Making Sense of this Season by Finding Player Equivalents

[LarBrd33]

This is going to be a little scattered, but I have some thoughts I'd like some opinions on.

Brad Stevens has always been remarkably effective at getting the most out of lesser talent.  Consider the first year he took the Celtics to the playoffs in 2014-15 with a 40-42 record.  His starting line-up in the playoffs was Marcus Smart, Avery Bradley, Evan Turner, Brandon Bass and Tyler Zeller.  Thomas and Sullinger also got significant bench minutes.   In the case of Sullinger and Bass, they aren't even in the league anymore.  Zeller is effectively out of the league as well.   Brad essentially made scrubs into viable playoff talent.

A couple years later you see Brad getting career seasons out of players like Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder.  I remember us having conversations about how Crowder's per-36 stacked up with Hayward and how Avery Bradley was giving you 80% of what Jimmy Butler was capable of.  Neither has reached that level since leaving Boston.  Likewise, obviously, for Isaiah Thomas.

Last year, injuries paved the way for a "Next Man Up" philosophy to kick in.  Across the board we have peak overachieving.  Without Kyrie or Hayward, the team played at a respectable 48 win pace, knocked off the Bucks in 7 games, embarrassed Philly, and had a fun series vs Cavs (who also let a team take them to 7 games in Round 1). 

Kudos to Brad Stevens for once again getting more with less.

Based on that, we had lofty expectations for this season.  There was no shame in expecting Hayward to return to an all-star level, Brown continuing his strong progression to stardom, and Tatum, a superstar prospect, making the 2nd year massive leap other superstar prospects made before him.  Check out how guys like Durant, LeBron and Davis progressed between year 1 and 2 - the hope was that Tatum would do the same.

Coming into this season, there was no shame in believing that this team could be the Golden State Warriors East.

- Kyrie = Our Steph

- Hayward = Our Klay

- Tatum = Our Durant (if he made the 2nd year leap)

- Horford = Our Draymond

Plus we'd have Brown to counter the addition of Boogie, and a loaded bench lead by a borderline star in Terry Rozier. 

We base these ideas on what these guys have done statistically.  It's not a stretch to expect Kyrie, who put up huge stats with 50/40/90 efficiency, to give us 85% of Steph.  Hayward in his final season in Utah likewise put up huge numbers with near 50/40/90 efficiency - hoping for him to slot into the Klay role (if healthy) wasn't ridiculous.  Tatum had just averaged 18 points efficiently in the playoffs, including averaging 23 in the Philly series and going toe to toe with LeBron in Game 7.  I stand by my Summer comments that 1st year Tatum was the spitting image of 1st year Kevin Durant on the Sonics.  Be mindful that rookie Durant shot 43% form the field and 29% from three.  He had more shot opportunities and minutes, but we saw enough from Tatum that rookie season that made them roughly equivalent.  Durant himself brought up the difference in his rookie role compared to Tatum when saying that Tatum had an MVP ceiling.  The difference, of course, is that Durant made the superstar leap in year 2 seeing his stats and efficiency dramatically improve ... and Tatum has failed to do that.

So what did we end up with instead?   Since stats so frequently color our perception of these players, I thought it would be an interesting exercise to find players this year who are putting up roughly equivalent stats to our players.  It might help give us some perspective.

Let me know what you guys think of these comps or have better ones...

Kyrie = Lillard

- Kyrie Irving:  24.4 points, 7 assists, 5.1 rebounds, 1.5 steals .492/.401/.867 in 33.mpg

- Damian Lillard: 26.3 points, 6.7 assists, 4.5 rebounds, 1.2 steals .453/.377/.910 in 35.5mpg

Horford = Marc Gasol

- Al Horford:  13.2 points, 6.7 rebounds, 4.1 assists, 1.3 blocks .529/.358/.808 in 28.9mpg

- Marc Gasol:  14.1 points, 8.1 rebounds, 4.5 assists, 1.1 blocks, .448/.347/.759 in 31.5mpg

Morris = Jerami Grant

- Marcus Morris: 14.2 points, 6.2 rebounds, 1.5 assists .459/.385/.836 in 28mpg

- Jerami Grant: 13.3 points, 5.3 rebounds, 1 assist .502/.383/.709 in 32.5mpg

Tatum = Rudy Gay

- Jayson Tatum: 15.9 points, 6.2 rebounds, 2 assists, .450/.359/.869 in 31.3mpg

- Rudy Gay: 14.1 points, 6.6 rebounds, 2.7 assists, .511/.418/.826 in 26.9mpg

Smart = this is hard as crap, because his impact is beyond stats, but how about Houston's "swiss army knife" PJ Tucker?

- Marcus Smart: 8.6 points, 2.9 rebounds, 4.1 assists, 1.8 steals .419/.365/.802 in 27.5mpg

- PJ Tucker: 7.4 points, 6 rebounds, 1.2 assists, 1.7 steals .400/.378/.673 in 34.mpg
 
------------

Jaylen = Gary Harris

- Jaylen Brown: 13.2 points, 4.3 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 1 steal .466/.342/.669 in 26mpg

- Gary Harris: 13.6 points, 3 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 1 steal .427/.346/.797 in 28.6mpg

Hayward = Will Barton

- Gordon Hayward:10.8 points, 5.3 rebounds, 3.4 assists .448/.335/.825 in 25.4mpg

- Will Barton: 12.5 points, 5 rebounds, 3.2 assists .414/.353/.831 in 28.2mpg

Rozier = Cory Joseph

- Terry Rozier: 9.3 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists, 1 steal .393/.356/.788 in 22.9mpg

- Cory Joseph: 6.8 points, 3.5 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 1.1 steals .424/.333/.667 in 25.3mpg


-----------------

Alright, look... that's not perfect so please let me know if you have better comps, but I think that's actually pretty [dang] fair.  Every comp I used is someone contributing to a playoff team. 

Here's the question for you...

Imagine this team:

Starters: Damian Lillard, PJ Tucker, Rudy Gay, Jerami Grant, Marc Gasol
Bench: Gary Harris, Will Barton, Cory Joseph

... Imagine that team has some random coach like Quin Snyder.   

How many games, would you expect that team to win?  Wouldn't it make total sense for them to be be 43-30 right now as a 5th seed?  Would there be any reason to believe that Lillard, Gasol, Gay and some role players would be able to flip a switch and steamroll the conference? 

I mean, really... isn't the only wildcard we have Brad Stevens and the fact that he has consistently messed up stat models and projections by getting players to play with 150% effort/execution and overachieve?  You give Brad Stevens that group of Lillard, Gay and Gasol... sure maybe they occassionally knock off more talented teams like the Raptors, Philly, Warriors and Bucks.  Maybe they have a fighting chance of going to the Finals.   But from a pure talent standpoint - isn't it fair to say that these guys are playing at a level that actually makes sense logically? 

Would love some thoughts on this.  Thanks.

TL;DR:  Would a record of 43-30 make sense if you were watching Quinn Snyder coach a roster of Lillard, Tucker, Gay, Grant and Gasol?

[IDreamCeltics]

I think this piece is a nice dose of perspective. 

I don't think it will be well received by this community which tends to vastly overvalue its own players (particularly Gordon Hayward and Marcus Smart) but I think NBA fans in general trying to make sense of this teams lack of punch will find these comparisons very enlightening. 

[ManUp]

Tatum being the equivalent of a Rudy Gay pretty much sums up where this season went wrong.

I was super high on him coming into the season, but I'm beginning to think selling high on him is the thing to do.

Tatum is a weak finisher, loose with the ball and way too content taking long twos.

[IDreamCeltics]

Tatum being the equivalent of a Rudy Gay pretty much sums up where this season went wrong.

I was super high on him coming into the season, but I'm beginning to think selling high on him is the thing to do.

Tatum is a weak finisher, loose with the ball and way too content taking long twos.

How do you sell high on a guy who's being favorably compared to a washed-up Rudy Gay?  I think the proverbial ship has sailed.

[RJ87]

Tatum being the equivalent of a Rudy Gay pretty much sums up where this season went wrong.

Pretty much.

[ManUp]

Tatum being the equivalent of a Rudy Gay pretty much sums up where this season went wrong.

I was super high on him coming into the season, but I'm beginning to think selling high on him is the thing to do.

Tatum is a weak finisher, loose with the ball and way too content taking long twos.

How do you sell high on a guy who's being favorably compared to a washed-up Rudy Gay?  I think the proverbial ship has sailed.

It's his second season and GMs aren't as reactionary as fans.

It takes a lot more time for a young players to tank their stock.

He still has great value and could still end up being an all-star caliber player.

[LarBrd33]

to be fair, Gay is actually having a solid season.  51% from the field and 42% from three... niice.  The Spurs have almost the same record as us.  Let's see the epic Gay vs Tatum matchup tonight!  Lol

FWIW, I still think Tatum can be a superstar some day.  It would not at all surprise me to see him averaging 25+ points next season for the Pelicans.

[Csfan1984]

I think everyone but two Irving and Horford have met expectations and Smart has surpassed them.

Everyone else (that should be in the regular rotation) has failed to meet expections.

Take that for what it is.

[mobilija]

Kudos for putting in the work on the comps but I don’t see it as an accurate projective model.

A) Stats don’t tell the story of player chemisty or even individual style.

B) Stats taken from players on different teams and then put together on the same team doesn’t bear out what kind of stats  they would have together.

However, on a 2nd look, it appears you’ve attempted to find players with similar roles. Sure, win total seems good for perspective but the whole thing has an inaccurate nba2k vibe to it as a real projective model.

[LarBrd33]

Kudos for putting in the work on the comps but I don’t see it as an accurate projective model.

A) Stats don’t tell the story of player chemisty or even individual style.

B) Stats taken from players on different teams and then put together on the same team doesn’t bear out what kind of stats  they would have together.

However, on a 2nd look, it appears you’ve attempted to find players with similar roles. Sure, win total seems good for perspective but the whole thing has an inaccurate nba2k vibe to it as a real projective model.

The point I want to make is that if you look at the talent level of this group... 43-30 makes a lot of sense.

What DOESN'T make sense is that this group managed to win 50+ and go on a deep playoff run last year.  That defied all logic.  A team with 1 top 25 player (Kyrie) and role players SHOULD be hovering around the 5th seed.  This tracks logically.  And if it helps people to remove the green tint and find player equivalent comps.... you'd find that you wouldn't at all be surprised to see a team of Lillard, Gay and Gasol struggle to win 50.

[CelticSooner]

Nice well thought out post LarBrd TP. While I do think the talent has regressed some this year I think what we are seeing has more to do with chemistry and effort. I think a lot of it lays at the feet of Ainge and CBS. Just not a good mix all the way around.

[RPGenerate]

Strong disagree on the Horford/Gasol equivalent. This isn't 2013 anymore, Gasol doesn't compare to Al Horford defensively.

[LarBrd33]

Strong disagree on the Horford/Gasol equivalent. This isn't 2013 anymore, Gasol doesn't compare to Al Horford defensively.

Someone else suggested Ibaka.

[PhoSita]

My only issue with your method here is that it's too backward looking.

Of course if you look at the stats based on how the guys have all played this year, when the team has underachieved, the talent on the team wont seem nearly as good.

The outcome is already determined. They've underachieved this season therefore the talent is less than we thought.

Maybe that's true but we didn't need this exercise to realize it.


The question as I see it is why have so many players on the team failed to live up to expectations individually, and why has the team as a whole failed to coalesce as in years past?

Is it because everybody in the media and the fanbase overrated the entire team based on last year?

Or is it that the personalities and skillsets on the team just wouldn't mesh and the result is worse than the ingredients?

I don't think this exercise really illuminates anything as far as that key question is concerned.

[LarBrd33]

My only issue with your method here is that it's too backward looking.

It's the opposite.

Being frustrated with this team's current level of play is backward looking.  The only reason you could be disappointed with this team playing on a level their talent affords is if you're looking back at what they accomplished in prior seasons.  If you ignore what they accomplished while overachieving, this season actually makes a ton of sense.  We have a top 25 player in Kyrie.  The rest of the team are non-stars.  Winning 43-48 games makes sense.

I wouldn't expect a team of Lillard, Gay and Gasol to do better. 

I mean... this team has an near identical record to the Thunder despite the fact they have Westbrook AND Paul George along with quality talent like Steven Adams.  That makes sense on paper.  So does our record this season.