Re: Ron Mercer -Reply

[Alex Wang <awang@mit.edu>]

> Walker?  Efficient??  Come on!  While I agree that Walker has a knack for
> getting off his shot--good or bad, mostly the latter--there is no way that
> he could be considered an efficient offensive player.  In fact, he is the
> personification of inefficiency with his wild shots, ill-timed long range
> miscues, and propensity for having his shot blocked.
 
> The only way that one could extrapolate Walker's performance as
> efficient is to utilize one of the mathematical formulas that you created to
> derive a contrived "score."  Where's the validity in that?  I'm not criticizi
 *ng
> the calculation itself, but rather the category that you've chosen to
> measure.

I am not saying Walker is an efficient player. I am saying he is a 
(slightly) more efficient offensive player than Mercer. Both of them
are inefficient offensive players while Pierce is an efficient
offensive player. Would you argue with this?

My measure of efficiency is (roughly) points per shot, weighing free throws.
It is not "contrived" to promote specific players and is certainly superior
to measures such as FG%. The problems with it are that good free throw 
shooters get a bonus, because they tend to get extra free throws in special 
late game situations that don't relate to their offensive ability; it 
doesn't factor in three point plays; it doesn't factor in turnovers and
assists.

Any factor like FG% that ignores three pointers and free throws is a much
more flawed measure of efficiency. For instance, say a guy is a great 
inside scorer and is wonderful at getting inside position; as a result,
opponents foul rather than give him a dunk. His line may be something
like 2-6 FG, 12-12 FT. If they give him the dunk instead, his line is
8-12 FG, 0-0 FT. In each case he gets 16 points on 12 possessions, which
is an efficient performance. But his FG% is 33% in the first case and 67%
in the second. How about a 48% long range two point shooter who adds a
40% three point shot? He gets more points per shot, but a lower shooting
percentage. If I'm a coach, I'll take the three pointers and let the media
people argue over FG%.

And the fact is, if you give Walker the ball and watch his idiocy, or
give Mercer the ball and watch him shoot the sweet jumper, you will get
basically the same number of points each time. And this is my measure
of efficiency. A better measure would actually be what Pitino probably
does, which is grade every possession using video. Another difference is
that Walker can always get the points one on one, whereas you can't count
on Mercer getting a shot; if his defender works through the screen he
doesn't have any options.

Your anti-Walker hyperbole doesn't prove anything. I could create equally 
"true" Mercer hyperbole: "He is the personification of inefficiency with 
his constant contested 18 footers, blind half reverse prayer layups, and 
inability to get to the line." 

I'd rather compare a statistic: How many points do they get for the shot 
attempts they put up? It's not a perfect statistic and there are cases 
where a high efficiency player will have a low efficiency score. For 
example, if a guy passes up his own high percentage shot to give his 
teammate a dunk, he gets no credit by this score. Mercer is not the 
type of player who does this often though. I could say the same thing
you said about Walker: There is no way that Mercer can be considered an
efficient offensive player using any standard other than an aesthetic 
one. I love the way he elevates on his jump shot and the nice stroke,
but if the ball doesn't go in it doesn't mean anything. I mean, he could
start jacking up three pointers and he'd look just as good but his 
efficiency would be around 15%.

> Besides, Mercer is a guard and Walker is a forward, further
> exacerbating Walker's inefficiency on offense.

I wouldn't contest your point that forwards tend to be more efficient 
offensive players than guards. But I never indicated anything otherwise.
This is the reason many good offenses start inside-out, and why a good big
man is much preferred over a equally skilled guard. And why Walker deserves
the max and Mercer will get traded.

Alex

> Ryan
>