[KINGS] Comments that don't warrant their own thread (Redux)
- Thread starter Section 101
- Start date
De'Aaron Fox in the month of February:
37.5 MPG
.298 USG%
.583 TS%
.506 FG% (20.5 FGA)
.551 2P% (15.9 2PA)
.351 3P% (4.6 3PA)
.771 FT% (6.0 FTA)
27.0 PPG
4.4 RPG
6.1 APG
0.6 SPG
0.8 BPG
2.9 TOPG
2.1 AST:TO
.710 0-3ft FG%
.537 4-9ft FG%
.429 10-15ft FG%
.556 16-3PT FG%
If he can knock down 3s at a 35% clip and shoot 55% from 16ft+, he's going to be incredibly difficult to stop.
37.5 MPG
.298 USG%
.583 TS%
.506 FG% (20.5 FGA)
.551 2P% (15.9 2PA)
.351 3P% (4.6 3PA)
.771 FT% (6.0 FTA)
27.0 PPG
4.4 RPG
6.1 APG
0.6 SPG
0.8 BPG
2.9 TOPG
2.1 AST:TO
.710 0-3ft FG%
.537 4-9ft FG%
.429 10-15ft FG%
.556 16-3PT FG%
If he can knock down 3s at a 35% clip and shoot 55% from 16ft+, he's going to be incredibly difficult to stop.
It’ll be interesting to me if both Fox and Sabonis keep playing this well and the team is actually winning next year (at or above .500), who will get the All-Star nod? If I had to bet without seeing the production of each player, I’d say Sabonis because the narrative would likely be that he’s turned things around in Sacramento.
What I'm worried about is he's only gained 0.1 VORP since the start of February.
For comparison, Morant has a 3.4 VORP on the season while Fox is sitting at 0.3, which is the worst since his rookie year. Usually Fox finishes around 2 VORP on the season but this year he'll be lucky to even get to 1.
Teams simply don't win when their best players don't have good impact stats. I don't know what he needs to do differently but he's not going to lead the teams to many wins if his impact on the game stays low while his numbers stay high. He's kind of sitting in early career Jabari Parker/Zach Lavine territory right now. Numbers look good but they aren't producing wins.
For comparison, Morant has a 3.4 VORP on the season while Fox is sitting at 0.3, which is the worst since his rookie year. Usually Fox finishes around 2 VORP on the season but this year he'll be lucky to even get to 1.
Teams simply don't win when their best players don't have good impact stats. I don't know what he needs to do differently but he's not going to lead the teams to many wins if his impact on the game stays low while his numbers stay high. He's kind of sitting in early career Jabari Parker/Zach Lavine territory right now. Numbers look good but they aren't producing wins.
I mean, Tyrese and Domas have had good VORP over the last two seasons and their teams have sucked raw eggs so maybe VORP isn’t the end-all be-all to determine a player’s impact?
in the only season the Kings were respectable (the Joerger run and gun year), his VORP was 2.3, which was more than respectable for a second year player. Up until this year, his VORP was right in the range where you’d assume the lead guard of a bad defensive team would be. Hell, Davion’s VORP is -.6, which would rate him worse than Tristan Thompson, which is categorically untrue lol.
This isn’t a screed against VORP by any means. I just find that VORP screws heavily towards big men and shooters while also uncaregorically penalizing players on bad defensive teams regardless of whether or not they’re at fault or not (in this regard, Fox does deserve some blame).
Also according to VORP Jokic is more than twice as good as Kevin Durant. (Seriously, Jokic’s VORP numbers are insane lol)
in the only season the Kings were respectable (the Joerger run and gun year), his VORP was 2.3, which was more than respectable for a second year player. Up until this year, his VORP was right in the range where you’d assume the lead guard of a bad defensive team would be. Hell, Davion’s VORP is -.6, which would rate him worse than Tristan Thompson, which is categorically untrue lol.
This isn’t a screed against VORP by any means. I just find that VORP screws heavily towards big men and shooters while also uncaregorically penalizing players on bad defensive teams regardless of whether or not they’re at fault or not (in this regard, Fox does deserve some blame).
Also according to VORP Jokic is more than twice as good as Kevin Durant. (Seriously, Jokic’s VORP numbers are insane lol)
Obviously VORP isn't a list of the best player all the way down to the worst player but I think there are some pretty hard line rules with the stat. I don't think you will find a team in modern history who made the playoffs with their leading usage player having a VORP as low as Fox's. Most of the players who lead their teams to the playoffs don't do it with low impact stats. I would bet that it's probably impossible for a legit 8th seed to have impact stats as low as his. The most balanced playoff team right now is the 8th seed Clippers who have 5 players with a VORP over 1 with PG surely being in the 3+ range if he played the entire season. The Kings have Sabonis and Barnes as the only two players over 1 at the moment.
It's not a perfect stat by any means but it does show a pretty good job overall of who is impacting the games and who isn't. There are outliers here and there. Like I think Hali's VORP is higher than it should be and Fox's seems like it's lower than it should be but true high usage leaders almost always have a high VORP. Klay Thompson has a lower VORP than you'd expect but most players are about where they should be once you start looking at the stat a bit.
Davion has played 2-3x the minutes as TT so I would say that their VORPs are about correct. TT would likely have the same or slightly worse than Davion if he played the same amount of minutes. We tend to forget that Davion shoots 1-9 every few games with little impact other than maybe a stop here and there and a bunch of fouls. He has been really bad this season. We just have to hope that his good games from this year turn into average games next year and his average games this year are few and far between next year. Otherwise he is going to have trouble sticking around. The refs allowing him to defend would be a step in the right direction.
It's not a perfect stat by any means but it does show a pretty good job overall of who is impacting the games and who isn't. There are outliers here and there. Like I think Hali's VORP is higher than it should be and Fox's seems like it's lower than it should be but true high usage leaders almost always have a high VORP. Klay Thompson has a lower VORP than you'd expect but most players are about where they should be once you start looking at the stat a bit.
Davion has played 2-3x the minutes as TT so I would say that their VORPs are about correct. TT would likely have the same or slightly worse than Davion if he played the same amount of minutes. We tend to forget that Davion shoots 1-9 every few games with little impact other than maybe a stop here and there and a bunch of fouls. He has been really bad this season. We just have to hope that his good games from this year turn into average games next year and his average games this year are few and far between next year. Otherwise he is going to have trouble sticking around. The refs allowing him to defend would be a step in the right direction.
The issue there is that USG% in itself is a bit of a broken stat (doesn't necessarily account for hockey assists/etc.).
Last season, Fox had a higher VORP than Devin Booker (2.0 vs. 1.3) despite Booker playing 9 more games than him in a season and Booker having a higher USG than him (32.7 vs. 31), meanwhile, Chris Paul had a 22.6 USG rate and 3.6 VORP despite handling the ball for seemingly the majority of his possessions. (Although I am still honestly at a loss for why Booker's VORP was so low last year compared to this one)
I do agree with you that teams with more high VORP players are usually pretty freaking good but then there are teams like the Nuggets where Jokic has an absurdly high VORP and then there are like three guys hovering at or close to 1. The Sixers were sort of in the same boat with Embiid as their one high VORP guy and then having a couple of dudes right around 1 (that'll probably change with Harden, who's still had good advanced numbers in Brooklyn despite playing like absolute trash the entire season).
If we're operating under the idea that Fox's .3 VORP this year is an aberration (and everything would seem to indicate that it is) and that Sabonis can play even better if the Kings find a coach who can maximize his talents (likely), VORP <3 facilitator (in this case a big) and VORP ~2 guard isn't really too far off from the norm as long as Monte can surround them with players that aren't putting up minus numbers.
TLDR, I think we're putting too much stock into Fox's USG number as an indicator of his role on offense as opposed to the role/hierarchical position he'd fill on a team that isn't completely unwatchable (in other words, the Kings this season up until the Sabonis trade).
Last season, Fox had a higher VORP than Devin Booker (2.0 vs. 1.3) despite Booker playing 9 more games than him in a season and Booker having a higher USG than him (32.7 vs. 31), meanwhile, Chris Paul had a 22.6 USG rate and 3.6 VORP despite handling the ball for seemingly the majority of his possessions. (Although I am still honestly at a loss for why Booker's VORP was so low last year compared to this one)
I do agree with you that teams with more high VORP players are usually pretty freaking good but then there are teams like the Nuggets where Jokic has an absurdly high VORP and then there are like three guys hovering at or close to 1. The Sixers were sort of in the same boat with Embiid as their one high VORP guy and then having a couple of dudes right around 1 (that'll probably change with Harden, who's still had good advanced numbers in Brooklyn despite playing like absolute trash the entire season).
If we're operating under the idea that Fox's .3 VORP this year is an aberration (and everything would seem to indicate that it is) and that Sabonis can play even better if the Kings find a coach who can maximize his talents (likely), VORP <3 facilitator (in this case a big) and VORP ~2 guard isn't really too far off from the norm as long as Monte can surround them with players that aren't putting up minus numbers.
TLDR, I think we're putting too much stock into Fox's USG number as an indicator of his role on offense as opposed to the role/hierarchical position he'd fill on a team that isn't completely unwatchable (in other words, the Kings this season up until the Sabonis trade).
Barnes has the best offensive rating of the current starters, so while I can see Barnes getting traded due to demand from other teams, I don't think it'll be because of fit. I do think the Kings need to get longer at the 4 spot, but the type of players that the Kings will want are dudes like Barnes, who play within the flow of the game rather than black hole it like Fox and Domas. Though the black holing with Domas is significantly less of an issue, because he's the only Kings player with an elite versatility rating (@ 13.9). Elite players rate higher than 10. Average players rate at 5. For perspective, Fox comes in at 8.9. Hali at 8.7. Buddy at 6.7.
I'm running some data that combines usage%/minutes%, which, I think, measures the amount of the time the player goes for a shot vs. the amount of time that he has an influence on the ball. Fox's ratio is 39.2%. Domas is 35.5%. Hali, Barnes, and Holiday are between 25% and 27%. Interestingly, DDV and Mitchell are between 33% and 37%. For perspective, Buddy had a 37% ratio. I'm not confident, yet, that this measures what I think it does, because I can't find the formula for minutes%. In theory, minutes% measures the percentage that a player has a say in where the ball goes (in his hand, moving the ball, etc), so you'd expect guards to be high (Fox and Hali are in 70% range), but a secondary/tertiary ball handler like Barnes is also at 70%. So I'm trying figure out what it actually measures. That said, my bet, the dudes that Monte will target in the off season, will be dudes, who are in the 25% to 27% range like Barnes.
I'm running some data that combines usage%/minutes%, which, I think, measures the amount of the time the player goes for a shot vs. the amount of time that he has an influence on the ball. Fox's ratio is 39.2%. Domas is 35.5%. Hali, Barnes, and Holiday are between 25% and 27%. Interestingly, DDV and Mitchell are between 33% and 37%. For perspective, Buddy had a 37% ratio. I'm not confident, yet, that this measures what I think it does, because I can't find the formula for minutes%. In theory, minutes% measures the percentage that a player has a say in where the ball goes (in his hand, moving the ball, etc), so you'd expect guards to be high (Fox and Hali are in 70% range), but a secondary/tertiary ball handler like Barnes is also at 70%. So I'm trying figure out what it actually measures. That said, my bet, the dudes that Monte will target in the off season, will be dudes, who are in the 25% to 27% range like Barnes.
I definitely wouldn't want to over pay for Barnes.
He gives you one game of 20+ on great efficiency, then drops like, 6 points on 5 fg attempts the next game.
Awesome when he's on, but I hate that listless Mr Invisible we get every other game. Dude should be our 3rd option, but he doesn't play like one consistently enough to merit getting paid like one.
He gives you one game of 20+ on great efficiency, then drops like, 6 points on 5 fg attempts the next game.
Awesome when he's on, but I hate that listless Mr Invisible we get every other game. Dude should be our 3rd option, but he doesn't play like one consistently enough to merit getting paid like one.
Last edited:
it's a conundrum of sorts. I think he was brought here to be a vet option behind 3 other guys (Fox, Bagley, Buddy) but right now moving him to get picks or prospects just moves us further back. We need to draft and hopefully package Holmes + for two other starting caliber players that can get Barnes back in that role. But if we ship him we're back to just having two true starters again.