Greg Oden: A PERspective
by da34shadow on Jul 29, 2009 12:17 PM PDT
102 comments
Much has been written about Greg Oden this past month and I noticed that most articles had something to do with Oden's shortcomings and the areas he has to improve this summer. While I think these articles are on target (Oden needs to get slimmer, work on his post game, get his mind right, etc), they are dangerously close to implying that Oden's rookie year was a failure. I think this is the case because of the expectations that were heaped upon him. The national media, as well as us Blazer fans, were hoping to see a force of a man: A guy who could block every shot in sight and humiliate any defender who dared to challenge one of his thunderous dunks. We fans wanted another Blazer to be the Rookie of the Year. Obviously, that did not happen and now we are left to figure out reasons why our expectations were not met. All of those excuses for Greg's performance snowballed and now we are at a place where the perception of truth (Greg was a failure) is more influential than the truth itself. So, let's press the reset button on what we think about Greg's rookie year and let an objective analysis frame our opinion about him.
I think the best way to view Greg's first season is to compare it to other center's rookie years. I went back to the 1988 draft and evaluated the rookie year for every center (there were 41 of them) drafted in the top 10. Using those parameters, I settled on using a rating system called the linear weights PER (lwtsPER). Essentially, it simplifies John Hollinger's very long and taxing PER. The only thing it does not do is adjust well for pace, but in the absence of anything else that would not take 1,000 years to calculate, I went with it and threw the results into a graph.
Overall, you can visually break this graph down into 5 tiers. Tier one has the certifiable studs (O'Neal, Duncan and Mourning), tier two has the solid starters who may explode into the stud category (Yao and Howard) or who may flame out with injuries (Camby and LaFrentz.) Side note: The Lafrentz case is an interesting one because he played in less than 20 games as a rookie. I believe that he is ranked higher than he would have been had he played more than 40 or so games. Tier three has players who may be starters (Emeka Okafor down to Bryant Reeves) but will never be anything more than that. Tier four has one dimensional players who are marginal starters at best (Tyson Chandler) or franchise killers at worst (the Kandy man.) Tier 5 has projects that may turn out fine (Bynum and Przybilla) or may just stink (Sene).
Speaking specifically about Oden, his season ranked as the 10th best one for rookie centers since 1988. Moreover, his rating of 17.38 was within 0.50 points of the 6th rated center, Brook Lopez. Interestingly enough, Oden's pace-adjusted PER was 18.13 compared to Lopez's 17.94. Given this information, I believe that people have been too harsh in evaluating Oden's play in his first year. Consider this: he was returning from surgery, had only one year in college, didn't get much defensive help from his guards, and was not used to the pace in the NBA. Note that these are not excuses, they just some factors that we should consider when we are discussing Oden's first year performance. This analysis shows that Oden managed to turn in a rookie season that placed him in the top ten of the last twenty years, and that is not disappointing...not disappointing at all.
11 recs |
102 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Bravo!
Stats don’t lie.
The Oden Era, Day 770
by Heymoe on Jul 29, 2009 12:27 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Sadly, PER is a lie.
GIGO
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Jul 29, 2009 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
?
PER is very helpful when you are trying to compare player A to player B. Given the fact that you apply that measure to everyone, equally, I do not think it is a “lie.”
by da34shadow on Jul 29, 2009 5:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Repeat after me, because it is true: THERE IS NO SINGLE NUMBER (CREATED BY A JOURNALIST) WEHREBY YOU CAN COMPARE A POINT GUARD'S PERFORMANCE WITH THAT OF A CENTER.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Jul 29, 2009 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
...WHEREBY..
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Jul 29, 2009 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can't even definitively compare the stats of Center A with Center B DURING THE SAME SEASON because they play with different casts of characters... The numbers of David Lee and Dwight Howard and Shaq are not comparable.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
by timbo on Jul 29, 2009 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
But it's fun to use over-simplified stats
I mean it…I’d rather use PPG, RPG, APG than the latest Player Average Mean Percentage Weighted Efficiency Adjusted Wombat Driven Column Sorted Reverse Trignometric Cosine Tracked Overall Score (the PAMPWEAWDCSRTCTOS) which ends up telling us exactly what we already knew: Brandon Roy is the best player on the Blazers.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 29, 2009 11:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec for the PAMPWEWDCSRTCTOS metric
I love it
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Jul 30, 2009 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't agree.
If you accept the following sentence as reality, than all things become extremely subjective. “You can’t even definitively compare the stats of Center A with Center B DURING THE SAME SEASON because they play with different casts of characters.” So, how then would you be able to say that Dwight Howard played better than David Lee? Dwight had shooters galore on his team, while David was left to deal with Zbo and Crawford and Duhon, etc. My assertion that Lee is better than Howard cannot be challenged then because “you can’t even definitively compare (their) stats.” My point is that PER gives weight to statistical performance and adjusts for pace. That makes more sense to me than not doing any analysis at all.
by da34shadow on Jul 30, 2009 8:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Use your eyes.
the people who really understand the game interpret performance with their minds, not a stat sheet.
by Blazin' on Jul 30, 2009 8:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My eyes...
My eyes told me that he had a ridiculous number of foul calls go against him (especially in the Houston series) and that he needed to get better at keeping the ball up high. They did not tell me that he was Kandi Man 2.
by da34shadow on Jul 31, 2009 7:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can see skill and talent with your eyes.
The easiest way to measure productivity is through stats.
by austinpwnz on Jul 31, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
productivity
is dependent upon many intangibles that cannot be quantified. Chemistry. Team-mindedness. Defense.
Productivity is not the end all and be all of a player’s value. The individual’s statistical success and the teams success cannot always be correlated.
One of the biases in depending upon statistics is the assumption that the whole is equal to the sum of the parts. In team basketball, it simply does not work that way.
by Blazin' on Jul 31, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't say stats were the only way to measure productivity.
They are simply the most convenient, by far. A big part of this is that stats take in a lot more information that any single person can, and so you get a larger sample size and more consistent results. Of course all those other things are factors – I’m simply trying to make the distinction between very skilled, very talented players who might not really help their team that much (Allen Iverson is my leading example) versus those who aren’t terribly impressive physically or to most observers but help their teams a lot (Troy Murphy, for example).
I pretty much agree with all your statements – but I really believe that observers and stats measure different things, and both are useful.
You can measure skill and talent with your eyes, but productivity is shown through statistics.
by austinpwnz on Aug 1, 2009 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That is not what was done...
I compared center to center
by da34shadow on Jul 30, 2009 8:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I just wish I could have gotten that dang picture a little bigger. Anyone know how to do that trick without losing resolution?
by da34shadow on Jul 29, 2009 12:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If using Firefox:
just hit “control +” a few times
Duct tape makes you smart.
by TTRocks on Jul 29, 2009 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hold Ctrl and roll your scroll wheel
Hit Ctrl-zero to return to normal.
"HA HA HA HA HA
I'm not laughing, I'm just listing the five ugliest Blazers ever."
- rockingharder
by jamon51 on Jul 29, 2009 11:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i agree that oden showed lots of flahes of potnetial stardum... and the stats, as you have shown reflect that, BUT
i worry about him not feeling like he belongs amongst the young potential stars of the league. He feels like to me one of those players in pick-up that you can just metnally take out of their game by trash talking and getting them out of comfort zone.
i saw on that minicamp clip when lopez forced him toward baseline, which oden doesn’t have a counter move towards, and a bad shot. oden got down on himself put his head down. that sort of thing worries me. that is difference between solid pryz type starter to all-star.
by mandoman10 on Jul 29, 2009 12:34 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks,
I do not understand why so many do not follow this little rule “if you do not have something good to say, say nothing” most all the mental problems where/are a direct relation to this.
by prof.mike on Jul 29, 2009 12:45 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Nice post
Meanwhile Greg Oden is doing pretty much the same things he did in college, he wasn’t a scoring machine there either.
I’ve realized that the ‘problem’ with Oden stems from the people who never saw him play in college and bought into the hype that he was the next Hakeem Olajuwon
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jul 29, 2009 1:06 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
And admittedly I got on the hype bus and have probably been harsher on the guy than he deserved
but I’m all better now
Blazer Fan
by leeroyjenkins on Jul 29, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank god knee surgery has advanced so much in the past decade.
Right? RIGHT?!?!
by Charon on Jul 29, 2009 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec
I'm going to come up with the best line here ever, something really clever.
by musicdaniel on Jul 29, 2009 10:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Dang... Brook Lopez had a good rookie year....
"The cake was a lie..." -blazeraddict
by TheOdenator on Jul 29, 2009 2:33 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Yup
But he’s also OLDER than Oden.
I know less than half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
by haildablazer on Jul 30, 2009 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually younger by 2 months
Per Basketball-Reference
This surprised me too, Same age, same experience (1 yr college)
by lee3022 on Jul 30, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course, he hasn't had microfracture surgery.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 9:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I only saw Odenin one college game
and that was the championship game against Florida. Greg kept Flodia’s big’s in check and scored when his driving buddy (conley) got him the ball in hte lane. Gosh I wish we had a Pg who can get into the lane…ohh that’s right Miller excell at dishing after driving just like Roy. Yeah, I think Greg’s per will be fine this year.
by NWfan on Jul 29, 2009 2:39 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
You mention that the Blazer guards' defense didn't do GO any favors
They also didn’t help him much at the offensive end. Time and time again, GO set picks, then flashed to the bucket wide open for alley-oops, yet the guards rarely even attempted to make the pass. I often imagined how Chris Paul—who managed to make Tyson Chandler look like an offensive weapon—would have utilized GO.
Now we’ll see one of the best alley-oop passers in the league (Andre Miller) penetrating & lobbing ‘em up there for GO. Viola: folks will be raving about GO’s offensive “improvement.”
Of course, if the glimpse we got in those USA mini-camp videos is accurate, by October GO will be in much better shape than we ever saw last season. That means he WILL be improved—simply by being better conditioned. As a result, he’ll be better able to get open and to catch Miller’s passes. I can’t wait…
"We don't back down to nobody." --Joel Przybilla
by hurryup09 on Jul 29, 2009 3:02 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
That's a good point
Its gotta be frustrating for Oden to work to get into position only to see the our guards go in a different direction…
by da34shadow on Jul 29, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't wait for the lob dunks. There will be many of them.....
…..Oden, LMA, Nic, Rudy. It is going to be lots of fun.
by upper left corner on Jul 31, 2009 6:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Interesting how the numbers
really do provide clear “steps” or levels of performance. That usually isn’t the case with most statistics.
"I'm a man, but I can change.....if I have to......I guess." - Red Green
by antediluvian on Jul 29, 2009 3:21 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This post sums up the most optimistic thing about Oden.
His per-minute numbers are pretty danged good (averaging a double double per 36 minutes). All he has to do to be effective is stay on the floor, and most big men learn that fairly quickly.
I’m not a huge fan of PER but I think looking at per-minute numbers makes the best argument for GO.
(Also I agree with a lot of the other sentiments about Miller helping etc)
by austinpwnz on Jul 29, 2009 3:55 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
the funny thing about PER and this site...
when PER tells people something they want to hear they have a lot more faith in the statistic than if it doesn’t.
i think PER is largely a good all around stat to measure effectiveness although it would be nice if someone could find a way to factor defense outside of steals and blocks into it.
the one huge per minute number though that this doesn’t address is fouls per 48 minutes which i think taints all the positive per minute numbers you throw up about oden.
one consistent thing in greg’s career pre and post surgery is his tendency to get in foul trouble. this isn’t unusual for big men mind you but he’s bad at this even for a big man. i see a lot of folks just shrug this off as , ’once he stays on the court more".
i don’t believe he will find it easy to avoid foul trouble to be honest. with the way the game is called these days it’s very tough as a defensively oriented big man to avoid them. dwight howard who most would consider the gold standard of defensive big men averages around 4.5 fouls per 48.
i think oden will find fouls are still a problem next season. i certainly expect improvement but it feels like most people expect this problem to simply go away and i don’t know what they base this on.
by colinmarsh on Jul 29, 2009 6:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Another way to look at the PER thing is
Oden scores very well with Hollinger’s PER ratings, and it is largely an offensive stat. We all agree he is incredibly raw offensively, yet he still ranks very well with an offensive stat.
In fact, every advanced metric ranks Oden very nicely.
I don’t see why the fouls per minute skews things. That is why he wasn’t on the court for a good amount of time, not because he was being pulled out for his play (normally). And yes, he gets in bad foul trouble even for a big man, but EVERY SINGLE BIG MAN improves on this, therefore it is reasonable to expect his per-36 stats to hold steady as he gains experience and fouls less—at the very least.
If the fouls are holding you up, then consider that in games he played 30+ minutes, he averaged 14/11. Those are the games where he didn’t have foul trouble. There will be a time when he doesn’t get in regular foul trouble, and right now his basement is at that 14/11 level when he is on the court.
He often fouled in silly, needless ways. That is correctable. I don’t think the game is called harder on big men foul wise; mainly only perimeter players get called for more touchy ticky tacky fouls from the new-ish hand checking rules so I’m not sure what you’re referencing there. Oden’s struggles weren’t from a new way of calling big men, it was from doing dumb fouls.
Luckily, dumb fouls from a smart kid will go away.
And when he doesn’t get in foul trouble, he averaged 14/11 his first year after microfracture and having little to no offensive skill. His per-36 is steady with that as well (I wouldn’t look at a per-48 stat when a per-36 is much more accurate and realistic to what he’ll eventually play).
He will still have foul problems, but not likely as much as his rookie year. And we all base this upon history, because this happens to every big man ever, to varying degrees. It’s just how it works. Oden has started out with bad foul problems, they won’t go away, but as he gains experience and is in shape, they will go away. And when they aren’t troubling him, he has been very effective.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jul 29, 2009 6:47 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
i like your optimism
but i’m surprised that you don’t think that big men have it harder
“I don’t think the game is called harder on big men foul wise; mainly only perimeter players get called for more touchy ticky tacky fouls from the new-ish hand checking rules so I’m not sure what you’re referencing there”
well i watch a lot of the nba with the season package and maybe it’s in my head but it feels like perimeter players are given more latitude when they play defense in the post.
for instance lebron james and dwayne wade are both very good and very physical defenders. neither is ever called for the incidental contact they create when gambling for steals and blocks in the post. i believe big men in this same scenario are held to a more strict standard. if a big man isn’t 100% clean on a block he never seem to get the call; even when his name is dwight howard.
think about the very common defense used on big men – big guy stands behind him and guard swipes at the ball. these swipes are very often not real clean but guards get away with it all the time. when a big guy reaches out and swipes it’s damn near a guaranteed foul.
i admit i don’t have much to back this up other than observation watching other games. we don’t really have a perimeter player who gets into the post and blocks shots regularly so you don’t see this much with the blazers but it’s something i’ve noticed.
by colinmarsh on Jul 29, 2009 9:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't mean they don't often get called for fouls
Just, that the way refs call fouls on big men hasn’t changed like it has for perimeter defenders, what with the hand checking rules and whatnot. At least, the changes were made quite a while ago for big men, since they don’t allow what the old Pistons teams did to Jordan and stuff.
Wade and Lebron and Howard and Yao get away with what they sometimes do because of their reps, as well. Oden should establish a defensive rep and get away with crap someday.
Morty
by Mortimer on Jul 30, 2009 5:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There is also a factor of perimeter defense
affecting big men fouls. Portland was poor in this area exposing Greg more. Joel adjusted well with much more experience. Look at Shaq’s fouls history and note in 2007-2008 with Miami the 5.1 per 36 minutes (highest in career) which dropped to 4.2 when he was traded the same year to Phoenix and even lower to 4.0 the next year in Phoenix.
by lee3022 on Jul 30, 2009 9:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Rice has pointed out several times
that Greg gets a foul call whenever he reaches out to contest the ball in the opponents hands instead of going straight up with his arms and waiting to block the ball until it is launched. I’m sure the Blazer staff will work with him on this as it does seem to be an automatic foul call by the refs. Most of his fouls seem to fall in this category.
Greg is only 21 years old, has one year of college ball and 1 year in the NBA. He will be an All-Star pretty soon. Don’t get so impatient Blazer fans. This means our guys will keep getting better for years to come. Most are still young and still learning the NBA.
Stu Inman: a soft-spoken, witty and brilliant basketball guy -- who had so much to do with Portland's only championship. He believed that you won with not just great players, but with great people. (D Jaynes 2-2-07 Portland Tribune)
by OrygunRod on Jul 29, 2009 11:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, just rewatched one of the Houston playoff games
One play illustrated this perfectly. Landry gets the ball in the low post, Oden guarding him closely. Landry does a head fake and spin to the key. Oden doesn’t buy the fake and stays in good position into the key. Landry then has to attempt a wild shot over the top. If Oden simply stands straight up with his hands up, that shot has almost no chance of going in, but instead Greg lunges after the ball and gets called for the foul.
He’s young and simply trying too hard on that play. More experience should reduce those kinds of fouls and keep Greg on the court longer.
by hellsfrozenover on Jul 30, 2009 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah.
Fouls are called on hands the majority of the time. It’s easy to learn to use your body not your arms.
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PER does incorporate fouls
They are a “negative” statistic.
by da34shadow on Jul 30, 2009 8:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thing is
Fouls matter more as you get more of them. They aren’t all of linear importance.
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 9:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, some analyses actually suggest that fouls are a positive
as long as you don’t get enough of them to keep you out of the game.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well
Fouls probably correlate with aggressive defense and blocked shots. They’re a side effect of normally good things.
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's especially hard to model
Cause sometimes the 3rd foul matters a ton, if you get it early. There’s no simple way to incorporate it into a metric: you just have to put the foul numbers side by side if the fouls are enough to affect (because once you’re below a certain fouls/minute threshold, you can play a normal 32-38 minute game).
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 9:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We all know what Oden needs to work on, Greg knows it too. No need to go there, he will get better.
I just think the media is ridiculous with their writings on Greg Oden. Greg is already the best offensive rebounder in the league. If you look up defensive rebounding percentage you’ll see that the player he has been backing up is the best rebounder in the league. Joel’s rebounding percentage is insane and beats out Dwight Howard.
by BRoyInThe4th on Jul 29, 2009 10:07 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks for the post
If you have the time next year, it would be nice to see this chart plus a 2nd year comparison.
GO: THE TEACHER ...come into my classroom "THE PAINT" for some tutelage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The rancor reflected in that remark I won't dignify with comment. But I'll address your general attitude of hopeless negativism." – Everett "O Brother, where art Thou?"
by Blazer1342 on Jul 30, 2009 4:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Oden sighting!
I’ve mentioned before that I live in Columbus. I knew Greg was in town this summer but I never thought i would run into him. I was driving around downtown in the Arena District where a lot of the local bars and hangouts are. I was turning down a side street and towards a parking lot when I noticed a rather tall man come around the corner.
I wouldn’t have thought anything of it until I got a little closer, and I almost stopped in the middle of the street. There he was, our little (very, very big) Greg looking to be in phenomenal shape, and craving sushi. I couldn’t help but watch him cross the street behind me and head into a sushi bar.
I just thought i’d let everyone know that it looks like all his hard work this summer is paying off. I can’t wait for the season to start!!
by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Jul 30, 2009 8:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Can you elaborate on Greg being in great shape?
I think that’s probably the most important thing for his offseason. I know you only saw him on the street, but if you have any more insight, I’d like to hear
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on Jul 30, 2009 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Greg definitely looked slimmer than he had during last season. Sorry if that is vague but its the best assessment I could give you. Just by eyeing him, he didn’t look 285.
by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Jul 30, 2009 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Watch some of the video from Las Vegas posted by Casey Holdahl on the Blazers' site
He is not in game shape but is moving better than last year in my view. One rebound in particular his forearms are 1/2 way above the rim (although the camera is likely floor level). Casey’s comments support that he is even noticeably in better shape by the 3rd day there.
by lee3022 on Jul 30, 2009 9:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't eat sushi in the mid-west
Yes with air travel we can get fresh fish anywhere, but it isn’t really as fresh as near the source. Greg if you are fixing for sushi, fly to one of the coasts (west coast is better as it contains more of the fish used by the Japanese).
by NWfan on Jul 30, 2009 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wholeheartedly agree
I love getting fresh seafood from the West Coast. Only if I actually still lived there…mmmmm.
by BLAZER_FAN_199 on Jul 30, 2009 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oden was not a bust!
This idea that Oden was a bust that the media has driven into us has all been BS. ESPN, Oden’s hype and his demeanor have helped make a lot of people think he’s a bust, but his stats just haven’t shown this. His biggest problem was staying on the court due to fouls, which is pretty common problem for rookie centers, especially ones with little college experience. Health is still the biggest worry with Oden. If he stays healthy, the fouling will improve, which will increase his playing time, which will improve his game and confidence. Numerous players, including BRoy and Paul Pierce, have all said his raw talent is off the charts. Time and health will make him an all-star at the very least.
by Coastie07 on Jul 30, 2009 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like the messge this post sends
But I think Greg may have been one of the only lottery-pick center who spent most of his rookie year as a backup, playing against inferior talent. Anybody have data on that?
by FrederickT1 on Jul 30, 2009 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
kind of
A lot of the people at the end of the list were backups. Saer Sene, Przy, Bynum, Darko, etc.
by da34shadow on Jul 30, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are some that played fewer than 1600 minutes
Raef LaFrentz
Joakim Noah
Adam Keefe
Eddy Curry
Tyson Chandler
among others
by lee3022 on Jul 30, 2009 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Something I would add in
As someone who was a huge fan of Oden’s before he came into the NBA (a side-effect of seeing him play in person when he was at Ohio State), there is a big difference between Oden and Brook Lopez (who I love too): defense.
PER is notorious for improperly quantifying defensive impact, and it is far worse for big men who can play defense because elements like changing shots cannot be a part of PER-esque stats because they have never been properly measured. As such, the value of guys with excellent defensive instincts and a non-hollow shot blocking ability (meaning someone who changes shots as well as blocking them) is understated by statistical measures.
Also, I’d consider the different in playing time that was based on foul trouble as an interesting factor, relying on the assumption that it is a correctable issue that can be or has been fixed.
by dprodigy19 on Jul 30, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
It's even more impressive when you don't use PER
PER is probably one of the worst advanced metrics for evaluating Oden because it places way too much emphasis on scoring and taking shots, at the expense of shooting efficiency and the other statistical categories. Oden was much better than Brook Lopez when you compare per 36 minute stats. He scored almost the same amount of points, but on less shots. He also was a better rebounder. This is all during a rookie season during which he was still recovering from microfracture. While Oden’s PER is encouraging, it probably actually undervalues his contributions.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 11:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
PER does take shooting efficiency
and per minute stats into account. Heck, it even attempts to adjust for pace.
As far as the per 36 minute stats showing Greg was much better than Lopez, PER shows Oden was slightly better (18.1 to 17.9), while the per 36 minute stats show roughly the same thing. The only place Oden was clearly better than Lopez was in boards and TS%, and was slightly worse in most everything else. Sure seems like they’re saying the same thing to me.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
PER does take shooting efficiency into account
if you shoot under 30% on twos. That’s about the break even point for two point shots in PER. In other words, as long as you shoot at least 30% on twos (and come on, who shoots less than 30% on twos?) you can increase your PER with more shots. Lopez took 2.5 more shots per 36 minutes than Greg, and since he shoots above 30%, artificially raised his PER. Oden is a whopping 3% better shooter than Lopez in both two point shooting and TS%. That’s more than just “slightly better.” It allowed him to score nearly as much as Lopez on a per minute basis while taking less shots. And two rebounds per 36 minutes better is no small difference either. That’s several added possessions for the Blazers that turn in to more points. Oden and Lopez did about the same in defensive stats; Lopez gets a few more blocks and Greg gets a few more steals. Oden also drew more foul shots than Lopez, although he shot a lower percentage on those shots. Lopez did beat Oden in assist-turnover stats and, of course, fouls, but other than that, Oden’s much more efficient at getting possessions and using them well. In other words, PER overvalues Lopez because he takes more shots, even though they’re at a lower percentage, while Oden was actually much better in terms of efficiency in both obtaining possessions and utilizing them. If we wanted to adjust for pace, Oden’s numbers would be even better, as Portland is one of the slowest teams in the league. Anyway, that’s why I take issue with the sentiment that Oden is only “slightly better” than Lopez statistically, seeing as how the per 36 numbers do not support PER’s conclusions.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
And 3 fouls per 36 minutes is no small difference either
I’m not sure where the conflict is. Most of the numbers you’re citing (pts/poss, TS%) have nothing to do with per 36 stats. They had roughly the same usage, and scored at roughly an equivalent rate (I said Oden had a clearly higher TS%). The difference in shots. It’s great that Greg drew foul shots, but there’s value in actually making those foul shots, which Lopez did at a MUCH higher level.
Put it simply, if I see a PER comparison, I think Oden was slightly better. If I look and see Oden had 14.8 points and 11.6 boards per 36 while Lopez had 15.4 points and 9.6 boards per 36, I don’t change that to “wow, Oden was astoundingly better”. And I don’t see why you’re discounting a player’s ability to maintain a high shooting % while taking more shots. Obviously 30% is too low a break even point, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t value in it. I don’t have a problem with valuing Brandon shooting 17 shots a game at a 48% clip more than Joel shooting 3 shots a game at 62%.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 7:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Think of it this way.
A rebound is a possession. And the players score something like 1.1 points per possession, correct? So a single rebound is worth, on average, 1.1 points. So that two rebound difference is actually worth more than 2 points.
Also the opportunity cost of Lopez’s missed shots should count against him or at least for Oden, but as Muad’Dib stated PER rewards anyone taking shots unless they are insanely bad.
The point here though is that Lopez is above average mainly at taking shots. He doesn’t shoot a remarkable percentage, rebound a ton, or do anything else particularly exceptional. This is the distortion introduced by PER.
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Are you guys serious?
And fouls are worth nothing? Give me a break here. The argument isn’t “Was Greg better than Lopez statistically?” the argument is “Was Greg MUCH better than Lopez statistically according to per 36 minute stats?” Even if we use the David Berri voodoo math to convert those 2 rebounds into 2.2 points, we still have the scoring difference to be a whopping 17 points per 36 compared to 15.4 points per 36. Not exactly an astounding difference. Better, but I don’t look at that and think “man, one player was dominant compared to the other”, especially when nearly every other metric slightly favors Lopez.
As far as Lopez hurting the team more by missing more shots? Come on. His TS% was almost exactly the same as Roy’s. It is much more difficult to maintain a high shooting percentage as you take more shots. That’s why Brandon’s shooting is weighted much more heavily as a positive than Joel’s. So what if it only gets to be negative at an absurdly low percentage? Greg still gets rewarded for it more than Lopez does, so what’s the problem? Why should a guy be penalized for shooting at an above average rate? Judging by what you guys apparently want to see, Nene should be considered the best players in the league.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 9:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think Oden was way better
But I’m trying to make a point about PER. It is scoring-driven. Lopez is still scoring efficiently (and at an above average % for a center) but take someone like Sergio last year – if he’d taken more shots at whatever his low percentage was, it still would have raised his PER. One’s shooting % is detrimental to the team when it’s lower than, for example, the team average – meaning the cost is greater than the benefit.
The problem isn’t Lopez, it’s PER.
(also I’d say fouls are a problem much more easily remedied than rebounding or fg%, which tend to remain constant, but that’s beside the point.)
Also thanks for the ad hominem attack on Dave Berri, but that was my own “value of rebounding” logic, not that it matters.
by austinpwnz on Jul 30, 2009 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
David Berri is a big boy
he can handle a couple ad hom attacks by anonymous commenters on a random NBA board. It’s what comes with the territory of being in the public domain.
As far as PER being too based on scoring, maybe, but it should be noted that the only reason the top two scorers in the NBA this year were the top two in PER was that compiled insane stats outside of scoring. Wade averaged over 7 assists and 5 boards. LeBron averaged over 7 and 7. The rest of the top 10 PER guys breaks down as: Paul (8th in scoring), Howard (15th in scoring), Duncan (18th in scoring), Kobe (3rd in scoring), Roy (10th in scoring), Parker (12th in scoring), Jefferson (7th in scoring), and Dirk (4th in scoring).
So there’s an overlap between six of the top 10 scorers and PER players in the league this year, but almost all of those were guys that did a ton of things other than scoring. The two players who did nothing but score very efficiently (Durant and Granger) don’t fare nearly as well in PER.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 10:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the point about the ad hom attacks wasn't that it was insulting to Berri.
It’s that it was a logical fallacy.
And PER isn’t all about scoring. Then it would just be PPG. The point is that it skews toward scoring. You’ll notice that in the top ten in PER, all of them are at least in the top twenty in scoring. There’s no sign of people like Marcus Camby or Jason Kidd who contribute massively in areas that aren’t scoring.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 10:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Equating a rebound to a possession/points
is a fallacy because a) it doesn’t take into account that most defensive rebounds will probably be collected by someone else on the team or a lesser replacement player anyways, so assigning full credit for a possession and the equivalent points to one player is overvaluing his own contributions. And b) a defensive rebound gets made available as the result of a successful defensive sequence. If Shane Battier forces a tough shot out of a player that misses, and Yao gets the rebound, you’re essentially giving the entire credit for Battier’s defensive effort to Yao.
Good teams play better defense, so more defensive rebounds are available, so ergo, defensive rebounding highly correlates to winning, when it’s really less about defensive rebounding and more about playing defense. The end result being that guys who collect boards on bad defensive teams still get rated as producing tons of wins.
Still, trk and others laid out the problems with WoW here better than I care to or can.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Reading
It’s a wonderful thing: http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/11/09/do-we-overvalue-rebounds/
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I feel like a teacher handing out reading assignments
http://dberri.wordpress.com/2007/03/26/incorporating-defense/
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great
find a 3rd party article defending it and we can talk. I can’t imagine why David Berri would ever have any stake in asserting WoW as an infallible statistical model.
Like I’ve stated multiple times, the issue isn’t “Is WoW useless?”, but “Is WoW a significantly better metric than others?” and no study not conducted by Berri has shown this. In fact, it’s been shown to be <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=7&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amstat.org%2Fchapters%2Fboston%2Fnessis07%2Fpresentation_material%2FDan_Rosenbaum.pdf&ei=upxySuOhDoSasgPywcjHCA&usg=AFQjCNE-ChPtrT06xXNNaEFFU-SjI99s3A&sig2=PcZyEBWdmvIyEm_viz_yhA" target="new">awful at predicting success by third parties.
Just like there’s a whole lot more to analysis than PER, there’s a whole lot more to analysis than possession metrics.
by Royster on Jul 31, 2009 12:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Damn, link here
by Royster on Jul 31, 2009 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good thing Rosenbaum publishes his work in peer-reviewed journals.
Oh wait, that’s Berri. My mistake.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Rosenbaum was voted by his peers as the president of the North American Association of Sports Economist.
Oh wait, Berri again, nevermind.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And finally
Berri responds to Rosenbaum himself: http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/11/26/answering-a-critic/
And now I’m done arguing about this. I didn’t want to turn this into an argument about WoW, but it seems some people can’t just leave be.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course
Rosenbaum and Lewin actually consult for the best regular season team in the NBA which actually has a financial incentive for using better statistical models and keeping those models confidential.
Don’t just take his word for it, though. Try Kevin Pelton or Roland Beech’s also.
Like you said, there’s a fundamental difference. PER produces oddities like saying Durant was the 6th best player in the NBA last year just like WoW produces oddities like saying Joel was 150% more productive than Melo two years ago (used only since Berri hasn’t posted this year’s data on the site). Neither one is perfect, and I don’t think I’ve argued that one is.
But hey, I’m fine being done with it. All the best.
by Royster on Jul 31, 2009 6:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where have I made any reference at all to Berri or WoW besides in response to you?
I don’t really see the point of replying to you any more. You seem to think I’m blindly parroting someone else’s logic when in fact I have my own. Yes, I made some simplifications, rebounding % is more accurate, etc etc. Whatever. I’m done.
by austinpwnz on Jul 31, 2009 12:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nice job
moving the goalposts. Basically, you want me to limit my argument to only the stats you want to focus on, which seems to be fouls and points scored. If I can only use those two, I admit, you win. You only factored in rebounds to Greg’s adjusted point total, but if we want to adjust it, we should adjust it based on shooting percentage too. Doing that, we get to 19.5, a significantly larger number than Lopez.
Once again, why are you comparing centers to Roy? Completely different positions, completely different baseline shooting percentages. An average center will always shoot more efficiently than an average shooting guard. Players should be rewarded for taking more shots when they shoot at or above the average percentage for their position. They should be awarded even more based on how far above the average their percentage is. I don’t have a problem with above average players taking more shots. It’s just that a better shooting % will get the same results points wise while using less possessions. And no, Nene is not the best player in the league. He didn’t rebound well this past season and needs to take better care of the ball.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 10:26 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great, Ray Allen had a .624 TS%
He had a much better year than Brandon. Lopez shot well for his position so he should be rewarded for taking shots. Simple as that. Shooting .568 on 800 shots is a lot more impressive than shooting .599 on 351. The idea that Oden was much more productive than Lopez is off-base given that they had nearly identical usage %. The difference is that more of Oden’s possessions became turnovers or him getting fouled, and Lopez had a few more assists.
So, using the roughly the same amount of possessions while they were on the court, Lopez scored slightly more than Oden. Of course, this is offset by Oden rebounding more. Hence, it being a slight advantage to Oden in my eyes. Maybe it’s a little greater than 17.8 compared to 18.1 would indicate, but nothing that jumps out at me, especially considering that Lopez had to do it in twice the amount of time.
The problem with possession stats is they overvalue rebounding and lead to absurdities like asserting that Rodman produced more wins than MJ on those Bulls teams. Does PER skew the other way? Of course, I’m not arguing that it’s infallible, but just that WP or WP48 shouldn’t be considered some amazing stat, which seems to be the argument here.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 10:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who said Rodman produced more wins than Jordan?
Even Berri doesn’t say that: http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/06/01/the-case-for-michael-jordan/
There are a lot of problems with Usage rate. Mostly, it’s that Hollinger makes numbers up based on intuition. Why in the world are assists multiplied by .33? Did he do any sort of analysis to reach that conclusion? No.
And who said anything about WP or WP48? If I wanted to open up that argument, I would have already referenced Berri’s metrics. I’m just arguing based on what makes sense. Oden produced the same per minute points while shooting more efficiently and thus using less possessions. He also gained more possessions through rebounding. Since basketball is a game of possessions, it seems Oden was more productive per minute. Of course, he has to get past fouls in order to play more minutes. But per minute, he’s significantly better than Lopez.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 11:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Actually he does
http://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/12/04/on-jordan-and-rodman-again/
While Rodman may have produced more wins, Jordan was better relative to other SGs than Rodman was to other PFs. The fact remains, however, that rodman produced more wins than Jordan in at least his last year (with the Bulls). Even when he has to talk about the raw number of wins produced, he goes to the career numbers and even admits that Rodman was more productive in some years.
Although Rodman did exceed Jordan’s productivity in some years, if we look at the each player’s career we see that Jordan’s Wins Produced far exceeded that which was offered by Rodman.
To think that there was a single year that MJ was healthy that Rodman was more productive than him is a joke.
by Royster on Jul 30, 2009 11:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you read the article you just referenced?
He was arguing that Jordan was better than Rodman. While Rodman produced more wins in that season, Jordan was much better for his position. It’s not that Rodman was better, it’s that the average shooting guard is more talented than the average PF. Essentially, Rodman was only better because most PFs are less talented than most SGs. Jordan can’t do anything about SGs being more talented than PFs. He’s a great basketball player, not a wizard. Oh wait, he was a Wizard.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I read it
WoW states Rodman produced more wins than Jordan in some seasons. The rest is just pussyfooting around explanations for that and saying that’s okay because of other reasons. (Jordan was better relative to other SGs, he had more career wins produced) Like I said in the quote, he explicitly states that Rodman was more productive than Jordan was over the course of certain seasons.
by Royster on Jul 31, 2009 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, so you're just ignoring the point of the article.
I can accept that.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 31, 2009 12:35 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A high FGA should never justify a crappy field goal percentage.
That’s just incentive for bad shooters to take even more bad shots so it looks like they’re being productive. You want your most efficient shooters taking more shots and your less efficient shooters taking less shots. PPG is a bad stat to focus on because it doesn’t tell you much about a player’s efficiency. You can get a player like AI who has fantastic PPG stats but normally hurts his team with his poor shooting. Oden’s higher shooting percentage makes him much better than Lopez simply because he’s spending his team’s possessions better. True, the fouls are a problem, but statistically, things like shooting efficiency and rebounding are some of the most important statistical areas. Basketball is a possession game, and it’s all about using your possessions efficiently while securing extra ones through steals or rebounds.
I’m not saying Joel is better than Brandon either. Comparing the two is stupid because they play different positions. Centers always shoot better than guards. But for a guard, Brandon shoots a great percentage. That’s why it’s good that he’s taking so many shots. It’s okay to have a high FGA if you shoot well for your position. Lopez does shoot well for his position, but Oden shoots that much better. If both of them have similar PP36 numbers, I want to take the one who does it while using less of my possessions.
Basically, it comes down to how you value each stat. All stats are not equal. Stats that have to do with efficiency and possessions like FG%, rebounds, steals, and turnovers are very important compared to other stats like PPG or PP36. Oden beats Lopez pretty soundly in most stats that deal with efficiency, suggesting that, at least on a per minute basis, he’s a significantly better player as a rookie.
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.—Dune
by Muad'Dib on Jul 30, 2009 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oden and fouls
Often overlooked when talking about Oden and his foul problems is his mobility last season. His lateral movement was weak and he was unwilling to test it after the surgery so when he moved to his left or right he had a tendency to not plant his feet , and being unable to extend his arms he created moving contact and a hand touch foul.
Oden will be much better this year because of the extra healing time and conditioning. During the Olympic Showcase drills and scrimmages Oden displayed good movement and after the first day of multiple blocks he wasn’t tested as much. He should be fine and may surprise many doubters.
by KA-Oregon on Jul 30, 2009 10:56 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Interesting work and a few observations
The need for PER adjustments is a little fuzzy. Could you elaborate?
Tim Duncan played PF as a rookie with the Admiral at center that season.
Tyson Chandler played PF as a rookie with Eddie Curry at center (both had 31 starts)
Adam Keefe played PF as a rookie (several centers)
Of the top 20 on your list only 6 played fewer than 3 seasons in college or other pro leagues before the NBA. (Lopez, Oden, Howard, Bogut, Curry, Nene and Chandler).
by lee3022 on Jul 31, 2009 12:43 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I tried to use a source different (can’t find it now) than just me to give the players a position. I thought about excluding Duncan, but opted to keep him in because I was curious to see how he did…
As for the PER adjustment, the PER stat only goes back to the 2002-2003 season, therefore, I was severely limited in my time scope. Linear PER allowed me to get past that hurdle…
by da34shadow on Jul 31, 2009 8:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oden's Experience
Thanks for pointing out that Oden played only one-year of college ball. From that perspective, he’s far exceeded any reasonable expectations.
by karsikko on Aug 18, 2009 11:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Grizzlies' Mayo assists families in need with Thanksgiving meal
- Behind the Box Score, where the Knicks nearly pulled one
- Photo Gallery: Will Ferrell, Mark Wahlberg take in a Knicks game
- SL: Arenas says Wizards have 'hidden agendas'; VC shoos boos
- Video: Kobe playin' H-O-R-S-E, hits over-the-backboard shot
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
