Do you not factor in team records as much as maybe historical all star selectors have? It feels a little unjust having two Clippers, a 20-24 team, and 10th place in this loaded western conference, make the cut. As a Thunder fan, I think Chet should be a lock (no bias)! But I do hear the arguments for a Booker or a Kawhi over him.... Harden on the other hand (defense matters too!).......
All fair points. I absolutely do not consider wins as much for All-Star as the coaches historically have when selecting reserves.
To me, that's somewhat a reflection of era. I think we've seen that team success in today's NBA requires more depth and optionality than ever before; the flip side that people don't really consider is that one individual player is driving wins and losses less than ever before.
That might not be true for the Jokics and SGAs of the world, but it's definitely true for second-tier All-Stars, guys who aren't quite in that rarified air. To me, that means that record shouldn't be held as strongly for/against them in these kind of arguments!
I think, given the Thunder's excellent season, Chet will be a lock, and he probably would've been for me too if I hadn't worked the rules a little to my advantage ha.
"[Siakam]’s putting up good counting stats on solid efficiency"
I appreciate your case for him, which is convincing. But it's worth mentioning that his efficiency is really not great. A TS% of 56.4% is below league average (~58%). That's the one thing that would give me qualms.
Yeah, solid is doing a lot more work than I meant it to there. While below-average true shooting, BBall-Index has a bunch of metrics that contextualize shotmaking beyond just raw %'s, including difficulty of the shot and shotmaking over expected. He performs much better in those metrics, although that may not be a strong enough argument to sway many people.
To your point, he'll never have ultra-elite superstar efficiency metrics, but his true shooting has been hindered by uncharacteristically low FT% and having to go against two or more defenders on seemingly every play in a packed paint. I fully acknowledge I'm giving him more credit than perhaps he deserves, but half the fun of being a writer is picking random hills to die on ha.
I ought to have explained that more thoroughly. Thanks for the chance to correct myself!
I can't copy/paste pictures in here apparently, but he's basically in the 70th/80th percentile in all their shotmaking metrics compared to other "starting shot creators" and "starting on-ball wings" which is pretty good! Not elite, but I can make exceptions given the lack of talent around him and corresponding defensive attention he has to absorb.
Trey Murphy?
Do you not factor in team records as much as maybe historical all star selectors have? It feels a little unjust having two Clippers, a 20-24 team, and 10th place in this loaded western conference, make the cut. As a Thunder fan, I think Chet should be a lock (no bias)! But I do hear the arguments for a Booker or a Kawhi over him.... Harden on the other hand (defense matters too!).......
All fair points. I absolutely do not consider wins as much for All-Star as the coaches historically have when selecting reserves.
To me, that's somewhat a reflection of era. I think we've seen that team success in today's NBA requires more depth and optionality than ever before; the flip side that people don't really consider is that one individual player is driving wins and losses less than ever before.
That might not be true for the Jokics and SGAs of the world, but it's definitely true for second-tier All-Stars, guys who aren't quite in that rarified air. To me, that means that record shouldn't be held as strongly for/against them in these kind of arguments!
I think, given the Thunder's excellent season, Chet will be a lock, and he probably would've been for me too if I hadn't worked the rules a little to my advantage ha.
"[Siakam]’s putting up good counting stats on solid efficiency"
I appreciate your case for him, which is convincing. But it's worth mentioning that his efficiency is really not great. A TS% of 56.4% is below league average (~58%). That's the one thing that would give me qualms.
Yeah, solid is doing a lot more work than I meant it to there. While below-average true shooting, BBall-Index has a bunch of metrics that contextualize shotmaking beyond just raw %'s, including difficulty of the shot and shotmaking over expected. He performs much better in those metrics, although that may not be a strong enough argument to sway many people.
To your point, he'll never have ultra-elite superstar efficiency metrics, but his true shooting has been hindered by uncharacteristically low FT% and having to go against two or more defenders on seemingly every play in a packed paint. I fully acknowledge I'm giving him more credit than perhaps he deserves, but half the fun of being a writer is picking random hills to die on ha.
I ought to have explained that more thoroughly. Thanks for the chance to correct myself!
It was a good argument! I haven't seen his name mentioned much for all-star consideration but now I'm half-way rooting for him.
I can't copy/paste pictures in here apparently, but he's basically in the 70th/80th percentile in all their shotmaking metrics compared to other "starting shot creators" and "starting on-ball wings" which is pretty good! Not elite, but I can make exceptions given the lack of talent around him and corresponding defensive attention he has to absorb.