Why I like the Clippers/Celtics Rumored Trade

[Fafnir]

Also, while not the best defender, he is a formidable one,

If this was true I'd be all for getting Jordan. The problem is he plays defense more like Javale McGee most nights.

Out of position, hunting for blocks, and compromising his team's rebounding box outs and rotations because of it.

Jordan has tremendous defensive potential, but he's a poor defender currently. This is made even worse because Blake Griffin isn't a defensive ace either.

[erisred]

z = Zone
zPPS = Zone Points Per Shot
x 2 or 3 = 2 for two-point shots, 3 for three-point shots

( zFGM/zFGA x 2 or 3 ) + ( [zFTA/zFGA] [FTM/FTA] ) = zPPS

Okay, after some editing, I think this is the correct formula. This would tell you every single player's optimal zone(s) and which players in the NBA have the most optimal zones.

Well done! I do think you're on to something here.

As was mentioned later, it's not the *whole* picture, there is defense to consider, too. But I don't think you were saying this is the *whole* picture, just a better way of making judgement about a player's offensive usefulness than either PPG or raw PPS.

[Fafnir]

z = Zone
zPPS = Zone Points Per Shot
x 2 or 3 = 2 for two-point shots, 3 for three-point shots

( zFGM/zFGA x 2 or 3 ) + ( [zFTA/zFGA] [FTM/FTA] ) = zPPS

Okay, after some editing, I think this is the correct formula. This would tell you every single player's optimal zone(s) and which players in the NBA have the most optimal zones.

Well done! I do think you're on to something here.

As was mentioned later, it's not the *whole* picture, there is defense to consider, too. But I don't think you were saying this is the *whole* picture, just a better way of making judgement about a player's offensive usefulness than either PPG or raw PPS.

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Teams help off and ignore him and it destroys the Clippers spacing, especially when they have time to impliment a gameplan. (aka the playoffs)

Jordan is a very good finisher, but he relies on offensive rebounds and others to generate those looks. Garbage man on offense.

[Celtics Insider]

He gets to the line a lot because people intentionally foul him because he can't hit free throws.  Teams score on slightly more than half of their possessions and you have to throw in some three pointers.  If Jordon only hits 50% and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt there, you are destined to lose every time teams take to fouling him intentionally.

If he was the defensive presence of early Shaq, then maybe you could live with it, but he isn't.

But, even if he only makes 1/3 of his FTs, the sheer amount of FTs he takes would up his points per shot in his optimal zone to one of the highest in the league for centers. He gets about 1.5 zPPS. Not exact, but it's rounded. Howard gets about 1.7. Only a 0.2 point difference per shot in their respective optimal zones (which happen to both be in the paint), and that is with Howard getting nearly as many zFTA as zFGA. If Jordan could miraculously hit 50% of his FTs, as you suggested, it would move it up to about 1.55 zPPS, putting him that much closer to Howard and other elite centers.

Also, yes, as people have mentioned, you would be wise to stack the zPPS against how many points per possession they give up. There's a site that lists them for all players, but I can't find it. 

[Celtics Insider]

z = Zone
zPPS = Zone Points Per Shot
x 2 or 3 = 2 for two-point shots, 3 for three-point shots

( zFGM/zFGA x 2 or 3 ) + ( [zFTA/zFGA] [FTM/FTA] ) = zPPS

Okay, after some editing, I think this is the correct formula. This would tell you every single player's optimal zone(s) and which players in the NBA have the most optimal zones.

Well done! I do think you're on to something here.

As was mentioned later, it's not the *whole* picture, there is defense to consider, too. But I don't think you were saying this is the *whole* picture, just a better way of making judgement about a player's offensive usefulness than either PPG or raw PPS.

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Teams help off and ignore him and it destroys the Clippers spacing, especially when they have time to impliment a gameplan. (aka the playoffs)

Jordan is a very good finisher, but he relies on offensive rebounds and others to generate those looks. Garbage man on offense.

But, really, who cares HOW he scores or WHY teams sag off on him? They do, and the stats show that he delivers. If you need points, give him the ball in his optimal zone. Just like in the movie "Moneyball", Brad Pitt basically implies that a single is no different than a walk. Who cares HOW they get on base, as long as they DO get on base?

If he has a lot of FT opportunities, and misses, the increased amount of FTAs still has a positive effect on his zPPS.

[D.o.s.]

Referencing Moneyball as a movie rather than a book screams to me a want to understand sabermetrics without the background and legwork to do so effectively.

That could totally be how I'm reading it and not true to life, but I feel like pointing it out.

Also, I wouldn't want a starting lineup with Rondo and Jordan for the simple fact that neither can hit free throws at an acceptable rate. If such a rotation-challenged coach as VDN can figure out that you can't play Griffin/Jordan in crunch time because of that, why would anyone else do anything differently?

For the record--the Clippers are one of my least-favorite franchises, and the thought of KG and Doc heading there makes me sad.

[Celtics4ever]

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Same as Perk, it's a start and he is a better overall rebounder if you look at there first five years of play he compares favorably in  FG, REB, Fouls and PPG.  Perk was better at BPG and FT and APG.   But for all purposes the first five years they are almost a wash.

Jordan would be better with some polished offensive guys to play off of, if he is the low post threat, Wiggins here we come!

I would rather get something than nothing folks.   This may be the best deal we get.  It beats starting over with nothing.

[Fafnir]

z = Zone
zPPS = Zone Points Per Shot
x 2 or 3 = 2 for two-point shots, 3 for three-point shots

( zFGM/zFGA x 2 or 3 ) + ( [zFTA/zFGA] [FTM/FTA] ) = zPPS

Okay, after some editing, I think this is the correct formula. This would tell you every single player's optimal zone(s) and which players in the NBA have the most optimal zones.

Well done! I do think you're on to something here.

As was mentioned later, it's not the *whole* picture, there is defense to consider, too. But I don't think you were saying this is the *whole* picture, just a better way of making judgement about a player's offensive usefulness than either PPG or raw PPS.

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Teams help off and ignore him and it destroys the Clippers spacing, especially when they have time to impliment a gameplan. (aka the playoffs)

Jordan is a very good finisher, but he relies on offensive rebounds and others to generate those looks. Garbage man on offense.

But, really, who cares HOW he scores or WHY teams sag off on him? They do, and the stats show that he delivers. If you need points, give him the ball in his optimal zone. Just like in the movie "Moneyball", Brad Pitt basically implies that a single is no different than a walk. Who cares HOW they get on base, as long as they DO get on base?

If he has a lot of FT opportunities, and misses, the increased amount of FTAs still has a positive effect on his zPPS.

Basketball isn't baseball.

Players aren't taking individual possessions and scoring on their own.

The Clippers are a worse offensive team when Jordan is on the floor because he can't shoot, can't dribble, and isn't a good passer.

Of course the best way to get points is to get a 6'10" athlete the ball in position to dunk it. The problem is generating such a dunk attempt, and Jordan's game is severely lacking at generating such dunks.

Howard is a much more impactful player on offense because he's a much more dangerous post option. Better at sealing his man and taking advantage of deep post possessions.

[Celtics Insider]

Referencing Moneyball as a movie rather than a book screams to me a want to understand sabermetrics without the background and legwork to understand.

No, it means that I was referencing a specific quote in the movie that was not present in the novel that I could make a good analogy with.

[Fafnir]

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Same as Perk, it's a start and he is a better overall rebounder if you look at there first five years of play he compares favorably in  FG, REB, Fouls and PPG.  Perk was better at BPG and FT and APG.   But for all purposes the first five years they are almost a wash.

Jordan would be better with some polished offensive guys to play off of, if he is the low post threat, Wiggins here we come!

I would rather get something than nothing folks.   This may be the best deal we get.  It beats starting over with nothing.

Would you like to pay Perkins 10+ million dollars a year even at his peak if he was a poor defender? Because for all his blocks and rebounds Jordan is a poor defender.

Offensively Jordan is similar to Perk's peak value (pre-knee injury). Except Perkins was actually more valuable because he is/was a much more physical and effective screener.

Perkins was frequently benched because he was killing the C's offense even at his best too....

[D.o.s.]

Referencing Moneyball as a movie rather than a book screams to me a want to understand sabermetrics without the background and legwork to understand.

No, it means that I was referencing a specific quote in the movie that was not present in the novel that I could make a good analogy with.

Fair enough. Like I said before, I could be mistaken.

[SHAQATTACK]

Trade the trader Black Jack Glenn Rivers off for some draft picks and dump a few bad contracts on the clips,, but  I say reload with Pierce and KG  and New Coach Lionel Hollins

[jambr380]

Except the reason that Jordan gets an above average amount of points in the paint is that he's a complete non-threat other than to dunk the ball.

Same as Perk, it's a start and he is a better overall rebounder if you look at there first five years of play he compares favorably in  FG, REB, Fouls and PPG.  Perk was better at BPG and FT and APG.   But for all purposes the first five years they are almost a wash.

Jordan would be better with some polished offensive guys to play off of, if he is the low post threat, Wiggins here we come!

I would rather get something than nothing folks.   This may be the best deal we get.  It beats starting over with nothing.

Would you like to pay Perkins 10+ million dollars a year even at his peak if he was a poor defender? Because for all his blocks and rebounds Jordan is a poor defender.

Offensively Jordan is similar to Perk's peak value (pre-knee injury). Except Perkins was actually more valuable because he is/was a much more physical and effective screener.

Perkins was frequently benched because he was killing the C's offense even at his best too....

I don't know, he's only got a couple of years left on his contract. If he is a total disaster, we can trade him as an expiring after next season. He showed the potential to demand his current contract [GS proved they would pay that amount]. I understand his liabilities, but I would love to see him play with Rondo [yes, over Paul] and acquiring Bledsoe and picks are really the best part.

[satch]

I find it hard to believe the clippers are dumb enough to do what is rumored.

[tarheelsxxiii]

But, really, who cares HOW he scores or WHY teams sag off on him? They do, and the stats show that he delivers. If you need points, give him the ball in his optimal zone. Just like in the movie "Moneyball", Brad Pitt basically implies that a single is no different than a walk. Who cares HOW they get on base, as long as they DO get on base?

If he has a lot of FT opportunities, and misses, the increased amount of FTAs still has a positive effect on his zPPS.

Fafnir's comment carries a lot of weight for me. How and Why are much bigger factors in basketball than baseball. The more team-oriented sport, especially when considering offensive production, will create a lot more variability in your data. The conditions upon which these events are occurring (e.g., defenders playing Jordan a certain way) would likely change if Jordan was put in a new setting. Those moderators, in turn, could drastically change the stats you're interested in.

In a nutshell, Jordan could likely be a different player on a different team... so any predictions for his production for the Celts, based on these stats, may not be too accurate.