Advanced Stats (IT, Tyreke, Thornton, and Jimmer) from Aykis of SactownRoyalty

[vikinginferno]

I thought these stats were very comprehensive of all 4 of our guards. These stats were compiled by Aykis of Sactown Royalty.

Isaiah Thomas

PER: 17.7

TS%: .574

ORB%: 3.0%

DRB%: 8.4%

AST%: 25.6%

STL%: 1.6%

BLK%: 0.4%

TOV%: 13.9%

USG%: 19.9%

Offensive Rating: 116

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.98

P&R Ball Handler (25.2%): 1.04 (4th in the NBA)
Spot-Up (23.6%): 0.98
Transition (17.9%): 1.24
Isolation (17.8%): 0.92 (24th in the NBA)
Shot Locations

At Rim: 1.4 FGM / 2.2 FGA (62.9%)
3-9 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.2 FGA (40.0%)
10-15 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 0.6 FGA (43.9%)
16-23 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.4 FGA (38.0%)
Threes: 1.3 FGM / 3.4 FGA (37.9%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.33
Defensive Rating: 113

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.83

P&R Ball Handler (43.1%): 0.76
Spot-Up (23.2%): 1.02
Isolation (16.1%): 0.69
Post-Up (7.2%): 0.6 (9th in NBA)

Tyreke Evans

PER:16.4

TS%: .512

ORB%: 3.1%

DRB%: 12.0%

AST%: 22.1%

STL%: 2.0%

BLK%: 1.0%

TOV%: 14.4%

USG%: 23.8%

Offensive Rating: 103

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.86

Isolation (28.7%): 0.74
Transition (25.7%): 1.11
P&R Ball Handler (13.6%): 0.71
Spot-Up (11.7%): 0.7
Cut (5.9%): 1.31
Shot Locations

At Rim: 4.6 FGM / 7.0 FGA (64.6%)
3-9 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 2.0 FGA (26.6%)
10-15 Feet: 0.1 FGM / 0.5 FGA (23.5%)
16-23 Feet: 0.9 FGM / 3.1 FGA (30.0%)
Threes: 0.3 FGM / 1.6 FGA (20.2%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.29
Defensive Rating: 111

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.88

Spot-Up (33.9%): 1.01
P&R Ball Handler (25.7%): 0.79
Isolation (13.1%): 0.7
Off Screen (11.6%): 0.96

Marcus Thornton

PER: 17.4

TS%: .544

ORB%: 4.9%

DRB%: 6.7%

AST%: 9.4%

STL%: 2.0%

BLK%: 0.5%

TOV%: 8.8%

USG%: 23.4%

Offensive Rating: 111

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.98

Spot-Up (21.8%): 0.92
Transition (22.6%): 1.34
P&R Ball Handler (14.1%): 0.84
Isolation (12.8%): 0.69
Cut (7.6%): 1.28
Shot Locations

At Rim: 3.1 FGM / 4.5 FGA (67.5%)
3-9 Feet: 0.6 FGM / 2.2 FGA (28.3%)
10-15 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 0.8 FGA (32.5%)
16-23 Feet: 0.9 FGM / 2.1 FGA (40.0%)
Threes: 2.1 FGM / 6.1 FGA (34.5%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.20
Defensive Rating: 112

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.88

Spot-Up (31.8%): 0.91
P&R Ball Handler (26.5%): 0.8
Off Screen (13.3%): 0.84
Post-Up (11.2%): 0.87
Isolation (9.2%): 0.91

Jimmer Fredette

PER: 10.8

TS%: .495

ORB%: 1.6%

DRB%: 5.7%

AST%: 15.1%

STL%: 1.3%

BLK%: 0.2%

TOV%: 12.5%

USG%: 20.4%

Offensive Rating: 100

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.86

P&R Ball Handler (25.2%): 0.86
Spot-Up (23.9%): 1.01
Transition (17.6%): 1.1
Isolation (12.1%): 0.7
Off Screen (8.9%): 0.68
Shot Locations

At Rim: 0.6 FGM / 0.9 FGA (67.3%)
3-9 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 1.0 FGA (25.8%)
10-15 Feet: 0.2 FGM / 0.5 FGA (30.3%)
16-23 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.3 FGA (39.0%)
Threes: 1.3 FGM / 3.5 FGA (36.1%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.11
Defensive Rating: 114

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.89

Spot-Up (29.1%): 0.85
P&R Ball Handler (31%): 0.91
Isolation (15.8%): 0.67
Off Screen (8.3%): 0.97
Hand Off (8.0%): 1.0


What do these stats reveal? (my insight, not Aykis)

IT has been the best all-around guard on the team this season (I am not saying he is the best player of the 4, simply that he played the best all-around this season). At the lowest usage rate of all of the guards, IT managed to post the highest assist %. He also was the most efficient at scoring out of the guards with a 57% true shooting percentage. The team becomes much better with him on the floor, as shown by his offensive rating (the highest). What some might be surprised about (and what I have been saying for ages) is that IT is a very good defender and likely our best PG defender. He has the best overall defensive points per possession and has no weakness on defense. Players try to post him up, but it just does not work.

Tyreke is deadly at the rim, but is terrible everywhere else. I think most would agree that his spot is at SG and he needs to at least be able to keep the defense honest when he is away from the basket. Evans also isn't nearly as good a defender at SF as he is at the guard position. Once he fully commits himself to the defensive side of the ball, he can be a stopper. Right now, he is a pretty good individual defender, but a bad team defender.

As we all probably know without looking at the stats, Thornton is a great scorer, but not so great in most other areas besides rebounding. His assist % is quite low, but I am fine with that as I feel his role should be pretty much only to score buckets. Thornton is pretty bad defensively and when Tyreke is out of position guarding SFs, the team's perimeter defense struggles heavily. I feel that he should come off the bench as a 6th man and move Reke over to SG.

With a PER only slightly over 10, Jimmer did not have a good season. He struggled to create his own shot against better athletes in the NBA. He was a decent passer with a 15.1% assist percentage. He's going to need to improve on both sides of the ball if he wants to be an important player in the NBA.

 

[rainmaker]

Take Rose and stick him at SF and tell him to stand in the corner and his stats will probably look worse, or less efficient than Watsons. Take Parker and stick him in the corner off the ball and his stats suffer as well. You point to IT's higher ast%, but Reke had the higher ast rate as a PG.

Usage rate can be tossed as there's no before/after stats for the switch from SF. But when IT had the ball more as a PG when Reke was SF, in comparison to when Reke had it as a PG under Smart, Reke had the higher ast rate, %, and APG, at 5.9, which is obviously higher than IT's. How much can you really take from stats which don't account for change of position or change of roles? Tough comparing IT statistically when he has the ball in his hands most possessions, to a guy who was playing the Bruce Bowen role much of the season, and then act like the ast % between the two means anything.

Defensively, it doesn't take into account who you're guarding. Doesn't take into account many times Reke guarded the best player out of the three he/IT/MT would be matched up against. So are we saying IT is the best defender, while looking at the stats of his opponent when he's usually being hidden on the weaker guy? Reke takes Westbrook, IT takes Sefalosha, and because IT holds him to less PPP or PTs in pick & roll situation it means he's your best defender of the guards?

To say IT has no weakness on defense is funny. Then why does he get hidden on the weaker opponent many times, and would have many more if not for MT also being next to him? Every time it was a Reke/IT back court IT was hidden. Other times it was the less of two evils when MT was out there and Reke would take the better of the 2/3.

Draw all the out of context conclusions you'd like.

I will say that something which can clearly be taken from this however is Reke's shooting %'s are unacceptable. Hopefully what we saw the last month of the season is here to stay, at the least.

 

[vikinginferno]

Uhh, what? IT was hidden? How come he was the one guarding (and outplaying many of) guys like CP3, Parker, Irving, Wall, Rose, Westbrook (in the clutch, Tyreke might have guarded him some in other situations)? He almost always just guarded the PG. There was little to no switching of him onto a "weaker" opponent as you put it. Stop throwing out a bunch of crap and hoping that some of it sticks.

Why are you comparing Tyreke to Rose or Parker? Tyreke is not similar to either of those players. Like I said many times in my post, Tyreke is being played out of position. That does not mean we cannot judge his play at all.

Do you even understand the stats? The USG % includes the long amount of time Tyreke spent at SF and his is STILL much higher than IT's. Even when he was at SF, his USG% was at least that of IT. Your hyperbole is insane. I don't know if you don't watch the games or if you have Alzheimer's (my apologies if you do), but what you are saying and reality are night and day. Tyreke still had the ball a great amount at the SF position and at the SG position. No, he didn't have a 25+% usage rate like it seems some of you would want, but he still had a very high rate and higher than that of IT.

 

[mac]

Uhh, what? IT was hidden? How come he was the one guarding (and outplaying many of) guys like CP3, Parker, Irving, Wall, Rose, Westbrook (in the clutch, Tyreke might have guarded him some in other situations)? He almost always just guarded the PG. There was little to no switching of him onto a "weaker" opponent as you put it. Stop throwing out a bunch of crap and hoping that some of it sticks.

Why are you comparing Tyreke to Rose or Parker? Tyreke is not similar to either of those players. Like I said many times in my post, Tyreke is being played out of position. That does not mean we cannot judge his play at all.

Do you even understand the stats? The USG % includes the long amount of time Tyreke spent at SF and his is STILL much higher than IT's. Even when he was at SF, his USG% was at least that of IT. Your hyperbole is insane. I don't know if you don't watch the games or if you have Alzheimer's (my apologies if you do), but what you are saying and reality are night and day. Tyreke still had the ball a great amount at the SF position and at the SG position. No, he didn't have a 25+% usage rate like it seems some of you would want, but he still had a very high rate and higher than that of IT.

Err. Maybe overall seeing as IT only started starting post all-star. But if you watched the games and felt that Tyreke had the ball in his hands at SF more than IT then you are the one with Alzheimers my friend.

 

[kingsnation]

I don't know if you don't watch the games or if you have Alzheimer's

Classy.

 

[Uncia03]

Another thread discussing how IT is better than Tyreke...

I wonder how many more of these we'll have this off-season. Since the IT for ROY campaign is now over, I fully expect IT to be coming off the bench at the start of next year, unless we make a trade of some sort.

Anyway, here's a simple question:

If the the GMs around the league were tasked with creating an expansion team, and told that their best player was going to be their PG, and then they were given a choice of either choosing Tyreke or IT, which player do you think they would select?

IT was an absolute steal for us, but just because he was a steal doesn't mean that he has to be a starter. Look at Jonas Jerebko or DeJuan Blair. All of them great pick-ups in the last couple drafts, considering where they were drafted, all played good amounts as starters, but ultimately are finding their roles as very valuable bench players.
There is nothing wrong with that.
But you don't alienate your most talented players in order to push for some advertising campaign designed to drive up ticket sales, at least you don't if you have a smart Front-Office.

Tyreke was mis-handled due to an advertising campaign, and if the stats show a drop in production or indicate that IT outplayed Tyreke over the course of the 2nd half of the season, that is something which reflects negatively on the FO, and shouldn't be used to somehow come to the conclusion that IT is a better building block than Tyreke for this franchise.

I think IT is a great change-of-pace PG and hope that he is here next season. I believe he'll do best coming off the bench, or coming in early if we are having problems defensively matching up with a quick guard.

I don't necessarily need Tyreke to be the PG next season, but he has to play at the guard spot, and I would prefer it if his back-court mate is of a size to create the proper mis-matches. Having a large guard like Tyreke and pairing him up with another large guard, (I really want to see how T. Williams would do) is the ideal sort of pairing for me.

 

[The_Jamal]

Uhh, what? IT was hidden? How come he was the one guarding (and outplaying many of) guys like CP3, Parker, Irving, Wall, Rose, Westbrook (in the clutch, Tyreke might have guarded him some in other situations)? He almost always just guarded the PG. There was little to no switching of him onto a "weaker" opponent as you put it. Stop throwing out a bunch of crap and hoping that some of it sticks.

Why are you comparing Tyreke to Rose or Parker? Tyreke is not similar to either of those players. Like I said many times in my post, Tyreke is being played out of position. That does not mean we cannot judge his play at all.

Do you even understand the stats? The USG % includes the long amount of time Tyreke spent at SF and his is STILL much higher than IT's. Even when he was at SF, his USG% was at least that of IT. Your hyperbole is insane. I don't know if you don't watch the games or if you have Alzheimer's (my apologies if you do), but what you are saying and reality are night and day. Tyreke still had the ball a great amount at the SF position and at the SG position. No, he didn't have a 25+% usage rate like it seems some of you would want, but he still had a very high rate and higher than that of IT.

Don't bother backing up your assertions with statistics and logic. This forum is anti-logic/evidence and only chooses to see what they want to believe with regards to Tyreke and IT

 

[Arkitect]

Don't bother backing up your assertions with statistics and logic. This forum is anti-logic/evidence and only chooses to see what they want to believe with regards to Tyreke and IT

The fun part about sports statistics is that you can find a statistic to support almost any assertion you want. When you post an assertion based on statistics, you can always expect some argument.

 

[Kingster]

Thanks for the stats. What needs more refinement (and I'm not interested in doing the chore) are the stats IT accumulated when he was a starter vs. a sub, and the stats that Tyreke accumulated when he was a 1, 2 or 3. The argument is going to be made with Tyreke that playing out of position was the cause of much of the less than stellar stats. But it may be that his position change was the effect, not the cause, of his performance. Hard to prove it either way, but at least with respect to shooting, it seems a difficult sell that Tyreke's bad shooting was due to him playing out of position. If you can't hit an outside shot, it doesn't matter whether you are taking it as a 1, 2 or 3.

The thing that surprised me somewhat was ITs offensive performance in ISO situations. That's a pretty high ranking for a rookie point guard. One question that intrigues about IT is what exactly is his ceiling? It's going to be interesting to see over the coming years.

 

[The Hammer]

I thought these stats were very comprehensive of all 4 of our guards. These stats were compiled by Aykis of Sactown Royalty.

Isaiah Thomas

PER: 17.7

TS%: .574

ORB%: 3.0%

DRB%: 8.4%

AST%: 25.6%

STL%: 1.6%

BLK%: 0.4%

TOV%: 13.9%

USG%: 19.9%

Offensive Rating: 116

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.98

P&R Ball Handler (25.2%): 1.04 (4th in the NBA)
Spot-Up (23.6%): 0.98
Transition (17.9%): 1.24
Isolation (17.8%): 0.92 (24th in the NBA)
Shot Locations

At Rim: 1.4 FGM / 2.2 FGA (62.9%)
3-9 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.2 FGA (40.0%)
10-15 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 0.6 FGA (43.9%)
16-23 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.4 FGA (38.0%)
Threes: 1.3 FGM / 3.4 FGA (37.9%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.33
Defensive Rating: 113

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.83

P&R Ball Handler (43.1%): 0.76
Spot-Up (23.2%): 1.02
Isolation (16.1%): 0.69
Post-Up (7.2%): 0.6 (9th in NBA)

Tyreke Evans

PER:16.4

TS%: .512

ORB%: 3.1%

DRB%: 12.0%

AST%: 22.1%

STL%: 2.0%

BLK%: 1.0%

TOV%: 14.4%

USG%: 23.8%

Offensive Rating: 103

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.86

Isolation (28.7%): 0.74
Transition (25.7%): 1.11
P&R Ball Handler (13.6%): 0.71
Spot-Up (11.7%): 0.7
Cut (5.9%): 1.31
Shot Locations

At Rim: 4.6 FGM / 7.0 FGA (64.6%)
3-9 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 2.0 FGA (26.6%)
10-15 Feet: 0.1 FGM / 0.5 FGA (23.5%)
16-23 Feet: 0.9 FGM / 3.1 FGA (30.0%)
Threes: 0.3 FGM / 1.6 FGA (20.2%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.29
Defensive Rating: 111

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.88

Spot-Up (33.9%): 1.01
P&R Ball Handler (25.7%): 0.79
Isolation (13.1%): 0.7
Off Screen (11.6%): 0.96

Marcus Thornton

PER: 17.4

TS%: .544

ORB%: 4.9%

DRB%: 6.7%

AST%: 9.4%

STL%: 2.0%

BLK%: 0.5%

TOV%: 8.8%

USG%: 23.4%

Offensive Rating: 111

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.98

Spot-Up (21.8%): 0.92
Transition (22.6%): 1.34
P&R Ball Handler (14.1%): 0.84
Isolation (12.8%): 0.69
Cut (7.6%): 1.28
Shot Locations

At Rim: 3.1 FGM / 4.5 FGA (67.5%)
3-9 Feet: 0.6 FGM / 2.2 FGA (28.3%)
10-15 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 0.8 FGA (32.5%)
16-23 Feet: 0.9 FGM / 2.1 FGA (40.0%)
Threes: 2.1 FGM / 6.1 FGA (34.5%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.20
Defensive Rating: 112

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.88

Spot-Up (31.8%): 0.91
P&R Ball Handler (26.5%): 0.8
Off Screen (13.3%): 0.84
Post-Up (11.2%): 0.87
Isolation (9.2%): 0.91

Jimmer Fredette

PER: 10.8

TS%: .495

ORB%: 1.6%

DRB%: 5.7%

AST%: 15.1%

STL%: 1.3%

BLK%: 0.2%

TOV%: 12.5%

USG%: 20.4%

Offensive Rating: 100

Overall Offensive PPP: 0.86

P&R Ball Handler (25.2%): 0.86
Spot-Up (23.9%): 1.01
Transition (17.6%): 1.1
Isolation (12.1%): 0.7
Off Screen (8.9%): 0.68
Shot Locations

At Rim: 0.6 FGM / 0.9 FGA (67.3%)
3-9 Feet: 0.3 FGM / 1.0 FGA (25.8%)
10-15 Feet: 0.2 FGM / 0.5 FGA (30.3%)
16-23 Feet: 0.5 FGM / 1.3 FGA (39.0%)
Threes: 1.3 FGM / 3.5 FGA (36.1%)
Free Throw Rate (FTA/FGA): 0.11
Defensive Rating: 114

Overall Defensive PPP: 0.89

Spot-Up (29.1%): 0.85
P&R Ball Handler (31%): 0.91
Isolation (15.8%): 0.67
Off Screen (8.3%): 0.97
Hand Off (8.0%): 1.0


What do these stats reveal? (my insight, not Aykis)

IT has been the best all-around guard on the team this season. At the lowest usage rate of all of the guards, IT managed to post the highest assist %. He also was the most efficient at scoring out of the guards with a 57% true shooting percentage. The team becomes much better with him on the floor, as shown by his offensive rating (the highest). What some might be surprised about (and what I have been saying for ages) is that IT is a very good defender and likely our best PG defender. He has the best overall defensive points per possession and has no weakness on defense. Players try to post him up, but it just does not work.

Tyreke is deadly at the rim, but is terrible everywhere else. I think most would agree that his spot is at SG and he needs to at least be able to keep the defense honest when he is away from the basket. Evans also isn't nearly as good a defender at SF as he is at the guard position. Once he fully commits himself to the defensive side of the ball, he can be a stopper. Right now, he is a pretty good individual defender, but a bad team defender.

As we all probably know without looking at the stats, Thornton is a great scorer, but not so great in most other areas besides rebounding. His assist % is quite low, but I am fine with that as I feel his role should be pretty much only to score buckets. Thornton is pretty bad defensively and when Tyreke is out of position guarding SFs, the team's perimeter defense struggles heavily. I feel that he should come off the bench as a 6th man and move Reke over to SG.

With a PER only slightly over 10, Jimmer did not have a good season. He struggled to create his own shot against better athletes in the NBA. He was a decent passer with a 15.1% assist percentage. He's going to need to improve on both sides of the ball if he wants to be an important player in the NBA.

This whole post and the conclusions you draw are a pristine example of watching the stats, but not watching the game. Thank you, rainmaker, for taking the time to obliterate it. I second that emotion.

 

[gatoradeSD]

IT thomas doesnt and cant play defense. he just runs fast. and tries hard

 

[Uncia03]

Thanks for the stats. What needs more refinement (and I'm not interested in doing the chore) are the stats IT accumulated when he was a starter vs. a sub, and the stats that Tyreke accumulated when he was a 1, 2 or 3. The argument is going to be made with Tyreke that playing out of position was the cause of much of the less than stellar stats. But it may be that his position change was the effect, not the cause, of his performance. Hard to prove it either way, but at least with respect to shooting, it seems a difficult sell that Tyreke's bad shooting was due to him playing out of position. If you can't hit an outside shot, it doesn't matter whether you are taking it as a 1, 2 or 3.

The thing that surprised me somewhat was ITs offensive performance in ISO situations. That's a pretty high ranking for a rookie point guard. One question that intrigues about IT is what exactly is his ceiling? It's going to be interesting to see over the coming years.

I don't think you're going to find anyone who thinks that Tyreke's shooting doesn't need improving. He clearly needs to become a better shooter.

Also, with-out question IT showed a much better shooting touch, especially from 3pt territory compared to Tyreke.
I don't think anyone will dispute that, and if someone came out with a stat that showed Tyreke as a better shooter from the outside, I would dismiss that stat, because watching the game it's clear who the better outside shooter is.
To me it's abundantly clear that at this moment IT is the better outside shooter and has better court vision than Tyreke.

The issue is that when IT was moved into the starting line-up and Tyreke was moved to the SF spot, Tyreke got frozen out of the offense, and that can't be allowed to continue.

Also, I'm curious if there is a place where you can see assist numbers based on player-to-player interaction.
I can think of multiple times where Tyreke drew in the defense and kicked it out to IT for the open 3. That's a good play, because IT proved that he could make that shot.

What I'm curious about is that Tyreke did show some development in moving with-out the ball and cutting to the rim for an easy bucket, but I don't recall IT being the one to make that pass a lot. So I'd love to know the numbers for the times that Tyreke assisted IT, and then the numbers that IT assisted Tyreke.

 

[vikinginferno]

Classy.

When the mods make subtle jabs when people say something completely ridiculous, it is completely fine. When I do it, it is something that is horrible? There comes a point where people either only see what they want to see in the games or they just aren't watching at all.

 

[vikinginferno]

Another thread discussing how IT is better than Tyreke...

I wonder how many more of these we'll have this off-season. Since the IT for ROY campaign is now over, I fully expect IT to be coming off the bench at the start of next year, unless we make a trade of some sort.

Anyway, here's a simple question:

If the the GMs around the league were tasked with creating an expansion team, and told that their best player was going to be their PG, and then they were given a choice of either choosing Tyreke or IT, which player do you think they would select?

IT was an absolute steal for us, but just because he was a steal doesn't mean that he has to be a starter. Look at Jonas Jerebko or DeJuan Blair. All of them great pick-ups in the last couple drafts, considering where they were drafted, all played good amounts as starters, but ultimately are finding their roles as very valuable bench players.
There is nothing wrong with that.
But you don't alienate your most talented players in order to push for some advertising campaign designed to drive up ticket sales, at least you don't if you have a smart Front-Office.

Tyreke was mis-handled due to an advertising campaign, and if the stats show a drop in production or indicate that IT outplayed Tyreke over the course of the 2nd half of the season, that is something which reflects negatively on the FO, and shouldn't be used to somehow come to the conclusion that IT is a better building block than Tyreke for this franchise.

I think IT is a great change-of-pace PG and hope that he is here next season. I believe he'll do best coming off the bench, or coming in early if we are having problems defensively matching up with a quick guard.

I don't necessarily need Tyreke to be the PG next season, but he has to play at the guard spot, and I would prefer it if his back-court mate is of a size to create the proper mis-matches. Having a large guard like Tyreke and pairing him up with another large guard, (I really want to see how T. Williams would do) is the ideal sort of pairing for me.

I have no idea where you get that I am posting about how "IT is better than Tyreke". I have never said such a thing, nor do I necessarily think that. Nowhere in my post do I compare them besides posting the stats. I am looking at ALL of our guards and how they fit into our team. If you read what I wrote, nowhere am I "bashing" Reke. I say that he should be the starting SG with Thornton coming off the bench. I guess any post that doesn't explicitly declare Tyreke the best guard on our team is a post against him. The people who have made this an IT vs. Tyreke thread are rainmaker and yourself. I am interested in discussing Thornton and Jimmer in relation to their stats as well, but I guess many of you would prefer to prove that Tyreke is better than IT when I am not even arguing otherwise. Please stop using strawman arguments.

Why would IT go to the bench? He had an amazing rookie season and he can only get better.

All the time I hear people say IT only was starting because of the ROY campaign. You do realize that campaign didn't even begin until much after he took the starting job? You also really think the coach cares about IT moving up in the rookie rankings over the team winning? This is just getting ridiculous.

 

[vikinginferno]

This whole post and the conclusions you draw are a pristine example of watching the stats, but not watching the game. Thank you, rainmaker, for taking the time to obliterate it. I second that emotion.

So it's completely fine when Bricklayer posts a thread about the stats, but when I post much, much more comprehensive stats, I am just "watching the stats"? When I post an opinion, I get railed for not having anything to back it up. When I back it up with stats, I get railed for using "stats" that don't tell the whole story somehow.

 

[vikinginferno]

IT thomas doesnt and cant play defense. he just runs fast. and tries hard

Is this meant to be taken seriously?

 

[vikinginferno]

Don't bother backing up your assertions with statistics and logic. This forum is anti-logic/evidence and only chooses to see what they want to believe with regards to Tyreke and IT

No, that's not true! It's totally fine if some obscure stat backs up their narrative, but when the comprehensive stats do not, "YOU CAN'T USE STATS! WATCH THE GAME!"

 

[gatoradeSD]

Is this meant to be taken seriously?

youre right hes a beast defender. defense player of the year possibly

 

[vikinginferno]

youre right hes a beast defender. defense player of the year possibly

HAHAHAHAHAHA IT'S FUNNY BECAUSE YOU ARE USING SARCASM! SO FUNNY!

So I can't say that IT is a pretty good defender without saying that he is a beast defender and should be defensive player of the year? A player can't just be pretty good on defense?

 

[Section 101]

No, that's not true! It's totally fine if some obscure stat backs up their narrative, but when the comprehensive stats do not, "YOU CAN'T USE STATS! WATCH THE GAME!"

What I also find funny is the 2 people with season tickets that have watched the most games live are the most vocal about Evans not being the PG. And before someone says that TV is just as good then why do NBA teams send scouts to the games instead of just watching film?

 

[Kingster]

I don't think you're going to find anyone who thinks that Tyreke's shooting doesn't need improving. He clearly needs to become a better shooter.

Also, with-out question IT showed a much better shooting touch, especially from 3pt territory compared to Tyreke.
I don't think anyone will dispute that, and if someone came out with a stat that showed Tyreke as a better shooter from the outside, I would dismiss that stat, because watching the game it's clear who the better outside shooter is.
To me it's abundantly clear that at this moment IT is the better outside shooter and has better court vision than Tyreke.

The issue is that when IT was moved into the starting line-up and Tyreke was moved to the SF spot, Tyreke got frozen out of the offense, and that can't be allowed to continue.

Also, I'm curious if there is a place where you can see assist numbers based on player-to-player interaction.
I can think of multiple times where Tyreke drew in the defense and kicked it out to IT for the open 3. That's a good play, because IT proved that he could make that shot.

What I'm curious about is that Tyreke did show some development in moving with-out the ball and cutting to the rim for an easy bucket, but I don't recall IT being the one to make that pass a lot. So I'd love to know the numbers for the times that Tyreke assisted IT, and then the numbers that IT assisted Tyreke.

I think the whole thing about Tyreke being played out of position is a non-issue at this point. I'd be shocked if he started with the Kings next year as a 3. To my mind, there is a very high probability he either gets traded (in which case he's not a Kings 3 any longer), or he doesn't get traded and plays the 2 (and Thornton either gets traded or goes to the bench). Either way, I don't see him being a 3 with the Kings. I'll eat a lot of black birds if that scenario transpires.

As far as the stats on who IT assists and who Tyreke assists, I don't know what that stat is going to tell you. There are a number of factors that could account for which player IT assists and which he doesn't (same for Tyreke), the main one being the offense that is run and the angles that they get.

Fourth in pick and roll efficiency is something for a rookie. That's an astronomically good stat for a rookie point guard; that means he's up in the company of Paul, Nash and Parker in that department. If you're looking for a guy to run the pick and roll with Cousins, then that stat indicates that IT is the guy.

 

[rhythmless]

So it's completely fine when Bricklayer posts a thread about the stats, but when I post much, much more comprehensive stats, I am just "watching the stats"? When I post an opinion, I get railed for not having anything to back it up. When I back it up with stats, I get railed for using "stats" that don't tell the whole story somehow.

You expected something else? This is the same forum that rail against a Sacbee article when it's critical of a Kings player, saying it's not researched, biased, etc, yet laud an article for being informative and impartial if it's in keeping with KF narrative. With that siad...

YOU'RE HIDING BEHIND STATS.

PER DOESNT MEAN ANYTHING. HOLLINGER IS STUPID.

THE STATS SAY TYREKE IS A BAD TEAM DEFENDER BECAUSE HE PLAYS IN AN OLD ARENA. IF THE ARENA WERE NICER AND MORE BETTER WELL LIT HE WOULD BE AN AWESOME TEAM DEFENDER. I SAW HIM STEAL THE BALL ONCE FROM A CENTER. HES THE BEST!!!

 

[The Hammer]

So it's completely fine when Bricklayer posts a thread about the stats, but when I post much, much more comprehensive stats, I am just "watching the stats"? When I post an opinion, I get railed for not having anything to back it up. When I back it up with stats, I get railed for using "stats" that don't tell the whole story somehow.

Backing up your argument does not mean providing more in-depth stats.

The problem with your argument is that it's simply wrong. IT is not the best guard on the Kings.

That, and your interpretation of the stats doesn't account for reality. Also, frequently, the more "in-depth" stats are, the more easily a wrong interpretation is made. More stats does not equal stronger point. More stats does however equal more opportunity to bend things to your bias. This is taught in any college level statistics class. It's neat to see it in action!

And, since you brought up Brick, more often than not Brick doesn't post stats to try to PROVE a point, he usually posts stats to try to DISPROVE other people's claims. That is actually something stats are good for. For example, the frequent claim around here that Tyreke doesn't pass, is a bad passer, is a selfish player, etc. That can be disproved by he assist numbers, even while he was at the small forward position.

But to throw up a freight liner's worth of numbers and say: IT is better than Tyreke. That's a gross misuse of statistical information.

 

[Npliam]

IT was a better guard than Tyreke this year. The stats bear that out. Now maybe Tyreke is the better player and the things he can do well IT can't do at all. Still doesn't change the facts. IT played better this year.

 

[Uncia03]

I have no idea where you get that I am posting about how "IT is better than Tyreke". I have never said such a thing, nor do I necessarily think that. Nowhere in my post do I compare them besides posting the stats.

What do these stats reveal? (my insight, not Aykis)

IT has been the best all-around guard on the team this season

When you post a bunch of stats and then the first thing you say is "IT has been the best all-around guard on the team..." either you mean what you say or you don't.

Since Tyreke is a guard and IT is a guard, you are saying that you believe one was better than the other.
How else do you expect someone to read that?

I also never said you were bashing Tyreke. Tyreke has his problems and they are well documented. The issue I have is with using some stats to show that IT was a better player for us than Tyreke last season, which I disagree with primarily because the stats don't add up to the whole picture of what's going on both on and off the court.

I have no problems with both of us not agreeing on that fact.

Also, I actually don't believe that Coach Smart was sacrificing wins to play IT at PG and push a ROY campaign. I said the Front-Office, and specifically the Maloofs, would be the ones to do that.
Smart came out and said that Tyreke is not a SF. Then a week or two later he moves him to the SF permanently. Then on his exit interview he says he moved Tyreke to the 3 in order to give him a different point of view so that he'd have more experience when he moves Tyreke back to the 1.

To me that seems as if Smart was told to get IT into the starting line-up, which pushed Tyreke to the 3, and now he's trying to back-pedal and say that Tyreke should be at the 1 going forward. I still blame Smart for playing the 3-guard line-up, because if he was told that IT had to start, then he should have benched Marcus to play the super-6th man role, because the 3-guard line-up is a recipe for losing games.

As to Marcus and Jimmer's roles, since you say you want to discuss them:
Marcus is the superior scorer, rebounder, and clutch player.
Jimmer looked very uncomfortable learning a new role and it obviously impacted him. I have no doubts that he'll end up being a solid player, but it will be a learning process for him.
IT was fortunate to not have to learn a new role, he did his thing and really impressed with his shooting from the outside. And in my opinion, if we're going to be a winning basketball team, his talents are best served coming off the bench.

 

[Uncia03]

IT was a better guard than Tyreke this year. The stats bear that out. Now maybe Tyreke is the better player and the things he can do well IT can't do at all. Still doesn't change the facts. IT played better this year.

I'd be curious as to VikingInferno's reaction to your post. It really is extreme posts like this which causes people on the fence to move in the opposite direction. I don't think you're helping his argument.

Which I guess is fine, because I doubt there are any on this board who haven't made up their minds one way or the other.

 

[vikinginferno]

Backing up your argument does not mean providing more in-depth stats.

The problem with your argument is that it's simply wrong. IT is not the best guard on the Kings.

That, and your interpretation of the stats doesn't account for reality. Also, frequently, the more "in-depth" stats are, the more easily a wrong interpretation is made. More stats does not equal stronger point. More stats does however equal more opportunity to bend things to your bias. This is taught in any college level statistics class. It's neat to see it in action!

And, since you brought up Brick, more often than not Brick doesn't post stats to try to PROVE a point, he usually posts stats to try to DISPROVE other people's claims. That is actually something stats are good for. For example, the frequent claim around here that Tyreke doesn't pass, is a bad passer, is a selfish player, etc. That can be disproved by he assist numbers, even while he was at the small forward position.

But to throw up a freight liner's worth of numbers and say: IT is better than Tyreke. That's a gross misuse of statistical information.

How can you not read what I have repeated time and time again? I have said nowhere that I think IT is a better player than Tyreke. For the 3rd time in this thread, I am seeing strawman arguments being thrown at me. I said "IT had been the best all-around guard this season." I'm not sure how anyone can deny that when the team played MUCH better offensively with him at PG, he was the most efficient scorer and passer based on usage, was the best at defending the PG position, and turned the ball over much less. Tyreke was played out of position at SF and I do think he has more potential than IT, but based on last season alone, IT had the better season.

Proving a point and disproving a point are very often the same. I did not come into this thread with any "point" to prove. I saw the stats, thought they were interesting, and posted my observations of the stats.

 

[vikinginferno]

I'd be curious as to VikingInferno's reaction to your post. It really is extreme posts like this which causes people on the fence to move in the opposite direction. I don't think you're helping his argument.

Which I guess is fine, because I doubt there are any on this board who haven't made up their minds one way or the other.

Not sure how that is considered outrageous. IT had the better season at PG than Tyreke. Is he "better" than Tyreke? I would say no and give Tyreke the benefit of the doubt that there are other reasons he isn't playing up to his potential. Npliam acknowledges this point as he states "Now maybe Tyreke is the better player and the things he can do well, IT can't do at all."

 

[Heuge]

IT was a better guard than Tyreke this year. The stats bear that out. Now maybe Tyreke is the better player and the things he can do well IT can't do at all. Still doesn't change the facts. IT played better this year.

Geez, comparing players just isnt your thing.

 

[pshn80]

Tyreke doesn't pass, is a bad passer, is a selfish player, etc. [/B]That can be disproved by he assist numbers, even while he was at the small forward position.

Since I have long advocated not starting Tyreke at the PG position, let me comment on your statement above in bold. Tyreke does pass and well from drives either full court or half court. He does not pass well from out front, in fact his passes are often "weak fish" kind of passes, very susceptable to miss firing. He is not selfish in my view, he is just not a half court manager, he doesn't see the court like one wants at PG to see it, he is highly skilled at assessing when he does drive to the basket. He has excellent assist stats almost all of which come from drives in the half court or fast breaks, so the stats are not useful in his case for assessing whether he is doing a good job as a floor general in the half court setting. All this may be a fine distinction but a real and significant one. One would think he could learn to do the job better but he had not after all the time he spent as a point guard. Keep Tyreke at the two. He is a very effective player.