MavsBoard

(12-22-2022, 09:55 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]So no, the stats do NOT say Wood is a "losing" player at all.

And I wouldn't say he is a "winning" player either.  You can post all the positive stats you want about him but the fact remains this .500 Mavericks team is by far the most success he's experienced in his career and more than likely, he'll find his way to his 8th team in as many years.  If he was as great as all the positive stats you like to throw around, his longest stint for a team would be far beyond 102 games over two seasons.

Wood has flashes of brilliance, but you can't fall in love with those flashes that you turn a blind eye to all the negatives like getting lost on the defensive end, or being bullied by stronger players, or his weird celebrations that are reminiscent of this meme:

(12-22-2022, 09:55 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I am saying I love stats until they are used in a way that goes against what they are saying. Wood was one man on a roster of 15 men. 

In the last 4 seasons (including this one) Wood has had an on/off rating of about +5.0, meaning 1 his teams were significantly better when he played than when he didn't, and 2 on his Detroit team, that team was actually a winning team when he played (!!!), this is a team that was 20-46.

So no, the stats do NOT say Wood is a "losing" player at all.

"I love stats until they are used in a way that goes against what they are saying." -- LOL how ironic. 

You claim that DET was a "winning team" when Wood played based on a positive on/off number, when that's not what that stat would be saying at all. Goodness.

In item 1 on off is correctly used. Yes the stat would say Wood PLUS his 5 rotation mates were somewhat better than the players they replaced. IE, item 1. They may have been good or bad - but their (or his) replacements were worse. (As for which of the 5 players in Wood's group was the cause, or which of the 5 players in the other group was the negative, it doesn't tell that.) 

But re item 2, no this number doesn't say they, as a group, were delivering a winning stint at all against the other team. Ever. Just that Wood's bad/good/whatever group of Pistons did better than their other group.

(12-22-2022, 11:53 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]You claim that DET was a "winning team" when Wood played based on a positive on/off number, when that's not what that stat would be saying at all. Goodness.

In item 1 on off is correctly used. Yes the stat would say Wood PLUS his 5 rotation mates were somewhat better than the players they replaced. IE, item 1. They may have been good or bad - but their (or his) replacements were worse. (As for which of the 5 players in Wood's group was the cause, or which of the 5 players in the other group was the negative, it doesn't tell that.) 

But re item 2, no this number doesn't say they, as a group, were delivering a winning stint at all against the other team. Ever. Just that Wood's bad/good/whatever group of Pistons did better than their other group.

LOL

So Wood's on/off in DET (2019/20) was +10.4. 

In the 1868 mins Wood was on the bench DET was outscored 104.9 to 113.3 (-8.4).

In the 1325 mins Wood played DET outscored their opponents 110.8 to 108.8 (+2.0). 

Like I said, DET was a winning team when Wood played. 

(12-23-2022, 08:13 AM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]LOL

So Wood's on/off in DET (2019/20) was +10.4. 

In the 1868 mins Wood was on the bench DET was outscored 104.9 to 113.3 (-8.4).

In the 1325 mins Wood played DET outscored their opponents 110.8 to 108.8 (+2.0).

So Wood's "on/off" is not a measure of "outscored the opponent" AND it takes a different number to tell us whether that did or did not occur. Got it.

I would at least expect an "oops, you're right, I messed up in how I used these numbers" and "oops, I shouldn't deride others for misusing stats, because I can make that mistake myself," but I don't see it. Oh well.

PS - If you want to point at Wood's plus/minus in your campaign to see him used as a starter, one way to make it more relevant would be to look at the difference in his plus/minus when he starts (and plays against starters) versus when he comes off the bench.

His numbers in DET were almost entirely against the B team (he only started 12 games, on that rag of a team -- which in itself should tell us something). There's definitely a difference in level of competition, so does he hold up against the better players?

(12-23-2022, 12:16 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]So Wood's "on/off" is not a measure of "outscored the opponent" AND it takes a different number to tell us whether that did or did not occur. Got it.

I would at least expect an "oops, you're right, I messed up in how I used these numbers" and "oops, I shouldn't deride others for misusing stats, because I can make that mistake myself," but I don't see it. Oh well.

Does a max extension get offered?  Or do the Mavs eff around and find out, yet again?

(12-22-2022, 09:55 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]I am saying I love stats until they are used in a way that goes against what they are saying. Wood was one man on a roster of 15 men. 

In the last 4 seasons (including this one) Wood has had an on/off rating of about +5.0, meaning his teams were significantly better when he played than when he didn't. And on his Detroit team, that team was actually a winning team when he played (!!!), this is a team that was 20-46.

So no, the stats do NOT say Wood is a "losing" player at all.

While I agree that it is not reasonable to say he is a losing player when he has been on such terrible teams, but a +5 on/off is not something to write home about given how bad the alternatives were.

I’m feeling generous this Christmas. Hop on the Christian Wood train now and I’ll delete your garbage takes from my memory! In a few days my generosity will run out and you will be on the naughty list.

(12-25-2022, 04:56 PM)IamDougieFresh Wrote: [ -> ]I’m feeling generous this Christmas. Hop on the Christian Wood train now and I’ll delete your garbage takes from my memory! In a few days my generosity will run out and you will be on the naughty list.

I’ve been onboard since the beginning, my guy.

(12-25-2022, 05:11 PM)Kammrath Wrote: [ -> ]https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1607136438633795585

Woj doing a favor for Wood’s agent.

(12-25-2022, 05:10 PM)KillerLeft Wrote: [ -> ]I’ve been onboard since the beginning, my guy.

I know. I’ve got tabs on all of you.

(12-25-2022, 02:55 PM)mvossman Wrote: [ -> ]While I agree that it is not reasonable to say he is a losing player when he has been on such terrible teams, but a +5 on/off is not something to write home about given how bad the alternatives were.

Yep. It looks like the alternatives were awful, and it was just empty numbers in a going-nowhere 20-46 season. For the season, DET was -180 in the 62 games Wood played.

Back to this season, I was very encouraged by Wood's performance against HOU because it felt like for much of the game he played with effort and intensity on defense. His stats didn't look great, but I think his value will only come when he adds defense, rather than merely giving effort on offense. That was a game where, even though he wasn't scoring much, it felt like he really contributed at times. In that, I see light on the horizon.

(12-25-2022, 06:10 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]Back to this season, I was very encouraged by Wood's performance against HOU because it felt like for much of the game he played with effort and intensity on defense. His stats didn't look great, but I think his value will only come when he adds defense, rather than merely giving effort on offense. That was a game where, even though he wasn't scoring much, it felt like he really contributed at times. In that, I see light on the horizon.

Some see it as hard work from him and the coaches starting to pay off. 

Some will see it as he and the team finally starting to realize how to best use his skills to synergetic effect with the rest of the team. 

Some will see it as a combination of all of the above. 

Me, I just hope Kidd watches games like today’s and LIKES this style of play. That way, they can build on it.

(11-06-2022, 09:35 PM)IamDougieFresh Wrote: [ -> ]

I’m sensing a timeline I didn’t consider originally where both happen. I see the option on the right has already fookin started god help me.

(12-25-2022, 06:10 PM)F Gump Wrote: [ -> ]Yep. It looks like the alternatives were awful, and it was just empty numbers in a going-nowhere 20-46 season. For the season, DET was -180 in the 62 games Wood played.

Back to this season, I was very encouraged by Wood's performance against HOU because it felt like for much of the game he played with effort and intensity on defense. His stats didn't look great, but I think his value will only come when he adds defense, rather than merely giving effort on offense. That was a game where, even though he wasn't scoring much, it felt like he really contributed at times. In that, I see light on the horizon.

There's pretty damn good value in what he's doing offensively regardless of anything else. The number of players putting up 38% on 4 or more 3pt attempts, and 63% TS on over 11 FG attempts per game is a very very small list. In fact only 5 other players in the NBA have offensive numbers as good or better, mainly out and out NBA superstars. I haven't seen him not give defensive effort the entire season either. Him missing assignments or being in the wrong position isn't not giving effort. He will never be a good man on man defender, but his weakside shot blocking threat has always been there, and he's the best rebounder on the team.

Regardless of what he does on defense, we are not likely to acquire another player on Luka's contract who can give what Wood can as a scorer IMO. And we haven't even really utilised him properly yet to fully exploit his offensive abilities.

(12-26-2022, 02:34 AM)Dundalis Wrote: [ -> ]Regardless of what he does on defense, we are not likely to acquire another player on Luka's contract who can give what Wood can as a scorer IMO. And we haven't even really utilised him properly yet to fully exploit his offensive abilities.

I find it funny the Mavs media are blatanly ignoring anything Spencer Dinwiddie doing on defense, or doesn't do on defense. Yet they were/are on Wood for every defensive mistake.

Luka + Wood + SD = -5 net rating, in 205 min
Luka + Wood + without SD = +15 net rating 301 min
Luka + SD + without Wood = -1 net rating 471 min

There really aren't any working lineups with Luka + SD that perform reasonable well on defense. Which is a big problem now and going forward. Because its put a ceiling on your performance, if you can't get enough stops. And not sure if the net rating of Luka + SD + Wood inspire confidence that this trio will ever work.

Mavs certainly have the personal to fix most issues i think. But not sure if Kidd has the balls to make "unpopular" lineup choices.