Daily Thunder.com

add: there is a blog up on today's Truehoop by someone who actually watched tape. He saw all the stuff I wrote about during the last fifteen games when I was doing defensive charting. We need more pieces like that (I mean NBA related, not just concerning Thunder) and less speculation on why teams lose . . .

I know that the coaches has the same tape, and that KD wants to get better - hopefully they got the players to watch that tape to learn from their mistakes . . .

Joe :I’ve noticed this for awhile, but have never been able to put it together in a post as well as Henry Abbott did here. He’s absolutely correct. Anyway you slice it, for every point Durant scores, he gives up a little more. It’s what drove me crazy this summer when people were writing articles comparing KD to Lebron. Great, they are comparable offensively only, but after the talk of offense the comparisons must stop. KD isn’t in that league.
When Durant was on the floor the team was ever so slightly (.7 points/100 possessions) worse offensively, and a full 8.2 points worse defensively. Add it up and the team is 8.9 points worse per game (roughly) when he plays…That’s not superstar stuff there. Basketball is a team game and he has to learn the nuance. The “trusting the teammates”, the passing the ball, the team and man defense and shot selection.
Green is no revelation offensively either. He settles for too many jumpers. The team is 2.3 points better when he is in on offense, yet it’s 5.4 points worse on defense when he is in. That’s a -3.1. Brooks has to find a way to fix this. With those two in the game at the same time most of the time, it will be difficult to win. That is why I suggested the idea of starting Collison and bringing Green off the bench.
Westbrook on the other hand is +4.1 when he is in the game. It’s really just about as simple as that. Winston and Abbott are correct.
But I don’t think it’s un-fixable. Durant has drive and I believe he wants to be very good. I think he’s coachable and he will figure it out. But I hope I never read another story comparing KD and Lebron again because it’s ridiculous.
Just FYI: the Cavaliers are 21 points better when LBJ is on the court.

excellent point Joe - Simmons is my favorite basketball writer, and even he is gushing over Lebron . . .

I remember last year when we had this conversation - Someone here noted that KD barely moves without the ball, he just stands and watches - subsequently, the rest of the team doesnt move and we get stagnant . . . when KD was out , we HAD to move to get good shots. Even though the Thunder played a weak schedule when KD was injured, they did SOMETHING right to go 5-2 (if I remember correctly).

Abbott's points are valid, but he needs to talk to someone that's actually WATCHED all the games for statistical support.

Bang4ur$ :
Wow, too much info for me to sort through completely. But in all of this, is anyone looking at adjusted +/- #s? As far as I could tell, this was all unadjusted, raw data. I mean, wouldn’t stat guys want to look at numbers that account for the other players on the floor?

You are absolutely correct. Adjusted +/- is the obvious tool here. In the link on the Truehoop article it goes to Durant's adjusted plus/minus at BAsketballvalue.com.

Wow, too much info for me to sort through completely. But in all of this, is anyone looking at adjusted +/- #s? As far as I could tell, this was all unadjusted, raw data. I mean, wouldn't stat guys want to look at numbers that account for the other players on the floor?

But, in regard to trading picks, it all depends on who is there. We still need a defensive big man cuz I don't think Mullins is going to be it, and it would be great to get a true pass first point guard to back up RW. Ollie and Livingston aren't going to be here forever.

I think if we had a chance to get Cole Aldrich from Kansas he would be worth taking.

I very much enjoy stats but sometimes you can get so deep into a box, you can't see out. Stats can tell us a lot, but they never tell us the WHOLE story.

edit last paragraph: anyone would actually watched a football game WOULD UNDERSTAND. My bad.

@Vega
Yeah, absolutely. We're already arguing about the roster logjam this year; we have players like White and Ibaka -- who, right now, are likely similar in size and skill to the big men available in the 8-12 range this year -- who may get little or no run this year. There's really no point to depth past the 10-man mark (look at the illustrious list of 11th and 12th men on championship teams the past few years; Will Perdue and Mark Madsen come to mind).

Back to the post...I'm skeptical, but I can't logically explain my opposition to the article. I do think KD's high PER proves that reliance on a single statistic isn't quite the answer here. I'm sure his defensive liabilities have something to do with his +/-, but I would also imagine that things like his teammates and even sample size would have a bit to do with it. One theory I haven't heard is that the Thunder's bench is not as overmatched as the Thunder's starters (which would make KD's numbers seem worse in comparison) but I haven't run those numbers (somebody get Crow!).

As far as the guy saying he wouldn't sign Durant for free...he's a dope. Look at the post below the last post about Iguodala -- he says it's "amazing" that teams do better running the ball out of the shotgun than passing or running out of non-shotgun formations. Well, obviously, since a lot of runs from the shotgun are on third-and-long when the defense is content to give up 8-10 yards on the ground. There's huge sample bias there, which anyone would actually watched a football game. What's truly "amazing" is that this guy is a professor.

@Vega

Yes it would. Biedrins would be great.

Our two first round picks this year look good on paper, but when you consider that the Thunder should improve substantially this year, possibly good enough to not get a top ten pick, and that Phoenix will probably be a playoff team, wouldn't it be better for us to use those picks to get a legitimate big like Biedrins or Gortat instead getting two more unproven young players?

I've noticed this for awhile, but have never been able to put it together in a post as well as Henry Abbott did here. He's absolutely correct. Anyway you slice it, for every point Durant scores, he gives up a little more. It's what drove me crazy this summer when people were writing articles comparing KD to Lebron. Great, they are comparable offensively only, but after the talk of offense the comparisons must stop. KD isn't in that league.

When Durant was on the floor the team was ever so slightly (.7 points/100 possessions) worse offensively, and a full 8.2 points worse defensively. Add it up and the team is 8.9 points worse per game (roughly) when he plays...That's not superstar stuff there. Basketball is a team game and he has to learn the nuance. The "trusting the teammates", the passing the ball, the team and man defense and shot selection.

Green is no revelation offensively either. He settles for too many jumpers. The team is 2.3 points better when he is in on offense, yet it's 5.4 points worse on defense when he is in. That's a -3.1. Brooks has to find a way to fix this. With those two in the game at the same time most of the time, it will be difficult to win. That is why I suggested the idea of starting Collison and bringing Green off the bench.

Westbrook on the other hand is +4.1 when he is in the game. It's really just about as simple as that. Winston and Abbott are correct.

But I don't think it's un-fixable. Durant has drive and I believe he wants to be very good. I think he's coachable and he will figure it out. But I hope I never read another story comparing KD and Lebron again because it's ridiculous.

Just FYI: the Cavaliers are 21 points better when LBJ is on the court.

I suppose if you wanted to look at this article from a bird's eye view, you'd simply say that Durant can shoot well, but needs to work on his passing and defense. That's not being too simplistic either; passing and defense are Durant's fundamental adjusted +/- problem. Fix those problems and this issue goes away.

Now, the view from close up is a different story. The 4 reasons listed in the article are good theories. I have a few of my own.

Jax Theory #1. How to maximize Durant's specific talent?
How do you take a unique talent and compliment it so that it achieves it's full potential? Phil Jackson was a master at this. Jordan and Kobe would have been great ballplayers no matter the coach, no matter the system. But Phil has a knack for finding a system that enhances his best player, hiding their weakness and expounding their strengths. This has yet to be done for Durant. Maybe it's the coaching staff; not everyone has coached a Durant before. Maybe it's the youth around him; how can Westbrook know how to make KD better when he's not even sure what he can do himself? Would KD be a better player if it were John Stockton circa 1995 running the show? Absolutely, yes. Stockton already knew his ability and role in the system, knew how to run a team, knew how to maximize his teammates. As soon as a system is established for KD, and his teammates figure out how to work in that system, I think we'll see his +/- change.

Jax Theory #2. Lack of team cohesion.
Transitioning a team from one generation to the next is an awkward adjustment. The turnover on the roster, the staff and the city in two season has been tremendous. It's everything you find in the recipe for breaking team unity. If you think about KD's only exception to the +/- rule is when he was paired with Green, Westbrook and Collison. That's three guys who played together for two years - the MOST time on the entire roster. Getting on the same page is really important for working within the system. Give the team some time to gel, with a stable roster and a stable staff and a stable environment.

Jax Theory #3. Durant sits during oppenent's 2nd string floor time.
The Thunder are better with Durant on the bench, because the other team's starters are also on the bench. I know there is overlap there because Durant plays so many minutes, but during the course of a season this is still mostly the case. So is the Thunder's defense better, or is the opponent's 2nd team worse? I'm sure it's both. Durant isn't a great defender, and anyone's 2nd team is worse.

Jax Theory #4. See combination of theories 1 and 2.
As of right now, Durant isn't a great passer or defender. Until Durant improves those areas of his game, and I think he will over time, you'll have to hide those weaknesses with the system. Even if the system was set up to hide this, you have to have good players who know what they're doing in order to make it work. Youth probably can't do that. At least not well. Implement a system that will help Durant succeed. Give that system stability and experience. As the youth finds their own role and their own identity, Durant's +/- issues go away, even if his pass/defense game never improves.

Everything in that article made sense. The stats were sound (though I do want to see them adjusted for all players for the games he missed, just as a comparison) and the logic was good. But I still don't buy it. Durant has the ability to be a franchise-changing player. He may not, but he could and should.

Durant can learn the aspects of the game that cause him troubles now. He'll get better on defense, about shot selection, etc. because he is an extremely driven player. He takes pride in his game, but doesn't let it translate into hubris. I think he'll also get a boost this year from more experience for most of his teammates. If RW doesn't drive the lane to find himself trapped, there will be fewer turnovers. That will lead to more offensive opportunities and less of a need to take any shot you can get. If Krstic can get back to his old form and DJ White can contribute, he'll have options in the post to open up the floor. It is easy to double-team Durant when your 5 will jump out for a mid-range jumpshot and not stay low as an option. If Harden is a legit shooter, that will also relieve some pressure on Durant. As J.G. said this week, I'll be concerned if he increases all of his stats too much. But if his teammates improve, his numbers (at least efficiency) should get better across the board. We've all said this before, now we just have to see if it happens.

I'll put my money on Durant any and every time.

@Royce
Haha, man, I really need to start refreshing before clicking the submit button.

Yeah, I'm real interested to hear what everyone thinks about this...

And...Royce posted it already. Sweet.

@J.G.
Thumbsup. I added it to my post as well. I just couldn't find it when I needed it.

And here's something I wrote about the same topic that Royce was kind enough to post on the site that further goes into detail about that certain stretch where Durant was injured.

http://www.dailythunder.com/2009/06/season-retrosp...

That, and the guy taking Westbrook's place was Watson.