Matt Moore article on Cousins and Barkley

[Bricklayer]

Why did you leave out wins? You should be better than this.

Wins are freaking huge in the NBA. No one cares about the excuses. They only look at your wins and your rings. Lebron could've barely loss the finals while scoring 60pts. 5 years from now, no ones going to care about his stat line for the playoffs nor the Cavs almost winning it. They'll always remember the GSW as champs and the Splash Bros. Lebron would just be in the honorable mention as a runner up. We see it thought NBA history. There's a bunch of guys who put up huge numbers and are now forgotten. Winning means everything.

Whether we like it or not, wins mean a lot. Even this year, there were guys who were hesitant to put Cuz in the AS game because his team sucks and we don't win. Idc how you spin it, but you had guys on TNT, ESPN, and NBA greats arguing that Cuz shouldn't be in it because his team sucks.

If those guys didn't think he was AS material, imagine what they'd think if we said MVP?

I never tried to argue that Cousins wasn't MVP material. Suggesting he'd be one next season without getting his team to the playoffs or 50+wins is a huge no.

This means he has to lead too. When has Cousins proved his ability to lead? Never, not even when Malone was here. Malone was the leader of that team. poopoo went AWOL when our leader left and we saw the aftermath.

This is the year where Cuz can prove he can be a leader by bringing the entire team together and start winning.

Winning games and leading his team to the playoffs will give him MVP votes. Not empty stats.

I'm pumped for next season and I hope Cuz does win MVP, but I'd rather be honest and realistic about it... I still think we win the finals.

Wins are everything when it comes to actually winning the award itself, but they are almost an externality. Garbage when talking about the talent to win it.

Cousins gets traded to Atlanta or signs with the Spurs instead of Aldridge, and suddenly he's a major MVP candidate. Cousins gets traded to Minnesota or the Lakers, suddenly he's not. Its all very silly. Without the wins there will be no MVP. But its the talent that makes him a potential MVP winner. There aren't 10 guys with any realistic shot at all, and he's one of the few that has. The "breaks right' is the team finally winning. If it happens, his game is already great enough for him to instantly be in the running. That makes no sense, but that's the way the dips like to award it, so....

 

[Amit149]

Until the playoffs came around Cousins was CLEARLY a better player than weenie Griffin. And considerablyt better than Aldridge too.

After that we get into tough comparisons, but this should be noted here: right now for the last few years the NBA has had an almost unprecedented number of high end superstars all working at peak form at once. I don't think the overall talent is as strong as the early 90s type pack of great centers and PFs and Jordan, but all of the guys at the moment are peak at the same time. There are great many seasons when Cousins is Top 5 without a question. Well a question by reasonable basketball minds.

And enough with the Top 10 to 15 nonsense. That's weak. There are a VERY clear cut 9 top guys. And acutally its 8 1/2. Blake can't defend and is a half step back, but his big playoffs served notice masyeb he belongs in the top group (notably though he has not been a good playoff performer before).

Anyway:
Lebron
Durant (if the foot is healed)
Westbrook
Curry
Harden
Davis
Cousins
Cp3
Blake

its a clear group, and nobody outside the group has a good argument why they should be in it. Aldridge would have been the 10th guy last year on numbers, but he was never as special/talented as the above guys, not as efficient, defensive, sparky. Lillard, Wall and Irving are all clearly a step back. Marc Gasol has turned into a bit of a sloppy thinking joke, he's a 17-8 center, get over it. The Kawhi cult goes on for a 16-8 guy. And all of those guys are Top 20, but that Top 9 group is as deep as we've seen all putting up big numbers at once. And there is still Love, who expelled himself, George, who if he recovers can make an argument, and Melo, who once was.

Comparatively there were a few years in the mid 2000s when Peja finished 2nd in the MVP voting because there was nobody else (everybody got hurt or was on trial as I recall), Nahs was gifted with a 2nd MVP just on a shrug because...who else? Etc. Notorious late 90s hole too after Jordan leaves and with Hakeem, Barkley, Ewing etc. all near the end.

Below are Cousins numbers last year and 4 MVP seasons of all time greats. Not 4 random seasons, 4 MVP seasons:

Barkley '93: 37.6min 25.6pts (.596TS%) 12.2reb 5.1ast 1.6stl 1.0blk 3.1TO = MVP
Garnett '04: 39.4min 24.2pts (.547TS%) 13.9reb 5.0ast 1.5stl 2.2blk 2.6TO = MVP
Cousins '15: 34.1min 24.1pts (.545TS%) 12.7reb 3.6ast 1.5stl 1.7blk 4.3TO = oh, definitely not top 5, i guess maybe top 10-15, maybe, i'm sorry, we suck. *whimper* *sniffle*
Malone '99: 37.4min 23.8pts (.577TS%) 9.4reb 4.1ast 1.3stl 0.6blk 3.3TO = MVP
Duncan '03: 39.3min 23.3pts (.564TS%) 12.9reb 3.9ast 0.7stl 2.9blk 3.1TO = MVP

Now anybody who looks at that list and doesn't see the clear MVP potential of ANY player on that list is a dunderhead. Things just have to break right.

Oh, and BTW, that first column, minutes, is as critical as anything. Watch what happens if I do nothing more exotic than bounce Cousins up to 38mpg, right in the middle of all 4 other guys:

Cousins '15: 38.0min 26.9pts (.545TS%) 14.2reb 4.0ast 1.7stl 1.9blk 4.8TO
Barkley '93: 37.6min 25.6pts (.596TS%) 12.2reb 5.1ast 1.6stl 1.0blk 3.1TO
Garnett '04: 39.4min 24.2pts (.547TS%) 13.9reb 5.0ast 1.5stl 2.2blk 2.6TO
Malone '99: 37.4min 23.8pts (.577TS%) 9.4reb 4.1ast 1.3stl 0.6blk 3.3TO
Duncan '03: 39.3min 23.3pts (.564TS%) 12.9reb 3.9ast 0.7stl 2.9blk 3.1TO

I agree with some of that, but like you say yourself- there are guys at their peak right now who are more deserving, I agree with you about that there is a tier of 9 right now and Cousins should be in it (I would agree with your list with the exception of CP3 being ahead of cuz). but I take issue with the Stats comparison to MVP seasons- picking those seasons is nice but the context of teams wins is important, Cousins is still considered by a lot of people a bad-team/good-stats guy (it's not entirely fair- but it is the situation.

Here's an alternative list of players who made very good stats on bad teams:

Dantely '82: 39.8min 30.3pts (.570 eFG%) 6.3reb 4.0ast 1.2stl 3.7TO = 25 wins
Richmond '97: 38.6min 25.9pts (.519 eFG%) 3.9reb 4.2ast 1.6stl 2.9TO = 28 wins
Stackhouse '01: 40.2min 29.8pts (.445 eFG%) 3.9reb 5.1ast 1.2stl 4.1TO = 32 wins
Love '14: 36.3min 26.1pts (.524 eFG%) 12.5reb 4.4ast 0.8stl 2.5TO = 40 wins
Cousins '15: 34.1min 24.1pts (.468 eFG%) 12.7reb 3.6ast 1.5stl 4.3TO = 29 wins

Wins are everything when it comes to actually winning the award itself, but they are almost an externality. Garbage when talking about the talent to win it.

Cousins gets traded to Atlanta or signs with the Spurs instead of Aldridge, and suddenly he's a major MVP candidate. Cousins gets traded to Minnesota or the Lakers, suddenly he's not. Its all very silly. Without the wins there will be no MVP. But its the talent that makes him a potential MVP winner. There aren't 10 guys with any realistic shot at all, and he's one of the few that has. The "breaks right' is the team finally winning. If it happens, his game is already great enough for him to instantly be in the running. That makes no sense, but that's the way the dips like to award it, so....

Thing is- you don't know if someone can replicate those stats on a good team- some can and some can't and that is where the Love comparison is effective.

Let's isolate Love VS Cousins and add some advanced stats:

K-Love '14: 36.3min 26.1pts (.524 eFG% .591TS%) 12.5reb 4.4ast 0.8stl 2.5TO 26.97PER 21.5EWA* 13.52WAR*
Cousins '15: 34.1min 24.1pts (.468 eFG% .545TS%) 12.7reb 3.6ast 1.5stl 4.3TO 25.29PER 14.7EWA 10.86WAR

EWA= Estimated Wins Added, WAR= Wins Above Replacement

 

[Bricklayer]

If he comes back to his elite level of play, I think he wins it. It'll be a comeback year for him too. Same with Durant.

George? No. He might win comeback player of the year, but besides the new look Pacers being unlikely to get the elite # of wins needed to produce an MVP, George himself only produced half a season of work that would even be in the running, even before the injury.

His big season:
36.2min 21.6pts (.424 .364 .864) 6.8reb 3.5ast 1.9stl 0.3blk 2.8TO 20.1PER

And that's just not good enough for an MVP. Particularly not when he is a forward, who may even be played out of position at PF, and so is going to be directly compared to LeBron and Durant.

George would have to com back not only at full strength, but at a higher level than he's ever shown so far. 25ppg, .450 shooting at least to get in range.

 

[Amit149]

George? No. He might win comeback player of the year, but besides the new look Pacers being unlikely to get the elite # of wins needed to produce an MVP, George himself only produced half a season of work that would even be in the running, even before the injury.

His big season:
36.2min 21.6pts (.424 .364 .864) 6.8reb 3.5ast 1.9stl 0.3blk 2.8TO 20.1PER

And that's just not good enough for an MVP. Particularly not when he is a forward, who may even be played out of position at PF, and so is going to be directly compared to LeBron and Durant.

George would have to com back not only at full strength, but at a higher level than he's ever shown so far. 25ppg, .450 shooting at least to get in range.

His appeal was the best player by far on a good team that was defense driven and (as a team) didn't score that much (hence his low stats) and for a time people called him "the best two-way player in the league"- a little like Kawhi Leonard.

I agree his numbers aren't nearly good enough, and he is an unlikely MVP candidate (I also doubt the Pacers being good enough to give him that platform).

 

[Bricklayer]

I agree with some of that, but like you say yourself- there are guys at their peak right now who are more deserving, I agree with you about that there is a tier of 9 right now and Cousins should be in it (I would agree with your list with the exception of CP3 being ahead of cuz). but I take issue with the Stats comparison to MVP seasons- picking those seasons is nice but the context of teams wins is important, Cousins is still considered by a lot of people a bad-team/good-stats guy (it's not entirely fair- but it is the situation.

Here's an alternative list of players who made very good stats on bad teams:

Dantely '82: 39.8min 30.3pts (.570 eFG%) 6.3reb 4.0ast 1.2stl 3.7TO = 25 wins
Richmond '97: 38.6min 25.9pts (.519 eFG%) 3.9reb 4.2ast 1.6stl 2.9TO = 28 wins
Stackhouse '01: 40.2min 29.8pts (.445 eFG%) 3.9reb 5.1ast 1.2stl 4.1TO = 32 wins
Love '14: 36.3min 26.1pts (.524 eFG%) 12.5reb 4.4ast 0.8stl 2.5TO = 40 wins
Cousins '15: 34.1min 24.1pts (.468 eFG%) 12.7reb 3.6ast 1.5stl 4.3TO = 29 wins



Thing is- you don't know if someone can replicate those stats on a good team- some can and some can't and that is where the Love comparison is effective.

Let's isolate Love VS Cousins and add some advanced stats:

K-Love '14: 36.3min 26.1pts (.524 eFG% .591TS%) 12.5reb 4.4ast 0.8stl 2.5TO 26.97PER 21.5EWA* 13.52WAR*
Cousins '15: 34.1min 24.1pts (.468 eFG% .545TS%) 12.7reb 3.6ast 1.5stl 4.3TO 25.29PER 14.7EWA 10.86WAR

EWA= Estimated Wins Added, WAR= Wins Above Replacement

You have to know how to use advanced stats. Actually its normally better not to use them since they are artificial creations. But you have to know the stats to understand how they are generated. I am not sure if this is entirely statistically sound, but it kind of should be, so if you figure Love played in 77 games, Cousins in 55, that's 1.4x as many games. You multiple Cousins' EWA and WAR by 1.4 and its EWA: 20.6, WAR 15.2.

EWA and WAR both depend on number of games played. Stubbornly so actually. They are like yahoo's stubborn fantasy default to total stats rathen than per game stats. It really doesn't tell you much except one guy was injured and another not.

But the larger issue would be that people were considerably stupid about Love too, and that's even with Kevin Love only playing one side of the floor.

In 2012-13 Love plays 18 games, they go 9-9 in his 18 games. He leaves, and they go 22-42 the rest of the year.
In 2013-14 Love plays 77 games, they go 39-38 in his 77 games. He leaves, they go 1-4.
In 2014-15 Love leaves for Cleveland, Minny goes 16-66.

Over the past 3 years Minny goes 48-47 with Love. They go 39-112 without Love. The narrative for idiots is that Love is empty stats and can't make them win. The narrative for smart people is wow, Love took a sincerely awful franchise and singlehandedly made them decent. And that's even without playing any defense.

And as an aside, Love "not duplicating his stats on a good team" isn't about Love being on a good team. Its about Love being on a Lebron team (and Irving team). Put him on the Clippers in place of Blake and he's putting up huge stats. put him on Atlanta in place of Milsap and he's putting up huge numbers. But his good team experience was to abruptly become a 3rd banana. A particularly problematic position to be in if you aren't much of a defender and can;t help on that end.

 

[Amit149]

You have to know how to use advanced stats. Actually its normally better not to use them since they are artificial creations. But you have to know the stats to understand how they are generated. I am not sure if this is entirely statistically sound, but it kind of should be, so if you figure Love played in 77 games, Cousins in 55, that's 1.4x as many games. You multiple Cousins' EWA and WAR by 1.4 and its EWA: 20.6, WAR 15.2.

EWA and WAR both depend on number of games played. Stubbornly so actually. They are like yahoo's stubborn fantasy default to total stats rathen than per game stats. It really doesn't tell you much except one guy was injured and another not.

But the larger issue would be that people were considerably stupid about Love too, and that's even with Kevin Love only playing one side of the floor.

In 2012-13 Love plays 18 games, they go 9-9 in his 18 games. He leaves, and they go 22-42 the rest of the year.
In 2013-14 Love plays 77 games, they go 39-38 in his 77 games. He leaves, they go 1-4.
In 2014-15 Love leaves for Cleveland, Minny goes 16-66.

Over the past 3 years Minny goes 48-47 with Love. They go 39-112 without Love. The narrative for idiots is that Love is empty stats and can't make them win. The narrative for smart people is wow, Love took a sincerely awful franchise and singlehandedly made them decent. And that's even without playing any defense.

And as an aside, Love "not duplicating his stats on a good team" isn't about Love being on a good team. Its about Love being on a Lebron team (and Irving team). Put him on the Clippers in place of Blake and he's putting up huge stats. put him on Atlanta in place of Milsap and he's putting up huge numbers. But his good team experience was to abruptly become a 3rd banana. A particularly problematic position to be in if you aren't much of a defender and can;t help on that end.

You are right about WAR and EWA, my bad (Love would have higher EWA and Cousins a better WAR).

About Love, that example came to compare another guy who had bad numbers on a bad team in recent memory and those numbers were discounted- it's a common thing. In theory you might be right about his numbers in the Clippers instead of Blake or Atlanta instead of Milsap- but that's just one theory. some players are far better being the main guys but can only take their teams up to a certain point- playing in a better team usually means having to share more on offense.

When Love moved to the Cavs his Usage Rate went from 27.7 to 20.4 and his PER dropped from 26.97 to 18.89,
When Bosh moved to the Heat his Usage Rate went from 25.9 to 21.0 and his PER dropped from 25.11 to 19.44,
When Durant got hurt Westbrook's Usage Rate skyrocketed to 38.2 and he had a career high PER of 29.12.

Point is, there is proof (and also logic) that it's easier to post big numbers on worse teams and higher Usage.