Stats, analysis, commentary.
Wizards games feel like the NBA version of Whose Line Is It Anyway?, the game show where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter. Except, of course, it’s the games themselves that don’t matter.
NBA blackout rules forced me to watch an entire Wizards broadcast, and…I guess their theory of commentary is that viewers want relentless positivity and cheerleading, and don’t mind (or notice) obvious absurdities and falsehoods. Also that viewers don’t care about things like the play-by-play guy correctly identifying locations on the floor.
Like, Chris Miller calling this shot from Houston Rockets center Jock Landale a “free throw line extended jumper,” when the shot was actually from the free throw line.
For those who don’t know but are interested in learning, “free throw line extended” is an imaginary line running from the free throw line (on both sides of the floor) out to the sideline. It’s where the free throw line would be if we extended it across the entire floor. It is not the free throw line itself. That’s called “the free throw line.”
On the bright side, Miller did correctly identify the dunker spot, and he told an amusing anecdote about Jeff Green intentionally stepping on Miller’s shoes in a pregame conversation.
As for Consor, please believe me when I tell you that he’s a deeply knowledgeable and superb basketball analyst. At least in private. I’ve had a number of in-depth discussions with him on strategy, team-building, fundamentals, advanced fundamentals and on and on and on. His insights on NBA defense were enormously valuable when I was working on my defensive tracking project. Nearly 20 years ago, Consor posed a fake trade hypothetical to me and a friend that was so good, I still think about it now and then.
So it saddens me to hear what he’s doing on TV. His “analysis” last night was apparently to like anything that someone in a Wizards uniform did. He liked how Jordan Poole was playing, generalizing from a few possessions when he didn’t force a shot. Except, Poole had been playing poorly — taking bad shots, laying bricks, unable to shake even big, slow, weak defenders. Poole finished the game 5-18 from the floor with two turnovers and four fouls. He was awful.
Consor agreed with Miller’s absurd assertion that Johnny Davis was looking more and more like he did in his NCAA days at Wisconsin. This enthusiasm came at a time when Davis was scoreless and on his way to 2 points, 1 rebound, and 1 steal in 27 minutes of action. He shot 1-7 from the floor.
They raved about Anthony Gill, who Consor asserted could have a role on any team in the NBA, when he’s in fact a break glass in case of emergency fill-in for the NBA’s worst team. Great guy, hard worker, definitely a talented basketball player who’s among the top 600 players on the planet. But there isn’t a robust market for Gill’s services, and there won’t be when he’s next a free agent. Gill might get a deal with another NBA team. More likely, it’s the Wizards or back overseas.
A fan listening to the TV broadcast could logically think guys on the team really were playing well. All it would have taken is not looking at the scoreboard, which reflected the reality that the team was losing badly and would lose by 23. And if maybe they took a nap during that stretch in the third quarter where the Wizards transmogrified Landale into prime Bill Russell, who finished the game with seven blocks. And if maybe they didn’t watch the game but just had the sound on in the background.
I understand wanting to sell some hope. Trying to peddle the idea that any of these guys (except maybe Poole and Kispert) could play a role if the team can be competitive again in a few years, is absurd. Especially when these guys playing well (according to Miller and Consor) results in a 23-point defeat.
Kudos to the Wizards M*A*S*H unit for keeping the score close for 2+ quarters. It’s no big failure they got buried when the Rockets got serious. Houston has genuine NBA talent that wants very much to make the play-in and then the playoffs. Washington was terrible when they had their regulars, and with the entire starting five out with injuries, they’re going to be that much worse.
It’s okay to praise their effort and acknowledge reality without resorting to propaganda and outright lies. It’s okay to say the team isn’t any good, praise a good play as exactly that — a good play — and talk about how much players need to work and improve to become good NBA players. It does no one any good, except maybe their bank balances and Ted Leonsis’ ego, to use their platform to spread BS.
To the actual game…
- Jalen Green scored 37 on the Wizards last week in Houston, and went for a career-high 42 against Washington last night.
- Amen Thompson scored 25 points on 12 field goal attempts, and grabbed 10 rebounds.
- Starting at center in place of the injured Alperen Sengun, Jabari Smith Jr. had 18 points and 14 rebounds.
- Justin Champagnie was pretty good — 16 points on 9 field goal attempts, 8 rebounds (including 6 offensive boards), and 2 steals.
- Richaun Holmes played hard and grabbed four offensive rebounds.
- Jules Bernard shot 3-5 from three-point range.
- I still think Patrick Baldwin Jr. has more of a future at center than he does at forward. Despite being praised by The Broadcast as a “bouncy” athlete (which seems to stretch the word “bouncy” to a new meaning that has nothing to do with its previous meaning), his best asset seems to be abnormally long arms on a 6-9 frame. He might get more open looks from three-point range when defended by slower bigs whose first thoughts are about protecting the paint than he does when defended by faster, bouncier forwards. (I don’t really think Baldwin has much of a future at center, by the way. Just that he has more of a future in that role than he does at forward.)
- Corey Kispert opened the game by making his first five shots. He finished 6-11, and managed 1 rebound, 1 assist, and 3 turnovers in 35 minutes.
Four Factors
Below are the four factors that decide wins and losses in basketball — shooting (efg), rebounding (offensive rebounds), ball handling (turnovers), fouling (free throws made).
Stats & Metrics
Below are a few performance metrics, including the Player Production Average (PPA) Game Score. PPA is my overall production metric, which credits players for things they do that help a team win (scoring, rebounding, playmaking, defending) and dings them for things that hurt (missed shots, turnovers, bad defense, fouls).
Game Score (GmSC) converts individual production into points on the scoreboard. The scale is the same as points and reflects each player’s total contributions for the game. The lowest possible GmSC is zero.
PPA is a per possession metric designed for larger data sets. In small sample sizes, the numbers can get weird. In PPA, 100 is average, higher is better and replacement level is 45. For a single game, replacement level isn’t much use, and I reiterate the caution about small samples sometimes producing weird results.
POSS is the number of possessions each player was on the floor in this game.
ORTG = offensive rating, which is points produced per individual possessions x 100. League average last season was 114.8. Points produced is not the same as points scored. It includes the value of assists and offensive rebounds, as well as sharing credit when receiving an assist.
USG = offensive usage rate. Average is 20%.
ORTG and USG are versions of stats created by former Wizards assistant coach Dean Oliver and modified by me. ORTG is an efficiency measure that accounts for the value of shooting, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers. USG includes shooting from the floor and free throw line, offensive rebounds, assists and turnovers.
+PTS = “Plus Points” is a measure of the points gained or lost by each player based on their efficiency in this game compared to league average efficiency on the same number of possessions. A player with an offensive rating (points produced per possession x 100) of 100 who uses 20 possessions would produce 20 points. If the league average efficiency is 114, the league — on average — would produced 22.8 points in the same 20 possessions. So, the player in this hypothetical would have a +PTS score of -2.8.
