Throw Noah Off the Boat?

The Wages of Wins Journal responds to the debate between Truehoop.com and Rick Morrissey over at the Tribune about the value of Noah. In Short WoW concludes that Noah is currently the most productive player on the team.

10 months ago MrPants 49 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

As I said in another thread

I’m not a fan of WoW.

But the overall point that Rick Morrissey doesn’t know what he’s talking about has been established, and encouraged.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2009 12:09 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Offensive Rebounds=WOW All-Star

I wouldn’t put too much stock into the article. You could find a list of the NBAs top rebounders and find an insanely strong correlation to their WOW stats.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 12:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Noah is still productive in other areas. He's one of the best rebounders in the league

and he’s a net positive adjusted plus minus contributor and was last year as a rookie as well (relatively rare for a rookie big man), which indicates that he’s playing good D. Also, he’s very efficient at scoring the ball, he just doesn’t use a ton of possessions. He gets most of his points on garbage stuff like putbacks,etc.

by fundamentallysound on Jan 9, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey I'm in the Noah fan club,

but best player on the team? Seriously, that’s a problem with the formulas.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Noah scores both ways

He had maybe three buckets last night “offensive interferrance” for the other team.

man up!

by exult463 on Jan 11, 2009 10:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

PER is a bit misleading in Noah's case

Hollinger presumes that a player who plays well in 15 minutes a game would play just as well (if not better) with 30-35 minutes a game. That’s generally true, but that doesn’t really apply to players who are out of shape, like Noah has been for most of the season. There’s reason to believe he would play worse with more minutes. That doesn’t mean he shouldn’t get more minutes (even with decreased production, he’d still probably be better than the alternatives), but his PER probably overrates him a bit.

Why resort to name calling?
-Dionysus2.0

because I wish to insult you personally
-your friendly BullsBlogger

by Big D on Jan 9, 2009 1:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

This is why I hate certain statistical bullshit

To be fair, Ben Gordon, Derrick Rose, Drew Gooden, and Larry Hughes are not far below average (in fact, if you wanted to think of these players as essentially average, you would be fine). Still, none of these players have actually been "good" this year.

Oh really, Derrick Rose hasn’t been “good”? Your stats suck ass.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 9, 2009 2:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I tend to agree with his analysis

Rose has played well on offense, but has struggled on defense. WoW wrote in an earlier post, linked to below, Rose is having a fine season for a rookie point guard. His point is that Rose is playing average in relation to all NBA players, which in perspective for his rookie season is plenty good.

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/russell-westbrook-is-similar-to-derrick-rose/

by MrPants on Jan 9, 2009 2:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I tend to totally disagree with his analysis.

And I think you pretty much just did as well. I’m not stupid and i’m not saying that Rose has been a superstar. I know he’s been especially vulnerable defensively, but for a 20 year old rookie that’s looked upon to do a TON for his team, I think he’s been spectacular. And there’s really no stats that would make me think otherwise.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 9, 2009 2:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get it, the stats

agree that for a 20yr old rookie, Rose has been great. His PER numbers for example are higher historically than any other young rookie pgs. It’s all context.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rose is having a great year for a rookie his age

but he’s not even close to CP3

We have every right to dream heroic dreams. Those who say that we're in a time when there are no heroes, they just don't know where to look.
Ronald Reagan

by snley on Jan 9, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

he's definitely not in bad company there

i didn’t realize how bad paul’s shooting actually was, though.

by Jaina on Jan 9, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think you missed the point of the comparison.

As far as Paul’s shooting. He had a low FG, but he was shooting 1 FTA for every 2 FGA as a rookie making his FG almost irrelevant It also means he was going to the line on many of the shots that would have raised his FG%. Contested layups still go in a lot more than jump shots.

by Scotter on Jan 9, 2009 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

not really

i really just meant that as an aside comment. :)

by Jaina on Jan 9, 2009 4:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

(partly random) Rose needs to get some more calls

Another plus to Paul is I think his leadership quality coming out of the gates really helped the refs respect his game and give him calls early. (not superstar calls of course but yeah)

Hopefully Rose can command that respect from his team.

by Camry on Jan 9, 2009 4:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Rose gets no calls;

at some point I see him being top ten in free throws attempted. I don’t think there’s anything that separates Rose from CP3 in terms of physical gifts, handle, or shot. I think the only difference is in knowing when to attack, when to pull back, when to push the ball, etc.

People have made the point that CP3 played with worse players his first year. I think it’s invalid. Paul went into a situation in which there was an established scheme, coach, and stable roles. The reason this matters is that a point guard’s productivity is indicative of a teams’ functioning as a whole. The Bulls are a complete and utter mess of inexperience, agendas, free-lancing, and miscommunication. If Mike D’Antoni were our coach, I wouldn’t be surprised if Derrick were averaging 20/7, and nobody would flinch to compare him to CP3.

Oy. I started that post feeling so hopeful about Derrick. Now I just feel depressed about VDN.

I would never presume to lecture you about a statistic, but I think they’re especially complicated when dealing with a point guard, and especially in a case when the player walks into a veritable mess.

For all the lip-service Pax gave to lowering expectations and protecting Derrick, he sure put him into a shitty spot, no?

The poster formerly known as Freethefro.

by MPG on Jan 9, 2009 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, in shooting, physical gifts and handle, you might be right.

But in passing, rebounding and defending/stealing, he’s nowhere close right now. Doesn’t mean he can’t be, just that he isn’t right now.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 5:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah a guys situation on a team is often overlooked..or takes a back seat to if they have an all star or on a good/bad team

From guys like Steve Nash to even Larry Hughes the team scheme changes and so does their production. But I don’t think it puts their abilities into question.

But yeah I shy away from comparisons that go into too much details of so many categories if its going to kind of put down another guys play. Some generic aspects of guys like Rose-Paul-Williams is they just try and do what their team needs to win I think. And they all give a you a different flavor.
But I do see the best as being the guy everyone looks at and grades themselves but if Rose just plays his game and expands then he’ll be even scarier. (but the comparisons will probably increase)

by Camry on Jan 9, 2009 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm too lazy to dig up the article

But Hollinger wrote some article to the effect of, it was the greatest rookie season ever. So it’s pretty tough to compare with that. Not to mention Paul went to school for 2 (maybe 3?) years.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 6:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Ever seriously? I think he exaggerates every now and then

by Camry on Jan 10, 2009 12:44 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It was one of the greatest rookie seasons ever.

by Scotter on Jan 10, 2009 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Here it is, actually it's #3

behind #1 Oscar Robertson and #2 MJ.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insider/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&id=2407284

by CJ Bulls on Jan 10, 2009 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I thought he said the greatest cause theres like 5 guys who are at least in the conversation or even better their rookie year

Along with Shaq-Wilt or are we talking about guards. One of the best but the best ever…if he had said that then he’d have to lose his job.
Cause then theres Magic-Mark Jackson-Isiah-AI
But not sure what context hes saying that in cause I can’t read the full article.

by Camry on Jan 10, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh, re-read and it was just guards.

He included Magic (who I always think of as a forward) in it so I stopped paying attention to the positions. The pick was solely based on the numbers. It was not a very subjective claim.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 10, 2009 4:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure it's all context. His PER is VASTLY inferior to Paul.

Do you see why it’s so hard to believe you when you don’t provide evidence and just type random crap out?

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Are you saying Rose has been good, or

good for a 20 year old rookie that’s looked upon to do a lot? I’d agree with the second, but not the first. There’s a reason why we’re 15-20 in a weak east.

by YaoPau on Jan 9, 2009 3:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think its that much on Rose's shoulders though

We’re lacking in a lot of key areas while he doesn’t help that much in some he still gives us an intangible that if we missed we’d be in worse shape.

by Camry on Jan 9, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would say he has been good..

and especially good for a 20 year old rookie. I don’t want this whole thing to turn into an argument o semantics like: “what is your definition of good?”. All i’m saying is that I find it hard to believe that anyone here would argue that D Rose has not been a “GOOD” player so far. Is that what you’re trying to say?

I am not a stat person, like I said, but even if you just look at PER, I haven’t checked recently, but isn’t Rose’s right above 15? Which I believe is league average. Which technically would classify him as being “good”, and especially good for a 20 year old rookie point guard that is currently getting star treatment defensively from several teams around the league. And besides all of that he’s just been fun as hell to watch, and as basketball fans when we start getting too far away from that, what the hell is the point?

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 9, 2009 5:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

misconception, league average of all minutes not all players

15 puts you in the 33rd percentile. Currently Derrick Rose ranks 104th with a PER of 15.81.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 6:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, all your qualifications just made it "relative".

And your qualifications (20 year old—-rookie—-do a lot for the team) are subjective. You could say, “who some expect to be as good as Chris Paul”, you’d see that he’s failing. At the very, very least, on a team seemingly devoid of rebounding, Rose should be getting more.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Whatever. Yea, he sucks.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 9, 2009 5:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Read my signature.

There is a difference between not being THE GREATEST EVA and sucking. You might just be too retarded to get that. I understand. I’ve managed group homes of those differently abled.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

or developmentally disabled

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 6:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Who the hell said he's "THE GREATEST EVA"?

All I said was that I THINK he’s having at least a “good” rookie year and I didn’t think that should even be disputed. I said I really liked him as a player and enjoyed his game. Also, I don’t give a shit what your signature says and I sure as hell don’t reference it when arguing with someone. You don’t know me so I’d like to know who the fuck you think you are calling me retarded? I sure as hell don’t think I said anything that deserved that.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 9, 2009 7:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

basketball retarded?

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 10, 2009 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Really, I'm basketball retarded because I think Derrick Rose is having a good season?

If I remember correctly, you were a huge fan of the VDN hire and also one of Luol Deng’s biggest supporters, so what exactly does that say about you? Since some people here are so quick to name call like 2nd graders over somebody’s opinion. And what is up with calling people retarded? Stupid as hell.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 10, 2009 7:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It is stupid as hell

only a retarded would go around calling people retards.

by reprisal on Jan 10, 2009 10:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

No, you're dumb because...

…I simply pointed out the “relative” parts of your description and listed a couple of Rose’s deficiencies, and you replied with “Whatever. Yea, he sucks.” That’s weak shit.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 11, 2009 12:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I got frustrated with arguing my point and that was me just giving up on it.

Maybe it was a stupid response, I can admit that. If someone tells me I’m wrong I can take it, if you want to call me stupid for thinking something I can totally laugh it off. But I’d like to know why you think it’s ok to just start calling people retarded? That’s really “weak shit”.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 11, 2009 4:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Because I'm not hung up on the PC-ness of it.

And I like to insult people on comment threads of Bulls blogs.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 12, 2009 10:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It has nothing to do with being "PC",

it’s just lame as hell. And your second sentence is exactly what’s wrong with places like this.

by Juiceboxjerry on Jan 12, 2009 2:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it's the worst.

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 13, 2009 11:27 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed. Rose has flaws

I don’t get why he doesn’t rebound more, especially since I’ve seen him grab tough rebounds. And the Bulls seem to rarely be on the break.

by CJ Bulls on Jan 9, 2009 6:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

especially since Gordon doesn't rebound for shit.

One of them needs to. From Scotter’s post before, it’s not the bigs that lack rebounding (although they aren’t as good as the best), but the guards. With Gordon and Rose playing the vast majority of minutes, the Bulls are getting zilch rebounding from the guards.

Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!

by tyger1147 on Jan 9, 2009 6:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

it'd help if Deng got his rebounding mojo back

USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 10, 2009 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Or if he got any kind of mojo back

Scoring, white blood cells, thicker skin, ability to keep Hughes and Nocioni on the bench.

Vinny Del Negro interviewed for the job today. I mean come on! Nobody else thinks this is nuts?
by Juiceboxjerry on Jun 6, 2008 4:21 PM CDT actions actions 0 recs

by Ozzie Montana on Jan 10, 2009 11:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs