Kawhi is a slightly above average defender this season...

[midnightpulp]

per the "advanced" stat of RPM.

According to ESPN's metrics voodoo, white American basketball player Luke Babbitt and the ghost of Paul Pierce are "better" defenders than Leonard. Also superior to Kawhi: Rudy Gay, Kevin Durant (underrated defender, but not THAT good), Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, and Trevor Ariza.

Per 82games.com, Kawhi has been pretty much lockdown against his opponents:

http://www.82games.com/1617/16SAS10.HTM

Especially against power forwards, holding them to a 10 PER and sub-40% shooting percentage (granted he only plays PF 5% of the time).

He hasn't been as "lockdown" against SFs this season as last season, but he's still holding them to 14 PER and a sub-50% eFG (48%) compared to a 12.7 PER and 464% eFG in 2015/16.

Nothing suggests he's merely a barely net positive defender. Again, he's holding his match-ups to roughly the same production as last season, where he posted a monster (for a wing) DRPM of +3.88.

"Well, Duncan's gone. Gasol isn't as good as a last line of defense as him, so Kawhi's metrics will no doubt suffer."

First, RPM is supposed to "adjust" for teammates on the floor, meaning it shouldn't unfairly punish players for playing alongside scrubs. Secondly, Kawhi's opponent production didn't see a significant enough uptick to suggest Gasol/LMA/Dedmon whomever is failing as a paint anchor to the point where it should drop Kawhi's DPM by 3 points. Thirdly, if the big is the one who contends the shot, he'll get credit for the defensive play, so if Kawhi is indeed funneling players into Gasol and Gasol is a matador in that instance, Gasol will get credited for the error.

Furthermore on that point, Houston, for instance, is a mediocre defensive team with no paint anchors anywhere near Gasol's caliber, Ariza's counterparts perform better against him than they do against Kawhi, yet Ariza has a higher DRPM.

http://www.82games.com/1617/16HOU8.HTM

Same thing with Robert Covington, who's a DRPM monster this season:

http://www.82games.com/1516/15PHI12.HTM

That said, I don't think Kawhi is as good defensively this season as last season, which is probably by choice so he has more energy for offense, but he's certainly a better defender than the aforementioned names and at the very least still a top 10 defender in the league.

ti;dr RPM is a bad, inconsistent "advanced" metric.

[lefty]

What are Parker stats tbh

[dabom]

OP writes "Kawhi is a slightly above average defender this season" using RPM

then writes tons of sentences on why it's not matching his "eye test" using bits and pieces of raw stats

then he states that Kawhi has indeed slipped defensively to save his energy for offense

Then goes back and says RPM is bad inconsistent.

Even though on other posts uses BPM(a very ing similar stat).

Which one is it OP? You everywhere, got.

[Chinook]

I love the suite approach to defensive stats as much as anyone, but using PER allowed to counteract RPM is ridiculous. PER is a terrible stat first off and isn't even additive, so something like net-PER is just absurd. Second off 82games neither accounts for cross-matches nor actually looks at what position a guy is playing at any given time. That's how you get things like Danny playing PG and Kawhi playing C.

That said, Kawhi's not getting love from advanced stats this year. I think if you were to be able to take out November, though, his numbers would look a lot better.

[midnightpulp]

OP writes "Kawhi is a slightly above average defender this season" using RPM

then writes tons of sentences on why it's not matching his "eye test" using bits and pieces of raw stats

then he states that Kawhi has indeed slipped defensively to save his energy for offense

Then goes back and says RPM is bad inconsistent.

Even though on other posts uses BPM(a very ing similar stat).

Which one is it OP? You everywhere, got.

I hate BPM. I only "use it" because you and the helmet crew use in your Tony/House comparisons.

No, RPM doesn't match the "eye test," nor does it correlate with raw stats. And some raw stats are fine, like eFG, since it's largely free of context, unlike assist stats or +/- stats.

[midnightpulp]

I love the suite approach to defensive stats as much as anyone, but using PER allowed to counteract RPM is ridiculous. PER is a terrible stat first off and isn't even additive, so something like net-PER is just absurd. Second off 82games neither accounts for cross-matches nor actually looks at what position a guy is playing at any given time. That's how you get things like Danny playing PG and Kawhi playing C.

That said, Kawhi's not getting love from advanced stats this year. I think if you were to be able to take out November, though, his numbers would look a lot better.

Why? PER's flaw is that doesn't account for defense and underrates assists (which isn't a bad thing, since the assist is the most overrated stat in basketball). We're using PER in this case to simply look at an opponent's offensive production against the player in question.

82games does try and track the amount of time a player played a certain position (i.e. it has Kawhi playing PF 5% of the time). Now does it obtain that data that from a cross-match or from when the player was officially playing that position? I don't know. And this is why individual defensive metrics will always be shaky because so much defense is played as a team.

Ultimate point is that RPM is a silly, flawed stat using an arbitrary guesstimate approach. ESPN has kept the formula "secret," but using an inference model in this case is just wrong. It's why garbage time heroes and specialist second unit players usually have RPMs with net gains (Lucas Nogueira, Speights, Zaza [I know he starts, but he plays limited minutes], etc). These players beat up on scrubs for limited minutes and then from that, the model "infers" that production over 48 minutes, and then sprinkles on more statistic voodoo to "adjust" for compe ion. If we take it at face value, RPM is supposed to tell us that Lucas Nogueira is a more productive player than Blake Griffin. After all, it adjusted for compe ion, so Lucas>Blake in a statistical vacuum.

There's too many inconsistencies with this stat to take it seriously.

[dabom]

I hate BPM. I only "use it" because you and the helmet crew use in your Tony/House comparisons.

No, RPM doesn't match the "eye test," nor does it correlate with raw stats. And some raw stats are fine, like eFG, since it's largely free of context, unlike assist stats or +/- stats.

No one uses raw plus minus you stupid .

If that's your argument, you're a ing idiot.

And you hate BPM but you use it when it suits you. Hypocrite much?

You taking L's this year.

[dabom]

Why? PER's flaw is that doesn't account for defense and underrates assists (which isn't a bad thing, since the assist is the most overrated stat in basketball). We're using PER in this case to simply look at an opponent's offensive production against the player in question.

82games does try and track the amount of time a player played a certain position (i.e. it has Kawhi playing PF 5% of the time). Now does it obtain that data that from a cross-match or from when the player was officially playing that position? I don't know. And this is why individual defensive metrics will always be shaky because so much defense is played as a team.

Ultimate point is that RPM is a silly, flawed stat using an arbitrary guesstimate approach. ESPN has kept the formula "secret," but using an inference model in this case is just wrong. It's why garbage time heroes and specialist second unit players usually have RPMs with net gains (Lucas Nogueira, Speights, Zaza [I know he starts, but he plays limited minutes], etc). These players beat up on scrubs for limited minutes and then from that, the model "infers" that production over 48 minutes, and then sprinkles on more statistic voodoo to "adjust" for compe ion. If we take it at face value, RPM is supposed to tell us that Lucas Nogueira is a more productive player than Blake Griffin. After all, it adjusted for compe ion, so Lucas>Blake in a statistical vacuum.

There's too many inconsistencies with this stat to take it seriously.

You are getting production and impact the wrong way got.

[midnightpulp]

No one uses raw plus minus you stupid .

If that's your argument, you're a ing idiot.

And you hate BPM but you use it when it suits you. Hypocrite much?

You taking L's this year.

Raw plus minus is BPM

All +/- stats are bad. If you can see why, then I can't help you.

[midnightpulp]

You are getting production and impact the wrong way got.

I'm using them interchangeably. If a player comes in, and "affects" the game, whether through box score production or intangibles, it's "productive" either way.

But yeah, RPM. Let's get on the phone and make a deal for Jimmy Butler. Kawhi plus picks. Bulls get a star and youth and we get the best SF in the game (per RPM).

You only like RPM because it rates your lover House so highly. That's it.

And it should. All he's tasked with is throwing the ball to Manu and beating up the Kris Dunn's of the league

[RD2191]

OP is by far the biggest got on this site. Can this be pinked already?

[dabom]

Raw plus minus is BPM

All +/- stats are bad. If you can see why, then I can't help you.

I was talking about single game plus minus.

I can already tell I don't like BPM as much already if it's what you say. But still decent to know.

[Chinook]

Why? PER's flaw is that doesn't account for defense and underrates assists (which isn't a bad thing, since the assist is the most overrated stat in basketball). We're using PER in this case to simply look at an opponent's offensive production against the player in question.

The flaws of PER are pretty well-traveled, but the biggest one in this case is that it's based on percent-of-team numbers. It favors chuckers over efficient scorers. It's extremely dependent on play-style, so guys like Korver who pretty much drove Atlanta's O in his prime, are considered below-average offensive players. It's .

82games does try and track the amount of time a player played a certain position (i.e. it has Kawhi playing PF 5% of the time). Now does it obtain that data that from a cross-match or from when the player was officially playing that position? I don't know. And this is why individual defensive metrics will always be shaky because so much defense is played as a team.

No, it doesn't keep track of the actual position a guy's playing. It looks at the guys on the court and assumes what position they are playing. Like if Green and Manu are on the floor together, Manu is the PG, not Danny. But 82games would give those minutes to Green. And for some reason, they assume Leonard is bigger than Anderson and would be a C if on the floor with Kyle and Davis. It's stupid.

Ultimate point is that RPM is a silly, flawed stat using an arbitrary guesstimate approach. ESPN has kept the formula "secret," but using an inference model in this case is just wrong. It's why garbage time heroes and specialist second unit players usually have RPMs with net gains (Lucas Nogueira, Speights, Zaza [I know he starts, but he plays limited minutes], etc). These players beat up on scrubs for limited minutes and then from that, the model "infers" that production over 48 minutes, and then sprinkles on more statistic voodoo to "adjust" for compe ion. If we take it at face value, RPM is supposed to tell us that Lucas Nogueira is a more productive player than Blake Griffin. After all, it adjusted for compe ion, so Lucas>Blake in a statistical vacuum.

Without knowing what the math is behind it, you can't say what it's actually arguing. I've yet to read methodology on RPM, but most stats like BPM are much better tested than they get credit for. For defensive stats, it's really hard to get a standard, but when you have stats like FG% allowed, STL% and the like, you shouldn't use something like net-PER to make a point.

[midnightpulp]

OP is by far the biggest got on this site. Can this be pinked already?

Why are you always hanging around in my threads like a Mexican at Home Depot looking for work?

Rob Diaz

Oh. I get it now.

[TheGreatYacht]

Couldnt agree more with those FACTS . The only players Kiwi locks up nowadays are LMAlpha and MVParker (who are more efficient)

[dabom]

I'm using them interchangeably. If a player comes in, and "affects" the game, whether through box score production or intangibles, it's "productive" either way.

But yeah, RPM. Let's get on the phone and make a deal for Jimmy Butler. Kawhi plus picks. Bulls get a star and youth and we get the best SF in the game (per RPM).

You only like RPM because it rates your lover House so highly. That's it.

And it should. All he's tasked with is throwing the ball to Manu and beating up the Kris Dunn's of the league

Production and impact are not the same thing got. Get it straight right now.

[midnightpulp]

The flaws of PER are pretty well-traveled, but the biggest one in this case is that it's based on percent-of-team numbers. It favors chuckers over efficient scorers. It's extremely dependent on play-style, so guys like Korver who pretty much drove Atlanta's O in his prime, are considered below-average offensive players. It's .

It never has. It's why players like Kobe, Iverson, et al rarely ranked among the league's best (Top 5) in PER despite being "MVP Level" players.

I'm okay with it punishing players like Korver. He's a low-volume scorer who was assisted on .84 percent of his shots through his career. Players like Westbrook are starting to shift the idea that efficiency is the only thing that matters in scoring. Volume scorers (depending on where they take their attempts) can individually create for the team over more possessions. Passing offenses are nice, but they require more moving parts and more precision, while a volume scorer can do such with less risk (i.e. a bad passing offense will be turnover prone and indecisive). And their misses can "create" for the team as well through offensive boards, especially if said volume scorer is a penetrator (defense collapses, big on weakside gets an easy put back).

No, it doesn't keep track of the actual position a guy's playing. It looks at the guys on the court and assumes what position they are playing. Like if Green and Manu are on the floor together, Manu is the PG, not Danny. But 82games would give those minutes to Green. And for some reason, they assume Leonard is bigger than Anderson and would be a C if on the floor with Kyle and Davis. It's stupid.

Link to 82games methodology in this case?

Without knowing what the math is behind it, you can't say what it's actually arguing. I've yet to read methodology on RPM, but most stats like BPM are much better tested than they get credit for. For defensive stats, it's really hard to get a standard, but when you have stats like FG% allowed, STL% and the like, you shouldn't use something like net-PER to make a point.

You don't need to know the math to know it's flawed. It's funny that the stat's proponents endeavor to come off as scientific, but the stat is trying to measure events that have zero-to-little sample size, i.e. it "assumes" a scrub would be a productive player wholesale (meaning against starters) because he has a nice RPM against garbage time players. It infers an outcome from something that hasn't even happened. No amount of math can ever be "right" here. Until Marcelo Huertas plays significant minutes against NBA starters is when I consider Marcelo Huertas a capable NBA player and not just a guy who filled a roster spot for a tanking team. Yet last season his RPM was higher than Zach Lavine's and DeAngelo Russell's

That said, individual defense will probably forever remain unmeasurable because of how team/lineup dependent defensive effectiveness is.

[midnightpulp]

Production and impact are not the same thing got. Get it straight right now.

A pick isn't measured in the box score, yet picks are "productive" actions, you silly helmet headed .

Same thing with creating spacing through being a shooting threat.

[dabom]

A pick isn't measured in the box score, yet picks are "productive" actions, you silly helmet headed .

Same thing with creating spacing through being a shooting threat.

No you face. They ain't the same.

Just ask anyone besides yourself.

[RD2191]

Why are you always hanging around in my threads like a Mexican at Home Depot looking for work?

Rob Diaz

Oh. I get it now.

Your threads are trash bro. You're telling me our number 1 scoring option took a hit on defense? You should work for ESPN with that type of expert analysis.

[midnightpulp]

No you face. They ain't the same.

Just ask anyone besides yourself.

A pick isn't a productive action

*It only frees up an offensive player for a better shot (and open shots are statistically more productive)*

A shooting threat who creates spacing isn't production

*Spacing creates bigger driving and passing lanes, which also creates better/open shots*

You're really this stupid, aren't you? Please tell me it's all an act.

[cd98]

I agree with Van Gundy that defensive stats are mostly garbage because you can't account for the team strategy or other factors.

[dabom]

Your threads are trash bro. You're telling me our number 1 scoring option took a hit on defense? You should work for ESPN with that type of expert analysis.

[midnightpulp]

Your threads are trash bro. You're telling me our number 1 scoring option took a hit on defense? You should work for ESPN with that type of expert analysis.

Obviously didn't read/comprehend the whole post.

Perhaps I'll get Nono to translate it in Spanish for you. Maybe then you'd better understand the point if it was in your native tongue.

[RD2191]

I swear, these Kawhi haters are ing idiots.