonejackson on Apr 3, 2011 2:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Forgive me. I went for cap locks.
The Wiz have 2 players, both rookies, who have triple doubles. I don’t know what you see, but I see Walt Frazier and Earl Monroe.
by hambonejackson on Apr 3, 2011 2:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I see JC as Earl Monroe
not Jesus Christ, although he is very close to him.
by hambonejackson on Apr 3, 2011 3:03 AM EDT up reply actions
If that's what you see (Frazier/Monroe)...
….then they need a Bill Bradley-like shooter at the 3 (Harrison Barnes) and Dave Dubusschere-like rebounder/shooter at 4 (Jared Sullinger).
i commented on the other reply so wont rehash that here. hey i feel u r projecting onto me. i never said he will revert to the mean or a one year wonder. in fact, i feel u are debating with a guy who agrees with you 95% of the way. the area i disagree with is a fact- this season, he has not shot at the clip u suggest. if you want to take the last 30 games last season and first 50 games this season to form your year. i cant comment on that at all. but i dont doubt your observations/analysis. what more can i say, i said he is a keeper at the mle or lower and i think he will return to above average shooting efficiency. i even noted he is a top 3! three point shooter, and i felt it was a better barometer for shooting accuracy because they tend to be set shots. he just wont finish this season shooting 57%TSP. we wont win even a quarter of our games this season…nick young is not the problem on this team- by miles
by les boulez bomber on Apr 3, 2011 12:15 AM EDT reply actions
Which is to say you are making good points
I just can’t read them
The artist formerly known as ledellforlife.
will do a better job in the future. i did not know how to receive what you wrote at first. thanks for clarifying!
by les boulez bomber on Apr 3, 2011 12:19 AM EDT up reply actions
and i think despite that one area we disagree, you handidly discredited the critics you referenced (a category i never fell into =)
by les boulez bomber on Apr 3, 2011 12:18 AM EDT reply actions
forget about...
NY.
Jordan Crawford is so much better than him!!!!!
jc for ROY!!!
Nick is a good player, possibly very good
Even if what you see is what you get with Nick, he’s already pretty good. He has been scoring with average efficiency, and he plays above average defense. He gets a below average number of assists, but he doesn’t pound the air out of the ball, so he allows his teammates to make up the difference. In addition, he puts above average pressure on the opposing team- it’s hard to defend a player who can score while on the move, curling around picks. That pressure opens up opportunities for his teammates to get offensive boards or easy scoring opportunities. Add it all up, and he’s already an above average player.
From that above average starting point, he still has plenty of upside:
As Rook laid out, there is reason to believe that he could be capable of maintaining the shooting accuracy that he showed earlier in the season.
He could improve his accuracy if our big men could learn to set better screens.
He could score from close range more if we had better shooters to spread the floor.
He has a very nice post game, but again we need better floor spacing.
With alternate primary scoring options, he could spot up and shoot more threes.
His rebounding and assist numbers have trended upward this season as he has gotten more comfortable with this style of play.
An already above average player who still has plenty of upside, and we’re balking at offering him an average sized contract?
The difference after the Allstar break
could be injury, could also be the result of opponent’s defense putting more focus on him.
But honestly, given the impressive performance of Crawford lately, I have nearly forgotten how Nick plays.
The decline in Young's shooting began BEFORE the All-Star game...
His shooting dropoff began when he became the starter.
Young's long-2pt shooting...
Prior to starting — .574
As a starter — .412
As a starter BEFORE the All-Star break — .414 (pre-injury)
Using TS% - .538
Full Season -
Starter — .532
Starter, Pre All-Star — .538
Bench — .570
by TheSecretWeapon on Apr 6, 2011 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Where are the corresponding 3-point shooting statistics….
How can he have a huge drop in his long 2-point shots but have his TSP hold relatively steady? It means that he increased his production somewhere else….
Probably by discontinuing shooting the long 2-pointers, and shooting 3’s instead….
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
His TS% did drop. From .570 before Arenas was traded to .538 for the full season — .532 since he became the starter.
by TheSecretWeapon on Apr 6, 2011 5:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Those numbers are a bit misleading...
because his last 5 injury-plagued games have a greater weighting on the small sample sizes. Here are the same numbers but ignoring his last 5 games:
TS%
Full Season .550
Starter .541
Bench .570
Starter Pre All Star .538
Starter Post All Star .557
The disparity between his starter and bench performances is now smaller, and there is an indication that he was getting better as a starter as he got acclimated to his role.
Another thing is that Young didn’t have a viable backup for much of his time as a starter (at least once Hinrich was traded). It’s harder to post consistently great numbers when the coach doesn’t have the luxury of sitting you or giving the shots to others when you are having an off night.
It’s really too bad that we haven’t had a chance to see Crawford and a healthy Young together. Flip would then have the luxury of playing the hot hand
AND
I’m not sure where you got your numbers, but ALL OF Nick Young’s Pre-All Star Percentages are better than Post-All Star….
Pre-All Star 45% shooting % , 39% 3-point, 81% FT, 54.8% TSP
Post All-Star 40% shooting%, 36.8% 3-point, 81% FT, 49.8% TSP
Everything dropped after he got hurt… that was the whole point of this post….. that until he was hurt, and for MOST OF THE YEAR, Nick was shooting well….
Now you can nit-pick until the sky turns puce, but it doesn’t change those facts…. You can cut and dice the numbers by using selected pieced (long 2-pointers…. assisted shots vs. non assisted…. whether he ate Cheerios for Wheaties for breakfast)… but it still doesn’t matter. He was an efficient, volume shooter before his injury.
He's "delightfully cranky"
I used to have super powers until my psychiatrist took them away.
Data came from the game logs at b-r and hoopdata.
Yep, his numbers did drop after he got hurt. They CONTINUED to drop — they were already coming down when he became the starter.
You can pick and choose which data to include until the sky turns puce (what color is that anyway?), but his shooting efficiency dropped once he became a starter. Maybe the knee injury he had around the All-Star break had an effect on that. Maybe he just didn’t do as well once he faced tougher competition and game plans. I suspect we’ll both be looking closer at those game logs pretty soon. :)
(BTW — puce is a color described as reddish-brown or purplish-brown. More simply, a shade of red.)
by TheSecretWeapon on Apr 6, 2011 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Those numbers are a bit misleading...
because his last 5 injury-plagued games have a greater weighting on the small sample sizes. Here are the same numbers but ignoring his last 5 games:
TS%
Full Season .550
Starter .541
Bench .570
Starter Pre All Star .538
Starter Post All Star .557
The disparity between his starter and bench performances is now smaller, and there is an indication that he was getting better as a starter as he got acclimated to his role.
Another thing is that Young didn’t have a viable backup for much of his time as a starter (at least once Hinrich was traded). It’s harder to post consistently great numbers when the coach doesn’t have the luxury of sitting you or giving the shots to others when you are having an off night.
It’s really too bad that we haven’t had a chance to see Crawford and a healthy Young together. Flip would then have the luxury of playing the hot hand.
Just like to add something to this discussion
First, great job Rook.
Secondly, there are many benefits having a shooter of Nick Young’s caliber provides for floor spacing. No doubt it provides greater time and space for other players. Doesn’t show up in stats but is something to keep in mind. It will really help when we add more scorers.
Finally, people are very correct to point out Nick Young is really bad at assists and bad at rebounding for a guard. What they ignore is the fact that Nick Young never turns the ball over. An efficient volume shooter, who plays good defense and does not turn the ball over is a valuable player. If he maintained his shooting/defense/turnovers but rebounded/passed at an average rate, he’d be All-NBA.
With ZERO great shooting guards in this draft look for Nick to make a quick exit
I am going to predict that at least one team (and remember it only takes one team) to see Nick as an up and coming Quality Starting Shooting guard and one team is going to make an offer to Nick that the Wizards will not match.
My guess, if the new CBA is status quo, 6 years at $60million.
See ya Nick. You would be playing second fiddle to Jordan Crawford anyway.
10mm per year is twice what he is worth…gotta let him go if that happens. no question about it.
by les boulez bomber on Apr 11, 2011 8:37 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Bullets Forever
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Miami Heat are moving on to the conference finals
- Kevin Durant is tired of hearing about the Spurs
- The 10-man rotation, starring your Indiana Pacers
- Blake Griffin highlights, ‘NBA Jam’-style (VIDEO)
- Finally, Shelvin Mack and Robert Pack have a dance dedicated to them (VIDEO)
