Projecting the '09 Bustahs: Will Jordan Hill and Terrence Williams be Rockets in 2013?
January 25th is the deadline for 2008 draftees to sign extensions with their current clubs. If they don't, and if their teams extend a qualifying offer, they will become restricted free agents this summer. January 25th is also, according to at least some people, the deadline day for option decisions. I'm not totally sure on that, especially since the option deadline was extending "indefinitely" back during the lockout and I have yet to see an update on it (meaning that the deadline might be June 30th with the rest of the team option decisions), but now is as good a time as any to look at our favorite Rockets sub-group: the 2009 Draft "Busts" -- Terrence Williams, Jordan Hill, Hasheem Thabeet, and Jonny Flynn.
If, for some reason, you don't remember how or why these guys got onto the Rockets, here's a quick recap. Jordan Hill came over in his rookie season (2010) as part of the three-way McGrady-Martin swap. For the remainder of the 2010 season, he played pretty well, filling in for Carl Landry (who left for Sacramento as part of the deal) and showing enough skill on offense and the glass to make most people think that the "bust" label attached to him in his first few months in New York were a tad premature. Since then, he has usually been the backup forward/center, getting mostly center minutes once rookie Patrick Patterson broke into the rotation last year. He isn't the player that Donnie Walsh might have wanted him to be, but he puts forth valuable contributions, even if there are some glaring flaws (his awful jump-shot and inefficient offense, for instance).
Terrence Williams was part of the Trevor Ariza erasure. The Rockets recognized that they probably made a mistake when they gave Ariza the full midlevel exception (a mistake that was perhaps compounded by Yao's injury early in the 2011 season). It was a fair mistake to make, though -- Ariza was 24, coming off a great season and playoff run, and seemed like he could take on a heightened role. But instead of hanging onto Ariza and hoping he would increase his level of play, the Rockets dealt him to the Hornets in a weird four-way trade that brought Courtney Lee and Williams to Houston and sent a protected draft pick to New Jersey. Daryl Morey likely saw the risk as a good one -- if the Rockets make the playoffs this year, they will almost certainly still have New York's draft pick, so whatever. Williams hasn't exactly impressed so far, though, failing to break into the rotation for any extended length of time. He has definite skills as playmaking and tough-rebounding shooting guard, but his poor shooting and inability to put his athleticism to use has meant that Chase Budinger, Courtney Lee, and even Chandler Parsons have beat him out for one of the backup wing spots.
Hasheem Thabeet came over in the Battier deal last year. The truth is that he was (and probably is) more of a warm body and contract than a real player (he is also an injured-player carrier). The 2013 Memphis draft pick in the deal is probably more likely to yield a rotation player than Hasheem's development will -- it was used in the Motiejunas trade, by all accounts a pretty good pickup. Hasheem has played a grand total of 15 minutes for Houston since the trade.
Jonny Flynn is here because the Rockets needed the numbers to work for the Brad Miller salary dump/Donatas Motiejunas trade. The Rockets moved up in the draft, got rid of Brad Miller's contract (thanks, Rick), and also got a chance to give Jonny Flynn some time (David Kahn sucks, y'all). They haven't really made much of that opportunity, and it's tough to argue with that decision. He hasn't really been lighting it up.
The point is, none of these players were ever much more than flyers and fillers to the Rockets. So while what they paid for these guys should have no impact on whether or not the Rockets should pick up their options for next year (basic microeconomics, y'all), the Rockets didn't really pay anything for them, anyways. They were the extra ketchup you get in your bag at Whataburger: a pleasant surprise, but not the focus.
But will any of them be here next year? More interestingly, what (or who) would these guys have to play like in order to warrant their options? The answer is after the jump.
I think the popular consensus (okay, the consensus Xiane and I came to the last time we talked about this in the comments) is that Hill's option will probably be picked up, Williams's might be, and Flynn and Hasheem are no-goes, valuable more for their expiring contracts this season than for any on-the-court skills. That consensus seems right to me, but the Rockets are dealing with millions of dollars here. They need evidence. Whose contributions are worth paying for next season? Who is likely to actually justify their contract?
I think it's that latter question that is the most difficult to answer. It's obvious right now that, other than Hill, none of the '09 Crew is actually playing anywhere close to the level demanded by his contract. "But," we think, "what if Thabeet improves or Flynn becomes the backup PG or Williams takes it to another level?" Fortunately, if we understand what these players are currently contributing in limited time, we can also understand what they are likely to do when given regular minutes. And, from there, we can figure out what sort of play would be required of them to justify their current contracts.
In order to answer these questions, I'll be looking at three statistics: minutes (self-explanatory), Win Shares, and WP48.
For those unfamiliar, Win Shares is a system developed by Dean Oliver (he's like the Bill James of basketball) a while back and modified by Basketball Reference over the years. It looks largely at per-possession statistics, crediting players with scoring efficiently, rebounding, and not turning the ball over. A fuller discussion of how, exactly, offensive and defensive contributions are valued in WS is available at the above link. Basically, it looks at how many possessions and points a player "produces" and credits them with an adjusted number of wins. Because of the way it works (looking at margin of victory, for instance) it has a reputation for over-crediting players on winning teams and undervaluing players on losing teams.
WP48 is the statistic developed by Dave Berri at Wages of Wins. It operates in much the same way as WS, looking at how often a player generates possessions (rebounding, either offensively or defensively, steals, blocks, etc.) and how often a player uses possessions (shooting, turnovers, fouls, assists). Using possessions well is rewarded based on data from the whole NBA. Using possessions by turning the ball over or shooting inaccurately is penalized. Because of this, WP48 tends to see volume-shooters (think JR Smith or Jamal Crawford) as pretty marginal players, while strong rebounders and efficient shooters (Chuck Hayes, Shane Battier, Dennis Rodman) tend to be seen as very valuable. On the other hand, its take on defense tends to get knocked a lot (put simply, it credits players with team defense and largely leaves it at that, though it also values defensive rebounding very highly).
I used these stats for two reason: First, I like rate stats. Advanced plus/minus stuff is interesting (mostly in telling you whose backups suck), but it has so little correlation from year to year that I doubt it really means much. Rate stats (those that look at boxscore statistics like shooting percentages and rebounding) tend to correlate fairly well from year to year, and that is a good indicator of meaning. These sort of composite rate stats let you look at the total value of a player and compare that to his peers.
Second, Win Shares and WP48 are updated daily. Basketball Prospectus has its own rate stat (WARP), but B-Pro doesn't update daily (or annually now, it seems, besides what is given in its yearly book). And since I have neither the skills nor time to perform the requisite regressions and analysis to come up with my own rate statistic (OALIPP -- the OAL Index of Player Performance, pronounced "wallop" -- is currently defined as "a number between -10 and 10 that indicates how much swag you've got," and while that's valuable it isn't something you should be making basketball decisions on), I have to look at these.
So, with that in mind, I performed four projections based on combinations of Win Shares, WP48, and projected minutes. I have also included Chase Budinger's numbers, because he has an option for next year and I wanted to look at someone who is actually outplaying his contract. For reference, in both WP48 and Win Shares, a value of .100 is considered "average." That changes based on position, but it's a good estimate.
This first projection uses each player's WS/48 value for the first fifteen games of this season, and projects how many minutes they will get in the 66 game season based on how many they have gotten in the first fifteen games. So Hill has played 236 minutes thus far in 15 games, and that projects to a little under 1300 minutes in an 82-game season. Form there, we can find how many wins each player should produce next season. Then, using last year's value of $1.7 million/win (the cap and tax has changed, but this shouldn't move around too much), we can figure out what that contribution is worth, subtract the value of the option for next year, and he have a rough estimate of how much each player will outperform or underperform his contract. As you can see, former #2-overall pick Thabeet will be paid over $6 million next year if the Rockets pick up his option, and (combined with a projected value of about $800 thousand) Thabeet looks like an obvious cut choice. There's a reason why the Rockets were very willing to use their amnesty option on him before the offseason got stupid. Not much better can be said for either Flynn (playing below replacement-level) or Williams. Hill doesn't look very good, either, however. With an almost $5 million option for next year, his value only projects to be a little over $3 million.
The bright side is Budinger, whose ridiculously cheap contract makes his slightly-below-average play an absolute bargain. But, again, he's included here so we can have a bit of green in that "difference" column, not because the Rockets really need to think about picking up his option.
There are some obvious problems with those projections, however: current minutes might not indicate how much a player will actually get on the court, after all, and win share rates for the first 15 games aren't nearly as predictive as career rates.
In this set of projections, I have taken a slightly different approach to estimating minutes for next year. I basically just guessed. Arbitrary, but whatever. I assumed each player would play about 77 games and get around the current minutes/game for their career. WS/48 is just their career rate. Basically everyone looks better except for Williams. This is because Williams's current WS/48 is drastically better than his below-replacement career rate. Flynn also looks worse, but only marginally.
Most interestingly, Hill suddenly meets (and slightly exceeds) his contract value. That's mostly because he possesses an average-ish WS/48 value across his career. Hill's worse shooting numbers this year have hurt his WS value. I think there's some good reasons to think those will improve (if he can stop taking jump shots, for instance, and just focuses on cleaning up and complementing the offense, and he has shown signs he can play like that), so maybe the Rockets can expect him to be an average big man this and next year as time goes on.
Okay, but Win Shares has its biases. Let's look at WP48's value.
Suddenly, Hill looks like he'll definitely be employed come June. This shouldn't be especially surprising, given WP48's love for good rebounders and guys who don't shoot too much. While Hill can't shoot, he usually doesn't try, either, and when combined with Hill's very good rebounding numbers this year (yeah, he disappears some games, but he also sometimes grabs a lot in limited minutes), Hill suddenly looks like the best '09 Lottery Guy on the Rockets.
Even Williams looks better, but he still looks remarkably poor -- again, it's because he rebounds reasonably well and didn't shoot much in his limited time on the court. Budinger faces the biggest drop, based on poorer shooting and rebounding this year, but this isn't nearly enough to sink his value. The most remarkable change is Thabeet, who has put up great rate stats in his very, very limited (nigh-meaningless) playing time. Because he can't get on the court (and I don't expect him to do so), Thabeet's contract is still way too big for him.
Changing to career WP48 numbers and more minutes makes Bud look a little better, but it doesn't change too much, otherwise:
So what does this mean? From the numbers, only Hill looks like a good choice for keeping around next season. Williams, Flynn, and Thabeet all put in sub-replacement win totals while being paid like above-average players. That's not good. But maybe you think Thabeet and Co. can turn it around. Even if that's the case, it's going to take a minor miracle for those contracts to work out.
Unless Thabeet totally remakes his play, his contract is hopelessly huge regardless of how much he plays (if he can get on the court for about 2000 minutes next year and play significantly above-average, his contract becomes semi-worthwhile (if he plays 2000 minutes at .12 WP48 or WS/48, he produces just enough to justify the contract). The path to employment for Williams is a little easier -- he just needs to get on the court in a backup role and play around average, and his contract is then semi-worthwhile. It doesn't become a value or anything, but it stops being a black hole for money.
This is a rough estimate of what minute totals and level of play would have to be for the non-Hill Bustahs to be worthwhile. The NBA Rookie-Scale contracts are generally fantastic values, but that's only because most players don't play like total shit. At the upper levels of the draft, the contracts assume that the player getting picked will turn out to be, at the very least, a decent enough backup. At #2 overall, Thabeet has to be basically a league-average starter (or a backup playing well) to justify that contract.. But that's because his contract is worth almost twice as much as that of Terrence Williams. Williams just needs to be a decent backup to be worth his contract. Same goes for Flynn.
With the use of B-Ref's player finder, we can actually find comparables to what is necessary for Flynn, Thabeet, and Williams to be worthwhile. These estimates are, of course, just one variation of what would be required, but they seem like the most likely combinations of minutes and wins/minute. Any more minutes and we push the boundaries of what they are ever likely to get. Any better play and we push the boundaries of believability (though Hasheem as league-average is a major stretch right now).
For Flynn, looking at just active guards with WS/48 values greater than or equal to .06, playing more than 2000 minutes, and producing less than 3 wins, we see a wide range of players: Earl Watson in '08, Chauncey Billups's rookie season, Darren Collison as a rookie. Can Flynn be any of those guys next year (or this)? Many of the indicators are there (his assist rate is good, his true shooting as a rookie was alright), after all. Flynn's horrendous play in Minnesota came when he was being asked to play in the triangle, so maybe he could do it if given the minutes. Wouldn't bet on it, though. Darren Collison as a rookie had a true shooting percentage fifty points over Flynn's career. Billups's numbers are perhaps the most reasonable, actually, with a true shooting only twenty points higher (but only five points higher than Flynn's rookie year), comparable assist percentage (22% vs. Flynn's 25.8%), and similar rebounding (4.5% vs. 5.0%). Turnovers are a significant issue (16% vs. 20%), but maybe Jonny can solve that by dribbling the ball more. So, you know, possible.
Hasheem's contract seems utterly hopeless at first glance, but we get some interesting players in the constraints listed above: Andrew Bogut in '07, Tony Battie in '06, and Chris Kaman in '08. Bogut's '07 season was more a product of injury than anything, and Kaman seems so different from Thabeet (he sort of has skills, though they don't amount to much in terms of actual production), but Tony Battie seems like a decent enough comparison to me. He doesn't have any post moves, he plays okay defense (which is why he keeps earning new contracts), and usually puts in "sub-replacement" performances (thanks, BPro!). Maybe, if Hasheem becomes Tony Battie, he can sort of earn back his contract wait that's depressing.
We knew Hasheem and Flynn were largely hopeless. What about Squid? His comparables are interesting: Omri Casspi last year, Evan Turner's disappointing rookie season, Raja Bell in '05. These are fairly small expectations, and if he were given routine playing time, I think he could earn the value of his relatively modest contract back. The biggest stumbling block is Williams' terrible true shooting, which just has to get higher with a more complementary role, right? He has the court vision, size, rebounding, and speed to be a superstar, but his actual ability to finish at the rim and make shots is ridiculously poor right now. Maybe, just maybe, he can become more, but I would remind everyone that the league's history is littered with guys just like Terrence who could never put their athleticism together into actual wins.
But actual ability isn't the only consideration for whether or not the Rockets should pick up these guys' contracts: they likely won't get playing time at all unless a trade is made, and even if they do, free agency might provide significantly better players (and if it doesn't, the d-league's replacement stock is certainly more cost-effective).
All told, the '09 Draft Crew (not including Bud, of course) would cost $17.5 million next year. Dropping them would create more than enough room to offer a max deal or offer several smaller deals. Making a tough decision like amnestying Scola would increase the free space to over $27 million. That's a lot of cap space, and while it's unlikely that the Rockets can attract a big-time free agent (unless everyone suddenly realizes how fucking cool Kyle Lowry is) with the right moves they can put together something pretty interesting.
What that could be a discussion for another time, however. In any case, don't be entirely surprised if the Rockets decide to scrap the whole thing and take the cap space. All things considered, it's what I'd probably do. You don't want deals like that for Hill or Williams -- you need deals for them where they are mostly producing pure profit, not where they're struggling to make the deal worth it. Under the cap rules, cap freedom is just too precious for you to waste significant money on guys like that, no matter how endearing Squid's dunks or Hill's occasional bursts of goodness are.
Anyways, my point is a simple one: We can say that these players "might" become worthwhile. We can marvel at Terrence's athleticism and Flynn's handle (I guess) and Hasheem's height, but the gap between where they are right now and what it would take to justify their contracts is, for the most part, enormous. These are players who, given their production, belong in the D-League or Europe, not an NBA bench. It's unfortunate, because all of these players would perhaps have been better served (developmentally, not financially) by being picked much later in the draft. Were Hasheem taken as the first pick in the second round, were he stashed in Europe for a few years while he learned the basics of footwork and playing professionally, then perhaps he would now be playing on an NBA team as a legitimate contributor. Were Williams and Flynn overseas (or even in the D-League), they might learn how to better use the tools at their disposal.
Instead, these players were taken in the lottery. Williams floundered as a rookie and has been stuck on the bench ever since. Flynn was put in a system that didn't in any way fit his skills. Hasheem didn't flourish immediately, and so the Grizzlies hid their mistake from nightly viewing. All three were mistakes. They should not have been taken so early in the draft, and if there is a great case for expanding the D-League's role, it's these guys.
36 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
johny flynn
johny flynn isn’t that bad of a player actually but we have better ones that’s the problem
by MilitaryBigfoot on Jan 22, 2012 6:17 AM CST reply actions
2008 Draft Class > 2009 Draft Class
Across the board for all poisitions #enoughsaid
by Carlos_HoustonSportsFanatic on Jan 23, 2012 10:46 AM CST up reply actions
It all depends on the moves made
Dragic is a free agent so maybe Flynn sticks around. I think Hill is here no matter what, he’s a legit backup C/PF. Thabeet is a likely no and T Will is up in the air.
by twinkilling0303 on Jan 22, 2012 8:21 AM CST reply actions
I like the OALIPP
"I’m not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information." Bill Watterson~Calvin and Hobbes
by The Chuckwagon has rolled on on Jan 22, 2012 9:19 AM CST reply actions
Stats are Great But!
I’m a Rocket’s fan that doesn’t understand why the Rockets went out and signed SD. No one will argue that he isn’t better today than Thabeet but how can Thabeet improve at all playing in practices against players on his own team as opposed to the centers of the NBA?
If the Rockets can not or will not send him down to the D league to get playing time how does one improve his skills sitting the bench? how does that benefit the player and/or the team? If the Rockets won’t play him in NBA games what does that tell all other GMs around the league? If he is just going to sit the bench and ownership has no problem paying him then why not just waive him and get him off the roster? why wait?
Three things:
why the Rockets went out and signed SD
The Rockets signed Dalembert because the difference between him and Thabeet is enormous. They probably could not have known that Dalembert would be this productive (going by WP48, he’s about twice as productive now than his career average), but he was still an average center (in WS, anyways. In WP48 he was a career .158, 50% more productive than the average player). Hasheem is a replacement-level scrub. That’s a difference of 3-4+ wins across the season. Right now it would be a difference of about 6-8+ wins. That’s an enormous difference. The Rockets want to win, and they wouldn’t win with Thabeet as the backup (or, heaven forbid, the starter).
If the Rockets can not or will not send him down to the D league to get playing time how does one improve his skills sitting the bench?
Why the Rockets don’t send him down to the D-League is an interesting question. He should still be eligible, after all. From his career numbers in the d-league, he does fine in that level of competition, and so perhaps they don’t think he can learn anything down there. Maybe they think he would be better served working with McHale every day.
If the Rockets won’t play him in NBA games what does that tell all other GMs around the league?
It’s sort of cute that you think that actually playing Thabeet — exposing his flaws to the world on a nightly basis — would increase his value.
Thabeet’s value is as an expiring contract. He doesn’t really have any value as a player right now. His contract is too big to make trading for him worthwhile (even if you think he could be a decent backup — this was the point of the article) unless you’re trying to clear cap space.
If he is just going to sit the bench and ownership has no problem paying him then why not just waive him and get him off the roster? why wait?
Because he can always be used in a trade to make the contract numbers work or to help another team clear cap space. He has value in trade because (paradoxically) he has a terrible contract.
And there’s always the chance he could suddenly morph into Tony Battie.
He's eseentially an expiring contract....
so it doesn’t matter if he’s with Rockets not suiting up, in the D-League, or playing Just Dance 2…
temporary avatar change...
He might be more valuable
sitting on the bench.
"Do not panic, all is well" Kevin Bacon in the parade scene in the movie Animal House
by mjdinhouston on Jan 22, 2012 2:50 PM CST up reply actions
Addendum (because there needs to be more):
Actually, this more of an aside.
Anyways, I talked a little bit about the differences between WS and WP48, but for the most part the players examined didn’t have radically different values. Hill was a little below average in WS/48, while he was a little above average in WP48, but it wasn’t a huge difference.
Kyle Lowry’s difference in value is much larger between the two systems. In WS/48, he’s a decent all-star. In WP48, he’s an obvious all-star on the verge of superstardom this year (.286 WP48, around guys like Dwight Howard, Iggy, Love, Chris Paul, etc. WP48 values above .200 are “stars;” those above .300 are superstars).
Dalembert’s kinda the same thing, though in WS/48 he is one of the most productive centers in the West (easily beating Bynum, Jordan, and the like — his competition appears to be Marc Gasol). In WP48 he is an obvious superstar (.325 WP48).
Neat.
Is there any chance of keeping dalembert for more than 2 years?
Is there concern about his age or something
Well, he'll be 31 next season.
Big men tend to age well as long as their knees don’t go out, simply because they never stop being tall. He hasn’t had any injury concerns as far as I know, and he has only played fewer than 70 games once outside of his rookie season. I’d say that, provided the Rockets hang on to him this season (and if they keep playing like this I imagine that they will), he’ll be on the Rockets next year, and if he plays like this (or reasonably close to it) the season after, they’d probably have to look at signing him long-term.
The issue, of course, is that what the Rockets do and who they sign/extend has a lot to do with what sort of players they acquire in the next six months.
And if Dalembert plays really well for the next two seasons, he’ll be able to command a lot in free agency. A Scola-like (well-compensated, but not so huge that it is crippling) deal would be ideal, I suppose, but a 7-foot quality center could probably get a lot more than that. I’d be really hesitant to sign him for much more than that, even if his play is outstanding.
I think we only keep Hill.
T-Will’s done. He didn’t play when Lee was out, while we were thin at SG and SF.
Flynn, like T-Will, is likely gone, but I can see Morey picking up their options.
Thabeet is gone, definitely. He can’t even beat out Jeff Adrien for playing time.
"Hakeem couldn't kick your ass cuz you were too
close kissin his!"- Sir Charles to Kenny Smith.
Hill is going to stay. At least with him you can see the development.
Flynn, although his numbers look bad I think can adjust and his numbers will rebound some.
Thabeet and Twill are just plain gone. Neither is worth the contract they signed and they are not likely to flick the switch any time soon.
"Slammed that hoe on the counter like I just got 35 on the domino table!!"
Sherrod Harris
Let's face it
The lockout killed any chance of Thabeet earning his contract. A summer of self-organized work-out is not something that can help him, and the fact that he utilize that time to turn some heads overseas also leaves him pretty much dead in the water at this stage. His option is also high, it’s a no brainer to let him go
Hill has been frustrating with his development seemingly stunted at inconsistent, I have hopes for him to get defensive rotation, but nothing more
Williams is the single most baffling player on this entire roster, obviously talented, yet some how cannot earn any time. We just dont know what to do with him.
Flynn, I dont know what to say, but he’s got some bad habit accumulated from playing at minny that he still couldnt shake and he’s not gonna get time here to dod so
We are in a position to literally scrap everyone except for the long term contracts, but I expect that to change as the mid-season trade deadline approaches. Celtics wants to do a tear down, I cant get an accurate read on the Suns, but they seems to be nearing the twilight as well, there are other likely trade partner, Thunders are in need of a back up PG, and a little veteran presence would not hurt either
the Knicks
Would be a great trade partner for flynn if they had any assets of value.
by Christopher Dion Harris on Jan 22, 2012 1:53 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Williams looks like he's done in Houston.
Sad, he had so much potential. I wonder who’s going to pick him up.
Sonicsgate: A movie about how the Sonics were stolen from Seattle.
The Conneticut Sun
"Do not panic, all is well" Kevin Bacon in the parade scene in the movie Animal House
by mjdinhouston on Jan 22, 2012 2:48 PM CST up reply actions
The problem with Flynn
Is that he’s being paid way more money than is proportional to the quality of his play. If he was getting paid under $1M I would understand picking up his option, but with the cost of his contract, I think there is no way.
turn them loose
Clear the cap space. We drafted a decent back up center and we should get him on our bench next year.
We have the opportunity to move up in the draft a bit or clear big cap space for free agency. With a young explosive team this year we just might attract the superstar we need.
It would appear Kyle is a well above average player and we have a PF developing well a consistent shooting two, a decent bench and a coach who seems to be connecting well with the players.
"Do not panic, all is well" Kevin Bacon in the parade scene in the movie Animal House
by mjdinhouston on Jan 22, 2012 2:47 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Here is the problem.
we are using advanced statistics with very small sample sizes and no information about the variances of the statistics. this is something most stats lack. we only know the AVERAGE, we don’t have a clue about distribution. Distribution matters, a lot.
by BuckeyeBob on Jan 22, 2012 4:06 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
additionally i have been curious why we don’t have more robust statistical methods. everything is average or percentage based.
Because firmer stuff isn't avaliable on a day-to-day basis, if it is available at all.
And I’m no statistician, so I’m not going to do it myself.
I'm amused by the projections here.
Primarily because they take minutes that are entirely theoretical and attempt to use real data to get a projection. As it stands, I don’t think you can calculate Thabeet, Williams, or Flynn’s stats and project minutes because their time on the court doesn’t warrant such a treatment. The eye test certainly speaks to Williams having a positive impact as a ball handler on the second unit but not much else really. Thabeet? Doesn’t see the floor, doing any stat projections with him is a misnomer that only theory craft can justify. Same goes with Flynn.
I’m a bigger believer in my eye than any assortment of stats, especially marginally useful ones. The end game is all about results, not really much else.
Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.
I don’t think you can calculate Thabeet, Williams, or Flynn’s stats and project minutes because their time on the court doesn’t warrant such a treatment.
With the exception of Thabeet, all of these guys have had significant time in the NBA. Flynn was in a bad situation, but we saw what he could do with basically two full years in the NBA. It’s not like he was buried on the bench. He started 81 games his rookie season and got almost 1000 minutes last year. And Williams’s numbers last year in limited time weren’t really any different from his rookie campaign.
Furthermore, an inability to get on the court is something that is meaningful. Yes, there are extenuating circumstances with Williams this year (he is blocked by a lot of guys), but that Flynn and Thabeet can’t make it up the depth chart is something statistically meaningful. It means they’re relatively unlikely to see time next year, because whoever is brought in to compete with them has a good chance of taking their spot (see Jeff Adrien).
But, ultimately, I think what’s most interesting here is what would be required for these guys to actually earn their contracts. Do you really think Thabeet can play at the level required? Maybe, but if I’m the Rockets I probably think I can do a lot better with $6.5 million than Thabeet and a prayer. Do you think Flynn can be 70% of an average player and get significant minutes? Maybe, but again, for $4 million the Rockets could probably do better.
The end game is all about results, not really much else.
And that’s what stats are. They reflect objective reality. What happened. What didn’t happen. There is a subjective element thanks to the role of the scorer, but overall I trust the numbers far more than my own eyes. Science tells us that your eyes and brain will trick you. The numbers might do that, too, but I’ll sure as hell trust the numbers more.
It's what *stats* are. Arbitrary extrapolations of figures that are not necessarily relavent is something very different.
The Rockets most likely can do better with the 6.5 million dollars Thabeet gets but do we know what Thabeet can do or with absolute certainty know why he’s not on the court? Until anyone can answer that, we’re left with pure speculation.
In regards to Flynn, he underwent hip surgery and is in a different system and situation in Houston, he hasn’t seen the floor to much so as far as I’m concerned it’s an entirely useless speculative exercise to assign an advanced stat as arbitrary as win shares or whatever theorycraft we wish to occupy our time with may say.
If you wish to talk about Williams extrapolations are theoretical as well. Without hard information and legitimate sample sizes these numbers are impressive only in their ability to be convoluted. They’re Rube Goldberg numerical devices as far as I’m concerned. The eye test may be deceitful from time to time but it certainly gives you a better idea for the machinations of something than extrapolating numbers and then rationalizing them after the fact.
Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.
Arbitrary extrapolations of figures that are not necessarily relavent is something very different.
If we’re talking about WP48/WS, neither is arbitrary. Both systems are based on regressions from NBA data — we can see what sorts of offensive and defensive efficiencies create wins, and then we can figure out what sorts of player contributions create those teams.
If we’re talking about minutes, while I joked that my second projection’s minutes were “arbitrary” and that I “guessed,” that was more jest than whole truth. I took their previous minutes per game (which were generally from starting or significant backup time) and assumed they would be given significant play next year. Since we’re asking whether or not these guys should be picked up for next season, I think that’s appropriate, since there’s no way any of them will be worth their contracts if they don’t get play at all.
Is there enough of a sample size to judge these guys? Again, with the exception of Thabeet, all have gotten significant burn, and that’s why I looked at their career numbers, as well. No, Williams didn’t play a lot last year, but in his rookie season he played over 1700 minutes. Yes, guys can improve from their rookie seasons, but (1) we haven’t seen that in more limited time in New Jersey and (2) evidently his coaches haven’t seen such an improvement that he can get even limited time here. I’m hopeful for Williams, because he can be an exciting player, but his shooting has been so poor so far in his career that I’m really doubtful.
The point is, all of these guys have to basically do a total 180 to even have the chance to be here next year. The only exception is Hill, who has turned into a decent rebounder and thus a valuable piece, though perhaps one who could be easily replaced at a cheaper cost.
Thinking Hasheem can be a legitimate backup, or that Flynn can turn it around seems to me to be wishful thinking, at best. You can talk about sample size all you want, but at the end of the day these guys have given zero indication that they can justify their rookie contracts.
The eye test may be deceitful from time to time but it certainly gives you a better idea for the machinations of something than extrapolating numbers and then rationalizing them after the fact.
The “eye test” is largely bullshit. You see what you want to see. You see an exciting, athletic guard who can throw down amazing dunks and you think “What a player!” not “Holy shit, he needs to get his true shooting above .500 soon or he’s going to wash out of the league.” You see Flynn and you think, “He looks like a legitimate point guard,” not “Here’s a guy who can’t shoot, who turns the ball over a little too much and who doesn’t pass well enough to justify it, and who by all indications can’t play defense.”
Furthermore, while you complain about the sample size for these stats, the same holds true for the “eye test.” Seeing a guy up close doesn’t magic away the fact that we’ve only seen Flynn play 70 minutes this season, and that’s why we have to look at their career totals. Yes, Flynn is in a different, non-triangle system now. But that doesn’t mean his 3370 minutes in the NBA prior to this season are meaningless. They show something real — the guy can’t shoot.
What the stats tell us is pretty certain: Williams has to get a better jump shot to justify playing him, and he has to finish better at the rim. Hasheem has to finish better. He has to stop fouling. Those aren’t necessarily revelations, but when you look at the aggregate data you see just how far behind these guys are.
That’s why the minutes are important — the fact that they haven’t gotten on the court so far is evidence that they won’t, and there’s almost certainly good reason for that. But even if they can get on the court, they’ll have to blow away all of their old statistical contributions to make their options anywhere close to worthwhile pickups. Maybe you think Thabeet doesn’t see court time for some other reason than that he can’t beat out Jeff Adrien for that last spot on the depth chart, but I think that explanation (he sucks worse than Jeff Adrien) is a much easier explanation (and one more likely to be true) than any other.
by Only_A_Lad on Jan 22, 2012 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I can see there is no such thing as discussing these stats with you.
You are a believer, I believe in watching the unit and assessing the situation. I don’t think either is more valid than the other. Enjoy your stats, I’ll enjoy my methods. Both have merit.
Maireann croí éadrom i bhfad.
We can Dream.
If we could make the BIG TRADE and get Howard, then maybe Dalembert will stay on for years as his backup and sometimes as twin towers. With Lowry any other combinations of what is left we could be great:
1.Lowry
2.Lee
3.Chandler
4.Patterson
5.Howard
Bench of Dalembert and whoever is left of Morris, Hill, Dragic, Williams and Bud would be a nice fairly young team. Money could work but will never happen. It should would be nice though.
Howard does not want to come here,
even though he is inconsistent we shouldl keep Hill. I would also keep TWill, he played well and then was benched for unknown reasons. Flyn is not better then Dragic, and should be traded or just let go, and the same for Thabust. Thabeet is so useless our coach will play 6’7 Adrien or Scola at center. The only way Bud should stay is if Morris goes back to the four, possibly by a Scola trade, if this happens and we do not get a three in return Twill should get the minutes.
by since86rocketsfan on Jan 22, 2012 6:27 PM CST reply actions
For once I agree with everything you said.
T-Will was playing well before being benched indefinitely. I can understand why C-Bud is rinding the pine now because he has been shit. I’d like to see Morris back in action and see what he learned. I still want to see Thabeet in a non-garbage time situation just to see exactly what the problem is. Surely he cannot be as bad as we think.
I hate david stern!
Hey! You're wrong!
Flynn’s 2k overall is 70 and Dragic’s is 63. Flynn > Dragic. #Logic
Dallas and Houston fan making it work. Gig 'em!

by 


























