View Full Version : 48MoH: Best Bets Without Parker
Blackjack
03-07-2010, 02:00 PM
Best Bets Without Parker
by Timothy Varner
Wayne Winston (http://waynewinston.com/wordpress/), who achieved celebrity status at Dorkapalooza 2010 (http://celticshub.com/2010/03/06/will-coaches-listen-to-stat-heads/), emailed this morning to say the Spurs should be fine without Parker, at least over the balance of the season. Obviously, they’ll need Parker in order to compete in postseason play.
The APM answer to Tony Parker’s injury, at least in the short term, is to mitigate the loss of Parker with more minutes for Bonner and a variety of three guard units featuring Manu Ginobili.
Keep reading → (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/03/07/best-bets-without-parker/#more-6866)
Amuseddaysleeper
03-07-2010, 02:08 PM
Great article Blackjack, :tu
It's nice to have some sort of optimism with TP's injury, and hopefully the rest of the team will step up in his absence.
Especially this quote:
"According to Winston’s numbers, it seems Keith Bogans is the only current rotation player whose role could diminish because of Parker’s injury."
Very interesting. Out of all of the best lineups, the only two players constantly featured are Manu Ginobili and George Hill.
TIMMYD!
03-07-2010, 02:26 PM
Maybe Pop will play Hairston more.
Yeah right.
sa_kid20
03-07-2010, 02:30 PM
I think you have to start Manu now with TP out. Pop did it to start the 2nd half last night and absolutely think it was the right move. A Manu-less starting five of Dice/TD/Bogans/Mason/Hill isn't gonna cut it against the tough schedule we have to finish the regular season.
portnoy1
03-07-2010, 02:30 PM
Well be fine as long as we play decent D and keep the ball moving from side to side. Hey, what do ya know! The guy that stops ball movement is the guy who is hurt. Hill/Manu have to man the PG position and play solid. I honestly wouldnt mind runnin hill out there for 35-40 minutes. I also expect RJ to get some more touches and his agressiveness to increase because of it.
timvp
03-07-2010, 02:58 PM
I like Wayne Winston's work but it's not logical to use minuscule sample sizes to conclude that the Spurs will be fine without Parker. He points to lineups that have played less than 50 minutes together on the season as evidence? I'm not even sure that qualifies as a sample size.
Saying Bonner and Ginobili can play more makes sense numbers wise but there are flaws. Bonner hasn't been the same since his injury (especially when it comes to rebounding) and Ginobili can only play so many minutes. Add in the grueling schedule and it'd be unfair to expect TD and Ginobili to play at their normally high level.
I'm a huge fan of advanced statistics but you have to be careful making definite conclusions based off the data. There are so many other factors to consider. A handful of minutes earlier in the season when the schedule was a breeze don't have much meaning right now. With a sample size that small, the best you can hope for is locating a possible trend.
The Spurs are 3-0 without Duncan this year and 4-1 without Ginobili ... but that obviously doesn't mean that the Spurs would be "fine" without them. I don't think the Spurs are doomed without TP but Winston is oversimplifying what needs to be done to stay afloat.
Blackjack
03-07-2010, 03:01 PM
It looked as if Pop had settled on his lineup even before the Houston loss because of the way he handled the bench (giving a start to Fin was a typical coach move to not disrupt continuity; instead of starting your 6th Man or your next best player, you go with a lesser bench player to not throw the bench out of wack).
So the lineup looked to be: Parker - Hill - Bogans - 'Dyess - Duncan
'Dyess hyper-extended the knee so the obvious choice to replace him was Blair (he's been their most productive big outside of Tim and there's been no real problem moving him back and forth), but once deemed to be healthy he assumed the starting role again last night.
Whatever the numbers bear out through the ol' +/-, starting Jefferson and Bonner or playing small isn't the direction I hope Pop goes; RJ looks as settled as he has all year and I don't want Tim having to overexert himself on both ends now that Tony's out.
I'm tempted to want to start Manu with Hill, Mason, 'Dyess and Duncan, but not having another ball-handling play-maker or point on the bench gives me pause (there are ways to massage minutes and make it work though).
Bottom line, leave RJ where he is, keep Bonner playing the same, suited role he's been playing recently and, preferably, show "The Bulldog" what kind of accommodations Pop's doghouse brings; Manu and/or Mason or choosing between 'Dyess and Blair to start are things I'm very open to.
Flux451
03-07-2010, 03:12 PM
Man, rotations will be a tough call. A lot our players are energy guys coming off the bench. Who would be best to start?
Amuseddaysleeper
03-07-2010, 03:21 PM
Malik Hairston!
mogrovejo
03-07-2010, 03:27 PM
Wayne Winston trusts his sauce too much, that's why he made a fool of himself last season when he said Durant was in the lowest 10% of players in the league. APM can suggest some interesting stuff when you have huge samples.
roycrikside
03-07-2010, 03:49 PM
I like Wayne Winston's work but it's not logical to use minuscule sample sizes to conclude that the Spurs will be fine without Parker. He points to lineups that have played less than 50 minutes together on the season as evidence? I'm not even sure that qualifies as a sample size.
Saying Bonner and Ginobili can play more makes sense numbers wise but there are flaws. Bonner hasn't been the same since his injury (especially when it comes to rebounding) and Ginobili can only play so many minutes. Add in the grueling schedule and it'd be unfair to expect TD and Ginobili to play at their normally high level.
I'm a huge fan of advanced statistics but you have to be careful making definite conclusions based off the data. There are so many other factors to consider. A handful of minutes earlier in the season when the schedule was a breeze don't have much meaning right now. With a sample size that small, the best you can hope for is locating a possible trend.
The Spurs are 3-0 without Duncan this year and 4-1 without Ginobili ... but that obviously doesn't mean that the Spurs would be "fine" without them. I don't think the Spurs are doomed without TP but Winston is oversimplifying what needs to be done to stay afloat.
If you were as big of a fan of advanced stats as you claim, you'd realize that the biggest reason for the Spurs underwhelming record this year has been the huge decline in Parker's play. Obviously injuries are a big part of that, but the reality is that he's killed them this year. A six point drop in PER? That's massive. 3.5 Win Shares in 1,500+ minutes? You seen his adjusted plus/minus?
And even without the stats, there's the guy we see on the floor. He's shooting below 50% this year, his defense is abysmal, and his assist-to-TO's is like 2-to-1. Again, injuries are a big factor why he's not the same guy, but it's not like the '09-10 Parker we've been seeing is a big asset these days.
HarlemHeat37
03-07-2010, 04:01 PM
You don't need advanced stats to see that Parker has declined, the regular stats show it too..bad example..
I've made many threads here using advanced stats and showing my work, but I'm not a big fan of Winston's work..he's made some outrageous claims like the one mogrovejo said and others like Luol Deng is more valuable than Kobe Bryant..
Adjusted on/off numbers are very telling in large samples IMO, but every stat has to be looked at more in depth if you want to make certain claims..sample size, opponents, teammates, coaching decisions, it all has a big part in these numbers..the best way to judge is to combine these stats and make a statement based off of that..
NFGIII
03-07-2010, 04:11 PM
Like Hollinger, Winston relies on statstics to predict the future. They are a guide or can help to get a feel for it but it rarely acurately predicts. I tend to agree with Timvp and those who feel that with the loss of TP this team is in trouble though not "doomed". Even though it seemed that the Spurs (or maybe I should say Pop) were starting to figure it out their chances in the post season weren't all that high. Believe what you want this team's lack of a defensive big - aka Drob/Rasho/Nazr - was going to make getting to the WCF very difficult and then most likely playing the Lakers almost impossible. Hopefully we can get TP back before the POs but I don't know if he will have enough time to get back into rhythm and be the TP we all know.
TP is the Manu of last year. :depressed
Interesting time ahead for the Spurs and us.
timvp
03-07-2010, 04:32 PM
If you were as big of a fan of advanced stats as you claim, you'd realize that the biggest reason for the Spurs underwhelming record this year has been the huge decline in Parker's play. Uh yeah that's obvious with any type of statistic. You don't need advanced statistics to see that Parker has had a poor season.
But surviving this upcoming schedule would obviously be easier with Parker around than with Parker injured. Playing Bonner more or wearing out Ginobili isn't the answer. Bonner isn't the same Bonner and we saw what happened after March of 2008 when Ginobili was asked to carry too much load.
timvp
03-07-2010, 04:33 PM
You don't need advanced stats to see that Parker has declined, the regular stats show it too..bad example..
Damn, too slow.
ElNono
03-07-2010, 04:54 PM
Saying Bonner and Ginobili can play more makes sense numbers wise but there are flaws. Bonner hasn't been the same since his injury (especially when it comes to rebounding) and Ginobili can only play so many minutes.
This...
George Hill will get the lion share of the minutes, IMO. Let's hope he doesn't run out of gas... let's not forget that he never really played a full 82 games season before...
Mark in Austin
03-07-2010, 06:05 PM
I like Wayne Winston's work but it's not logical to use minuscule sample sizes to conclude that the Spurs will be fine without Parker. He points to lineups that have played less than 50 minutes together on the season as evidence? I'm not even sure that qualifies as a sample size.
Saying Bonner and Ginobili can play more makes sense numbers wise but there are flaws. Bonner hasn't been the same since his injury (especially when it comes to rebounding) and Ginobili can only play so many minutes. Add in the grueling schedule and it'd be unfair to expect TD and Ginobili to play at their normally high level.
I'm a huge fan of advanced statistics but you have to be careful making definite conclusions based off the data. There are so many other factors to consider. A handful of minutes earlier in the season when the schedule was a breeze don't have much meaning right now. With a sample size that small, the best you can hope for is locating a possible trend.
The Spurs are 3-0 without Duncan this year and 4-1 without Ginobili ... but that obviously doesn't mean that the Spurs would be "fine" without them. I don't think the Spurs are doomed without TP but Winston is oversimplifying what needs to be done to stay afloat.
This. The classic error the lunatic advanced stats believers make is to put blinders on to what actually happens on the court and just believe the numbers.
At the MIT conference this weekend Avery Johnson spoke to this - it was Winston's analysis that convinced him to change the starting lineup for the first game against the Warriors - we all know what happened there.
And Hollinger is infamous for his PER projections based on silly stupid small sample sizes. (Jackie Butler anyone?)
Advanced stats have their place, and do a great job of fighting the "conventional wisdom" thinking some in basketball have. But it isn't a substitute for common sense. It's just another tool a good coach knows how to apply and a bad/inexperienced coach uses as an excuse or a crutch.
The Spurs should do well without Parker. As much as we like Tony, basically, he was a scorer -- he is too small to play much D and is not much of a distributer.
What he can do is score when all else breaks down. That will be missed.
Parker also creates matchup problems for the Lakers and would be critical if the Spurs play the Lakers in the playoffs in the 1st round. But (contrary to popular sentiment) I don't see the Spurs finishing anywhere close to the 8th playoff seed. In fact, I doubt that they will finish below 5th (get out your :lol:lol:lol) and quite possibly higher.
Two things really concern me about this injury (1) Parker may not get anywhere close to the old TP this season -- Parker going to the floor after scoring is not an anolmaly but the natural and probable conclusion to his drives. I fear that he can't/won't be doing that until his hand is fully healed -- likely next season. TP without his aggressive play may not be of much help. Also, Ginobili seemed to almost concede the season after learning the news. He knows more about this than we do and if he's "devastated" we probably should be, too.
Bottom line, as crazy as it seems, I still think that the Spurs can do some big time damage in the playoffs. In case you hadn't noticed, this is an off year for the NBA -- nobody (not even the Lakers) look unbeatable. The Spurs have infused some new young blood into the mix. That hasn't happened for a while and when it does the Spurs have tended to overachieve come April.
DPG21920
03-07-2010, 06:43 PM
Do people not watch the Spurs? Parker is not a bad defender. He has struggled with everything this year, but he is not a bad defender.
Bonner has had 2 really good games in a row as well.
ohmwrecker
03-07-2010, 06:59 PM
Do people not watch the Spurs? Parker is not a bad defender. He has struggled with everything this year, but he is not a bad defender.
Bonner has had 2 really good games in a row as well.
You're right. Parker is a pretty good defender. He struggles against bigger guards like Derron Williams, but it's not from lack of effort. I also don't understand why people say he's not a true point guard or a good distributor when it is his penetration that can lead, indirectly, to points and assists for others. I guarantee he could average 2-3 more apgs if he played in a different system.
As for Bonner, I will change my tune, if and when he is able to be a solid contributor in a playoff series.
The Truth #6
03-07-2010, 07:07 PM
Good points so far all around. Unfortunately, in my opinion, I do think Pop will overplay Manu like he did two years ago when Parker went out. We'll get to the playoffs but without much left in the tank.
Do people not watch the Spurs? Parker is not a bad defender. He has struggled with everything this year, but he is not a bad defender.
Bonner has had 2 really good games in a row as well.
Okay, you're right. Parker is a great defensive player (remarkable considering his small and slight statuture).
Oh, and Matt Bonner is a great NBA player.
You're right. Parker is a pretty good defender. He struggles against bigger guards like Derron Williams, but it's not from lack of effort.
Who said it was?
I also don't understand why people say he's not a true point guard or a good distributor when it is his penetration that can lead, indirectly, to points and assists for others.
He doesn't pass when he penetrates (nor should he since he is the best diminutive finisher at the hoop this side of vintage AI). Parker is a great player. But he is not a facilitator. And it is not the "system." Look at Manu.
ohmwrecker
03-07-2010, 08:07 PM
Who said it was?
Nobody. Just making a statement. You do know I wasn't talking to you, right?
He doesn't pass when he penetrates. Parker is a great player. But he is not a facilitator. And it is not the "system." Look at Manu.
Um . . . yes, he does. If he can't finish at the rim, he usually makes a great pass to the corner, but he is such a good finisher that he usually takes the high percentage shot. Ask yourself what happens to the ball after TP kicks it out. It is usually passed around the perimeter for the best shot, but it is Parker's penetration that causes the defense to initially collapse.
Manu is a different kind of player and doesn't average any more assists than Parker does. Manu is not going as fast as Parker when he drives to the hoop and he is taller so he gets a lot of his assists passing into the post as opposed to out like Parker.
Just making a statement. You do know I wasn't talking to you, right?.
Okay, you got me there -- I'm paranoid.
Um . . . yes, he does. If he can't finish at the rim, he usually makes a great pass to the corner, but he is such a good finisher that he usually takes the high percentage shot. Ask yourself what happens to the ball after TP kicks it out.
Um, Hell freezes over?
It is usually passed around the perimeter for the best shot, but it is Parker's penetration that causes the defense to initially collapse.
Manu is a different kind of player and doesn't average any more assists than Parker does.
Maybe because he's not a . . . what's the word . . . point guard?
You know what, I think I'm just becoming a complete A-hole. :lol:lol
ElNono
03-07-2010, 08:27 PM
I was actually very pleased with Tony's defensive play in the last week or so. He was lazy when the season started, although that could have been attributable to the PF or the ankle bothering him.
DPG21920
03-07-2010, 08:41 PM
He is very nice prospect.
Guess who's back.
ohmwrecker
03-07-2010, 09:08 PM
Maybe because he's not a . . . what's the word . . . point guard?
I wasn't the one who brought up Manu, Bubba.
You know what, I think I'm just becoming a complete A-hole. :lol:lol
I agree.
You know what, I think I'm just becoming a complete A-hole. :lol:lol
I agree.
We've reached a concensus! :lol
Of the Big 3, Parker is definitely the one you'd leave with this recent injury. He's been one of the biggest disappointments this season and fell off dramatically from his awesome level last season. The Spurs used to have three players in the top 11 PER standings but thats not the case this year...Parker's not even in the top 50 (Ginobili fell from 11th to 25th, Duncan has the same spot at #5, Parker used to be #8 but now not even in the top 50!). This is a huge disappointment since the rest of the Big 3 are still playing on a high level. Imo Manu Ginobili has been the better playmaker and has done a better job finding consistent chemistry with the new acquisitions particularly DeJuan Blair.
With Parker out due to his hand injury at least it means the rest of his body can rest and heal. The amount of injuries he's sustained is pretty crazy and hopefully he doesn't play for France in the offseason. If the basketball gods are with us he'll find his touch quicker than Bonner.
senorglory
03-08-2010, 03:34 AM
Best Bets Without Parker
by Timothy Varner
Tim, thanks again for your useful info and perspective. Your blog is "first class"... just like Finley. Ha.
but seriously, keep up the good work.
BillMc
03-08-2010, 03:39 AM
Best Bets Without Parker
by Timothy Varner
Wayne Winston (http://waynewinston.com/wordpress/), who achieved celebrity status at Dorkapalooza 2010 (http://celticshub.com/2010/03/06/will-coaches-listen-to-stat-heads/), emailed this morning to say the Spurs should be fine without Parker, at least over the balance of the season. Obviously, they’ll need Parker in order to compete in postseason play.
The APM answer to Tony Parker’s injury, at least in the short term, is to mitigate the loss of Parker with more minutes for Bonner and a variety of three guard units featuring Manu Ginobili.
Keep reading → (http://www.48minutesofhell.com/2010/03/07/best-bets-without-parker/#more-6866)
Very nice read. Well done! :toast:toast (And it just reminds us WE MUST resign Manu.)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.