NBA Contracts Summary Lakers Contracts Summary Lakers Player Stats Lakers Advanced Stats Lakers Per 36 min
  1. "It's one thing to have a ton of data. It is entirely another thing to know what to do with it." -- Patrick Minton

    LB Analytics: A deeper look at Lakers stats and game play.... NO Smilies allowed.

Season Recap

Discussion in 'LB Analytics' started by trodgers, May 13, 2018.

  1. trodgers

    trodgers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    9,062
    Likes Received:
    14,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Professor of Humanities
    Location:
    Orlando
    Offline
    2017-18 Recap

    Point Guard
    Scoring Leaders: Clarkson 6.3, Thomas 6.2, Ingram 5.9
    Passing Leaders: Ball 4.1, Thomas 3.8, Ennis 3.6
    Hustle Leaders: Payton 3.2, Ball 3.0, Ennis 2.6

    Overall
    Thomas 82
    Clarkson 79
    Ball 76
    Ingram 70
    Ennis 68
    Payton 62
    Caruso 58

    Wing
    Scoring Leaders: Clarkson 6.3, Ingram 5.9, KCP 5.5
    Passing Leaders: Hayes 3.9, Clarkson 3.4, Ingram 3.1
    Hustle Leaders: A.Ingram 3.0, Brewer 2.8, Deng 2.6

    Overall
    Clarkson 80
    Ingram 70
    A.Ingram 66
    KCP 58
    Hayes 54
    Hart 51
    Brewer 48
    Deng 35
    Blue 19

    BIG
    Scoring Leaders: Randle 6.5, Lopez 6.2, Kuzma 6.0
    Passing Leaders: Randle 2.8, Bryant 2.7, Deng 2.6
    Hustle Leaders: Nance 3.8, Bogut 3.7, Zubac 3.5

    Overall
    Randle 91
    Nance 91
    Lopez 83
    Zubac 83
    Kuzma 68
    Bogut 66
    Bryant 61
    Deng 45
    Hayes 45
    Frye 44
    Wear 43
    Williams 29

    Tops - By Possession Consumed
    Name / Possessions / Points Produced / Points Per Possession
    Randle 1539 / 1795 / 1.17
    Kuzma 1424 / 1559 / 1.09
    Ingram 1281 / 1466 / 1.14
    KCP 1154 / 1356 / 1.18
    Ball 1111 / 1372 / 1.23
    Lopez 1096 / 1244 / 1.14
    Clarkson 1001 / 1160 / 1.16
    Hart 549 / 676 / 1.23
    Thomas 397 / 456 / 1.15
    Nance 394 / 488 / 1.24
    TEAM 11409 / 13242* / 1.16

    The Core
    PG Ball
    -He gets involved enough in scoring that he rated between poor and adequate as a scorer, rated exceptionally as a passer, and just short of good as a hustle player (this was the biggest surprise to me - and really helped his defensive metrics). If he plays defense like he did this season (DPM liked him a lot more than counterpart stats; I think this has to be monitored), then even if he doesn't improve as a shooter, he's still almost worthy of an NBA starting position. I imagine he'll improve his shot and playmaking. It's especially important not to write off a young player after shooting struggles - especially those slighter in build. Ingram moved from 40.2% to 47.0% on FGs in one season. Ball starts off worse, but if he improved to just 40.2% on FGs, even without improving his three-point shooting, he'd already be up to 11 points per game. At the same time, he's just over two Standard Deviations down from the average FG% in the NBA. That has to change.
    Now: Rotational / Starter
    Potential: I see All-Star potential

    SG Hart
    Hart is an adequate scorer, adequate passer, and adequate hustle player. Seeing a pattern? He belongs on a roster, but if his defense isn't excellent, then he probably doesn't belong in or around the starting lineup. He's already 23, so it's hard to see what his upside might be, but if he's a rotational player who can occasionally harass opposing wings, that's probably good enough for his draft position to make him a good addition. On the bright side, in limited minutes after the ASB, he was a much improved player: Scoring up to 5.8 (good), Passing midway toward solid (2.3), and hustle up to solid (2.5). That would have bumped his overall score to 60 at his position. For a legit 3-and-D player, that's fine.
    Now: NBA Body with some business on the court
    Potential: Role Player - 3&D (especially situationally)

    SF Ingram
    Ingram finished his rookie season below 5.0 scoring, at 2.5 passing, and at 2.3 hustle. He had a 51 overall rating at Wing. The main culprits for him were a very low Points Per Shot (1.08) and a horrific 0.32 Points Per Minute. He was too passive and couldn't maximize his opportunities when he saw them. Then something happened - he adapted his game to his limitations. He scored 1.25 points per shot this season, and he increased his Points Per Minute by 150% to 0.48. That bumped him to 5.9 scoring (good, nearing excellent), 3.1 passing (good), and 2.4 hustle (adequate nearing solid) with a 70 Wing Rating. Defensive metrics tended to hate him as a rookie, but he held opposing SFs to 13.1 PER on the season, thanks to a ridiculously low 3.7 assists allowed per 48 minutes. He outperformed rival PFs by 3.5 PER (and amazingly outscored them 23.7 to 20.0 per 48).
    Now: He's a rotational player on his offense, and he's a clear cut starter because of his defense.
    Potential: After nearly doubling his PPG and climbing nearly two standard deviations in shooting, Ingram has set himself on a track appropriate to his draft position. He may never be an All-Star, but he'll be a good starter for years to come.

    F Kuzma
    Kuzma is going to polarize. He showed excellent scoring, adequate to solid passing, and near solid hustle as a rookie. He posted a 68 overall rating (and 63 at Wing), which is promising - making him a rotational player already. Unlike Hart, Kuzma cooled after the break, falling to 5.9 scoring, 2.2 passing, and 2.2 hustle. He'll be 23 at the start of next season, and his defensive numbers were decent to tolerable. He doesn't seem to have much room to improve on D, and he wasn't a better shooter in college. I don't see the upside. But honestly the biggest problem with Kuzma is that he's a PF. Because he's not better than Randle.
    Now: NBA rotational player.
    Potential: Sixth Man

    PF Randle
    There's this PF who averaged 16.2 points, 9.5 rebounds, and shot 52% over 13 NBA seasons. He never went to an ASG, but he racked up 80.3 Win Shares in his career. I've said from the beginning that Randle projects a lot like that dude, Carlos Boozer. I stand by it.
    Look at Boozer / Randle side-by-side at 23:
    JR: 16.1 points, 2.6 assists, 8.0 rebounds, 56% FGs
    CB: 17.8 points, 2.8 assists, 9.0 rebounds, 52% FGs
    Now, Randle has only 11 Win Shares in his four seasons, compared to Booster's 19 in his first three seasons, but the comparison is legit.

    Randle was an excellent scorer (6.5), solid to good passer (2.8), and good hustler (3.0). His 91 rating would be a star rating but for two things - BIGS actually find it easiest to score 80+, so I'd put that 91 in perspective - and his defense is not good (but he's good enough on O now that he can outwork and outscore his counterpart most of the time).
    Now: Legit starter.
    Potential: Legit starter - like Boozer.

    C Zubac
    Zubac flashed tons of promise as a rookie - with 5.8 scoring, 2.1 passing, and 3.3 hustle for an 82 overall rating. He languished on the bench for much of his sophomore season, but it wasn't all bad news. He finished at 5.5, 2.3, and 3.5 with 83 overall. Opposing Centers averaged 20.7 points and 18.7 rebounds per 48 against him, while he averaged only 19.4 and 14.8, correspondingly. Unlike some of the other Lakers youngsters, he's only going to be 21 this coming season. He finished the season on a relative tear, with 6.9 points, 5.9 rebounds in just 18 minutes per game over his final eight. Already a solid to good scorer, Zubac has consistently shown more than adequate passing and near excellent hustle. I wouldn't slot him in for 24 minutes a night, but year three could be a huge step forward for him - even as the NBA changes to the detriment of players like him. His ceiling is both difficult to ascertain but possibly much higher than some of the other players on this list.
    Now: Role Playing Big
    Potential: Good Starter
     
  2. LTLakerFan

    LTLakerFan - Lakers Legend -

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    14,384
    Likes Received:
    19,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    So Cal
    Offline
    Thank you trodgers for doing all that especially since you didn't watch much of the season. Much appreciated. Can you please refresh memory here as to the individual scale range on scoring, passing and hustle?
     
  3. trodgers

    trodgers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    9,062
    Likes Received:
    14,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Professor of Humanities
    Location:
    Orlando
    Offline
    Quick look at some likely leaders for this season:
    Scoring: Harden 7.4, Davis 7.1, Durant 7.1
    Passing: Westbrook 4.5, James 4.3, Harden 4.2
    Hustle: Drummond 4.2, Davis 3.7

    Positional Efficiency
    PG Harden 113, Westbrook 109, James 109
    Wing Harden 112, James 104, Durant 97
    Big Davis 112, Drummond 105

    Rough Scale
    Scoring

    3- terrible
    4 - poor
    5 - adequate
    5.5 solid
    5.75 good
    6 - excellent
    7 - exceptional
    Wilt posted a 7.56 in 61-62, the highest I've seen.

    Passing
    1 - terrible
    1.5 - poor
    2 - adequate
    2.5 - solid
    3 - good
    3.5 - excellent
    4 - exceptional
    Magic posted a 4.91 in 1985-86. That's the highest I know of offhand, but I haven't charted all the data.

    Hustle
    1 - terrible
    1.5 - poor
    2 - adequate
    2.5 - solid
    3 - good
    3.5 - excellent
    4 - exceptional
    Shaq posted a 4.45 in 1994-95, the highest I've seen.

    Positional
    20+ potential NBA body
    40+ NBA body
    60+ rotational
    70+ role player
    80+ starter
    90+ star
    100+ superstar
    Shaq posted a 133 in 1994-95, the highest I've seen.
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2018
    sirronstuff, alam1108, TIME and 5 others like this.
  4. trodgers

    trodgers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    9,062
    Likes Received:
    14,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Professor of Humanities
    Location:
    Orlando
    Offline
    There isn't really a range, except from zero to...well, I suppose it could get higher than those numbers, but it would be difficult to do so. If Pete Maravich played every minute of every game in his final year in college, then his scoring efficiency would have been 7.57, but if he'd missed even 10% of the minutes (36 MPG), it would have been 7.78. So, 7.4 is ridiculously good.
     
  5. LTLakerFan

    LTLakerFan - Lakers Legend -

    Top Poster Of Month

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    14,384
    Likes Received:
    19,025
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    So Cal
    Offline
    Thanks again. So it's the scale and explanations you have above for the NBA leaders?
     
  6. Barnstable

    Barnstable Supreme Fuzzler of Lakersball.com Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2014
    Messages:
    5,225
    Likes Received:
    8,791
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Offline
    Awesome work. Thanks @trodgers

    I need to pour over this to really let it all soak in
     
    LTLakerFan, TIME, Cookie and 2 others like this.
  7. trodgers

    trodgers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    9,062
    Likes Received:
    14,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Professor of Humanities
    Location:
    Orlando
    Offline
    Scale yes. As an explanation, I’ll say that all these efficiency stats are measures of two variables. Hold on. Let me type thjd on my computer.
     
  8. trodgers

    trodgers Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2014
    Messages:
    9,062
    Likes Received:
    14,281
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Professor of Humanities
    Location:
    Orlando
    Offline
    So, for...

    Scoring Efficiency: it's the player's ability to effectively choose effective shots - so it's points per shot and points per minute.
    Passing Efficiency: it's the player's ability to effectively pass for scoring - so it's assists per minute and assists / (assists + TO)
    Hustle Efficiency: it's the player's ability to effectively hustle - so it's "Good" per minute and "Good"/("Good"+"Bad")
    ....."Good" is offensive rebounds, steals, and blocks. "Bad" is TO and PF. If I had easy access to the data, I'd add in 50/50 ball stats, too.
     
  9. alam1108

    alam1108 - Lakers All Star -

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    7,884
    Likes Received:
    16,330
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Laker Land
    Offline
    Man I miss these numbers. Good stuff!
     
  10. sirronstuff

    sirronstuff LB Facebook Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2014
    Messages:
    13,277
    Likes Received:
    31,400
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Texas
    Offline

Share This Page