Al/Paul Lineups since 2010/11
- Thread starter GVC
- Start date
I think you need to do one with Favors playing w and w/o both Al and Sap. The story to me is that when Al is off the floor, and Millsap is on the floor, that means most often that Favors is on the floor.
I am one who thinks Millsap is undersized, can't defend longer or equal-to-greater athletic players, and can't keep such players off the boards, etc.
I'm going to bet that our Per48 is best when both Al and Sap are off the floor.
In other words, the argument makes sense, but the scope is too narrow.
I am one who thinks Millsap is undersized, can't defend longer or equal-to-greater athletic players, and can't keep such players off the boards, etc.
I'm going to bet that our Per48 is best when both Al and Sap are off the floor.
In other words, the argument makes sense, but the scope is too narrow.
GVC
Well-Known Member
So you didn't actually read/look at the first post.
Over the 3 years, the full ranking in +/- per48 is:
1. Millsap w/o Al (+8.2)
2. Millsap + Al (+0.4)
3. Al w/o Millsap (-4.2)
4. w/ neither (-5.5)
GVC
Well-Known Member
No ****, Sherlock. Favors gets the third most big man minutes. This is even more true of Jefferson than Millsap, as Al has only played 26 minutes with Kanter this season.
I know you didn't miss his point, but you did pick the lazy part to reply. I think it's a worthy question (not that I think you haven't already done more work on the subject than anyone else) and one that deserves merit. You did skip over the part where catchall implied that Millsap's numbers are more inflated than Al's because of who Paul plays with when Al is out vs. who Paul plays with when Paul is out.
It's a valid question, but one that I don't think creates any change, whatsoever, to the findings here. The data still stands in the face of the query, but the query deserves credence. Make sense? lol
You can infer from GVC's numbers and common knowledge that the frontcourt combo with the highest +/- is Favors/Sap.
I would have thought it would be Favors/Kanter, which is basically implied by neither Al nor Sap being on the floor. However, that line-up comes in 2nd this year, not first.
If you put stock in these numbers alone, you would conclude that Sap is worth keeping on the team.
There might be one more hidden factor, however, which is that when Al is off the floor, so is Randy Foye likely off the floor, and so is Marvin Williams likely off the floor. That's why I prefer the analyses that look at 3 and 4-man combinations. Those analyses are more apples-to-apples, and they come to the conclusion that Foye, and to a lesser extent Tinsley and Marvin, are killing us.
I would have thought it would be Favors/Kanter, which is basically implied by neither Al nor Sap being on the floor. However, that line-up comes in 2nd this year, not first.
If you put stock in these numbers alone, you would conclude that Sap is worth keeping on the team.
There might be one more hidden factor, however, which is that when Al is off the floor, so is Randy Foye likely off the floor, and so is Marvin Williams likely off the floor. That's why I prefer the analyses that look at 3 and 4-man combinations. Those analyses are more apples-to-apples, and they come to the conclusion that Foye, and to a lesser extent Tinsley and Marvin, are killing us.
Truth. He deserves it too.. NICE guy (and big), gf beats him, no respect .. we should form a rainbow parade in his honor.
Good points. Do it.
GVC
Well-Known Member
The data is now all available on NBA.com. You just have to do the leg work. Looking at every lineup permutation is not something I'm going to tackle. However, the numbers are so staggering it's unlikely that much of the difference in Al and Paul's +/- can be accounted for by wing players or opposing teams' players/lineups. Adjusted +/- is available at basketballvalue.com. Al actually scored quite well last season. Millsap has been in the top 10 in the NBA the last 2 seasons (2nd last year). This year's numbers are not yet available.
As for the rankings of 2-man combos (without correcting for the two 3-man combos) featuring Al/Millsap/Kanter/Favors, the best per minute combo is Kanter-Jefferson, albeit in only 26 minutes (not nearly enough). Kanter-Millsap and Favors-Millsap are second and third, respectively. Favors-Kanter is 4th. The two negative combos are Jefferson-Millsap (5th) and Jefferson-Favors (6th).
I don't like pulling up a Bleacher Report article, but it's based on NBA.com data... https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1527516-who-doesnt-have-chemistry-in-the-nba-the-worst-lineups
According to these numbers, the line-up consisting of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Sap registers a +/- of -5.6, while the line-up consisting of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Al Jeffs registers a +/- of -5.7, indicating that the Al version of this line-up is a smidgen worse. Also indicated by these numbers is that a line-up with Tinsley/Foye/Sap/Al and a line-up of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Al are equally bad (-5.7). That means, if you're going to run Tinsley, Foye and Al, it makes no meaningful difference if you choose Millsap over Marvin Williams.
If we look at 3-man combos (from the same article, lower down), we see that the 3-man combo with Foye/Marvin/Al registers a -4.5, while the combo with Foye/Marvin/Sap registers a -2.9, again seeming to indicate that Al makes this player combination a bit worse.
However, it bears mentioning that ALL OF THESE PLAYER COMBINATIONS RANK AMONG THE WORST IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE.
In another thread... https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php...ps-in-the-NBA/page2&highlight=4-player+combos GVC pulled the following player combos (assuming this year), which again suggest that Al is holding our frontcourt back a bit.
Kanter-Millsap: +29 (120 minutes)
Kanter-Favors: +25 (541 minutes)
Favors-Millsap: +23 (233 minutes)
Jefferson-Kanter: +11 (25 minutes)
Jefferson-Millsap: -40 (1377 minutes)
Jefferson-Favors: -61 (392 minutes)
Overall, however the Jazz's best-performing line-ups have included Al/Favors/Sap with different PG/SG combinations (usually including Hayward). So personally, I conclude that if our best line-ups all include Al and Sap, but also our worst line-ups include Al and Sap, the problem with our worst line-ups is that they include Tinsley/Watson, Foye and Marvin Williams, and, may also consider how Sap is being used.
So, yes, Al is holding back our front-court vis a vis Sap and Favors, but our backcourt is what's holding back the team as a whole.
According to these numbers, the line-up consisting of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Sap registers a +/- of -5.6, while the line-up consisting of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Al Jeffs registers a +/- of -5.7, indicating that the Al version of this line-up is a smidgen worse. Also indicated by these numbers is that a line-up with Tinsley/Foye/Sap/Al and a line-up of Tinsley/Foye/Ma.Williams/Al are equally bad (-5.7). That means, if you're going to run Tinsley, Foye and Al, it makes no meaningful difference if you choose Millsap over Marvin Williams.
If we look at 3-man combos (from the same article, lower down), we see that the 3-man combo with Foye/Marvin/Al registers a -4.5, while the combo with Foye/Marvin/Sap registers a -2.9, again seeming to indicate that Al makes this player combination a bit worse.
However, it bears mentioning that ALL OF THESE PLAYER COMBINATIONS RANK AMONG THE WORST IN THE ENTIRE LEAGUE.
In another thread... https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php...ps-in-the-NBA/page2&highlight=4-player+combos GVC pulled the following player combos (assuming this year), which again suggest that Al is holding our frontcourt back a bit.
Kanter-Millsap: +29 (120 minutes)
Kanter-Favors: +25 (541 minutes)
Favors-Millsap: +23 (233 minutes)
Jefferson-Kanter: +11 (25 minutes)
Jefferson-Millsap: -40 (1377 minutes)
Jefferson-Favors: -61 (392 minutes)
Overall, however the Jazz's best-performing line-ups have included Al/Favors/Sap with different PG/SG combinations (usually including Hayward). So personally, I conclude that if our best line-ups all include Al and Sap, but also our worst line-ups include Al and Sap, the problem with our worst line-ups is that they include Tinsley/Watson, Foye and Marvin Williams, and, may also consider how Sap is being used.
So, yes, Al is holding back our front-court vis a vis Sap and Favors, but our backcourt is what's holding back the team as a whole.
Lion's Roar
Active Member
And yet we sit here discussing +/-??? There probably isn't any stat that is closer to pointless. Maybe adjusted +/- could be better but I don't know HOW they adjust it so I can't speak to it.
I would rather pay Millsap the money they got and keep him then signing any of those two. But that is neither here nor there. It doesn't matter what I think. What matters is that the NBA is leaning towards stretch 4's more and Millsap can compete with them there and he doesn't even rebound above their level anymore. Since the skill sets are quite different that's why I decided to use PER as a tool to weigh him different aspects of the game. And if you think Millsap deserves a 50% raise over the seasons those guys got then you are either desperate (as a team) or you over value him for sentimental reasons.
They paid that cause they had to pay him that. Do you think they have $7.5M standing around to pay Paul. Most likely they had to take a loan on the NBA line. They are probably still paying that loan too. Not to mention the value of money. If you pay Paul that amount then his contract will be worth more cause you have to insert inflation into the calculations. So basically they would have to pay more money, get hit with interest and inflation to pay him a contract he probably doesn't deserve in today's NBA. Doesn't make sense to me.
GVC
Well-Known Member
PER, among others.
I'd rather be sentimental than innumerate. Maybe you can explain to me how 10 is 50% more than 8/8.6.
Interest payments and inflation through to the first pay day of the season aren't significant enough that you'd be better off flushing cash down the toilet today with no longterm benefit. The Jazz may actually have difficulty reaching 90% of the cap in payroll next season. If they manage to pay their players nearly $70mm this season, they shouldn't have any problem paying their players $60mm, even if $7.5mm is paid up front. Makes loads of sense if you care to actually consider it.
Lion's Roar
Active Member
Top 5 on/off court by 82games.com 2011-12:
Chris Paul
Ryan Anderson
Steve Nash
Kevin Garnett
Blake Griffin
PER:
James
Paul
Wade
Durant
Love
So yes I don't like it when ppl are using +/- or on court/ off court and talking trash of PER.
I can go get the post where ppl were referring to $12M. I said Ilyasova and Anderson got close to $8M.
Since 4 is half of 8 and 8 + 4 = 12 then yes difference is 50%.
It makes sense to put forth a contract with decreasing values. Signing bonus doesn't make much sense financial wise. Do you remember when Ak signed his contract? Did you know part of the money was actually deferred past the 6 years of the contract to help the Jazz? Did we go from having to defer payments to giving away signing bonus in 8 years?
The idea of contract renegotiation and signing bonus was cool cause it meant that the second year contract could drop like a rock. Since the new contract won't be a renegotiation the contract is still limited by the 7,5% decrease in salary. So giving a signing bonus isn't relevant at all and a waste of the team's money.
Last edited:
GVC
Well-Known Member
I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that you were referring to me in your response to my post. Then we agree, as previously stated. Not comfortable at $12mm per year.
A contract with a signing bonus is easier to move down the line than one without because the team acquiring said contract doesn't have to pay the bonus. While there are no cap savings (that is, the cap hit in any year is equal to the base salary + an equal share of the bonus), the savings in salary could be used in a variety of ways. That contract is a more valuable asset (and thus easier to trade if needed...like, say, you have a bunch of young players who all could potentially become better than Millsap and also become free agents around the same time) because of the signing bonus (all else equal). Yes, there is a tradeoff, as the the signing team has to pay more for the player than their cap hit over the time before any potential trade and might find it difficult to make a large up front payment (the bonus). Whether there is some amount of signing bonus (between 0 and 15% of the total value of the contract) such that the added value to the contract is greater than the cost in salary/interest is debatable (imo). I'd prefer the FO value the basketball savings over the financial savings, but perhaps that's just wishful thinking.
As for PER v. +/-, a list of 5 names doesn't do anything for me for a number of reasons. If you want to have that discussion, you'll have to first explain to me the methodology Hollinger used to construct PER so I can explain why that methodology is flawed. I'm not amped up for that discussion, but I can meet you half way if you're serious about it.
DutchJazzer
Banned
millsap in alfensive system, is not better than those 2.
millsap in a half decent offensive system is light years ahead of those
I don't see why it's an either-or thing. Yes, PER has some flaws (e.g. doesn't account for team defense). Yes, +/- has some flaws (e.g. can be artificially raised or lowered by other players' performance). So use them in conjunction with each other! If you view them as "indicators", then I think that they, along with some other key stats, do a pretty good job of telling the story.
DutchJazzer
Banned
i do hope he catches his break but i hope it wont be on the jazz