PDA

View Full Version : So, What does a draft pick get ya? (Sidebar # 1 - Danny Granger fanoodling)



count55
12-25-2008, 03:59 AM
Ok, this is really just me putzing around. I may use this thread to play some games with Danny and where he stands. I may let it die entirely.

In any case, Santa just left the house, and I can't quite sleep, so I'll give you this little nugget in your stocking:

http://img355.imageshack.us/img355/8623/dannypv2.png (http://imageshack.us)

Essentially, this tracks the yearly AdjPR for Danny and charts it against some other players taken at the same #17 slot: Josh Smith, Jermaine O'Neal, Shawn Kemp, and Rasho Nesterovic. In hard numbers, Danny is tracking well above everyone else in this sample.

It should be noted that this year's numbers were through 12/15, and Josh Smith was being downgraded this season due to an extended absence from the lineup. However, on GrossPR, Danny is posting a 25.4 per game through 12/23, while Josh Smith is only at 17.8.

Now, as I said, if this thread becomes anything, it will probably be a place to try to quantify what Danny is doing comparative to others. Once again, I remind people that this is strictly a statistical formula for production, not a means to say that a player is "better" than another.

However, Danny is a very productive player right now. In fact, through last night's game, he is 8th in the league in Gross PR at 25.4.

Like I said, this is just the first cocktail napkin analysis I've done. Thought some might be interested.

Merry Xmas.

Naptown_Seth
12-25-2008, 01:14 PM
Merry Xmas! :)

I hate that you have to qualify "it's just an analysis..." and so on around here. I call BS and say that your numbers are easily as valid as any other opinion. We know the limitations of the PR (well, some of us do) and it's the same as any other measure. It's not stats, it's the WHICH STATS are important in quantifying a player.

As I always remind people, total wins and total losses are also stats. Winning PCT is a stat.


Anyway, to DG. Let's put Pippen up there too even though he's not a 17 pick simply to act as a measuring stick on what that kind of PR means. Plus the fact that Pippen had a very similar growth curve to Danny's, at least so far.

One problem we have is that 2 of these guys were HS players which is why they went lower in the draft. If they'd had just 1-2 years of NCAA to prove themselves out then they would have been picked much higher AND they would have started off with higher PRs too you would expect. I mean JO barely got to play early on.

Another thing that stinks here is that Kemp and JO both fell off rather unexpectedly and probably don't track like a normal star player does. We know JO's health but we should remember that Kemp's fall was shocking too and due to his own approach to the game, something I don't think DG is going to have a problem with.

With those things in mind DG's early PR tracking is just nuts. What he is right now, not in the future, is a massive steal at 17. I'd even say he's a better pick than Reggie at 11 in terms of bang for buck.

There is no way you can consider Danny the expected value at that pick, even in a deep draft. That's a guy that a GM just has to know is under the radar before he moves to acquire that pick. Normal 17 picks just aren't that valuable.

Trader Joe
12-25-2008, 01:19 PM
When Danny was drafted I thought he could be a 18 ppg, 5rpg player with very solid D, a steal at pick number 17 in any circumstance. Needless to say, I'm pleasantly surprised by his continuing improvement, and I think Danny deserves the credit for that as he has remained committed to improving his game every year.

count55
12-25-2008, 02:16 PM
Merry Xmas! :)

Backatcha


I hate that you have to qualify "it's just an analysis..." and so on around here. I call BS and say that your numbers are easily as valid as any other opinion. We know the limitations of the PR (well, some of us do) and it's the same as any other measure. It's not stats, it's the WHICH STATS are important in quantifying a player.

As I always remind people, total wins and total losses are also stats. Winning PCT is a stat.

Two things.

First, I always feel the need to recognize the shortfalls in any statistical analysis at the top of the page. It's been drilled into me in my professional life, and I consider it to be good practice. Also, it helps limit the time wasted arguing over the math.

Second, I will also qualify analyses as "Cocktail Napkin" when I haven't quite decided what they mean. I threw this particular one together in about 15 minutes, so I haven't reached all my conclusions yet. This is also a habit from professional life, where my final decisions often have consequences in the form of people's jobs.


Anyway, to DG. Let's put Pippen up there too even though he's not a 17 pick simply to act as a measuring stick on what that kind of PR means. Plus the fact that Pippen had a very similar growth curve to Danny's, at least so far.

Ask, and ye shall receive, though I am still not endorsing the Danny=Scottie proposition.

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/4524/dannyscottycv1.png (http://imageshack.us)


One problem we have is that 2 of these guys were HS players which is why they went lower in the draft. If they'd had just 1-2 years of NCAA to prove themselves out then they would have been picked much higher AND they would have started off with higher PRs too you would expect. I mean JO barely got to play early on.

Another thing that stinks here is that Kemp and JO both fell off rather unexpectedly and probably don't track like a normal star player does. We know JO's health but we should remember that Kemp's fall was shocking too and due to his own approach to the game, something I don't think DG is going to have a problem with.

With those things in mind DG's early PR tracking is just nuts. What he is right now, not in the future, is a massive steal at 17. I'd even say he's a better pick than Reggie at 11 in terms of bang for buck.

There is no way you can consider Danny the expected value at that pick, even in a deep draft. That's a guy that a GM just has to know is under the radar before he moves to acquire that pick. Normal 17 picks just aren't that valuable.

There's absolutely no question in my mind that Danny was a spectacular value at #17, as was Josh Smith. It is certainly a possibility, if not a likelihood, that one of those two players could prove to be the best player ever taken 17th.

That being said, the arcs of Shawn Kemp and Jermaine O'Neal could simply speak of the flaws inherent in a player taken in the mid-late first round. They are on here because they are clearly the best players in the group to this point.

Seth, you may want to take a look at the Roy Hibbert/17 thread I posted, as well. It will tell you how bleak that slot has been.

Anthem
12-26-2008, 02:09 PM
Fanoodling? We're fishing for Danny Granger's catfish using only our fingers?

count55
12-26-2008, 02:30 PM
Fanoodling? We're fishing for Danny Granger's catfish using only our fingers?

Never heard of that usage...I was just engaging in a little *******ized onomatopoeia.

Naptown_Seth
12-27-2008, 12:26 PM
Ask, and ye shall receive, though I am still not endorsing the Danny=Scottie proposition.
Of course not. I'll let the math and reality do that. ;)

It's pretty amazing how closely they've tracked so far. Look, I'm the big numbers geek here so I didn't go with this Pip thing on gut or because I'm up Danny's rear. I keep checking on the numbers and they just keep tracking. The more they do the more I lock into this mantra.

But even if Pip's curve was far different I simply requested it here for a general gauge of a more appropriate and obviously more often compared player.



Seth, you may want to take a look at the Roy Hibbert/17 thread I posted, as well. It will tell you how bleak that slot has been.
I just haven't had the time (thus no prospect thread entries either despite the team's increased losing) but even without seeing it yet I know. I went over this stuff with those other draft position stat studies I brought up before and my own research back with the Shawne pick for one, and just in general discussions on how to build a team.


As I said, I think you have to consider HS players as always undervalued due to the higher risk of them panning out. Thus Kemp and JO probably could have been top 10 picks and might have started their PRs at about year 3 of what they really did - thus less "growth" from them several years into their career.

The kind of slower development that we've seen with Pip and Danny is the oddity I think. For example I think Rush is a consistent shot, a bit few TOs/fouls, and a slight bump up in everything else away from being "topped out". He'll see his PR go up, but nowhere near what Danny did.

Although I'd love to be wrong about that one. :)

count55
01-05-2009, 04:55 PM
More playing around. Here are Danny's first four years charted:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/3673/dannybyyearxv1.png (http://imageshack.us)

The two things that strike me are: (a) the big leap he has made with each season, and (b) how steady he has been throughout the course of each season (excluding his Rookie year).

Here are a couple of other looks:

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/8698/dannymonthly1cr8.png (http://imageshack.us)

This shows the comparative months for each year. What I find encouraging about this chart is that each corresponding month shows improvement from the prior year. For example, Oct-Nov 2009 (season) was better than Oct-Nov 2008, which, in turn was better than 2007, which was better than 2006.

Then there is another look at the same info:

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/9496/dannymonthly2gw1.png (http://imageshack.us)

In this, you can perhaps see the "rookie wall" in 2006, and the struggle to get through the doldrums of March in 2007 (which was one of the worst Pacer months on record at 2-14). However, he finished April of 2007 very strongly, and the second half of last year was outstanding.

(A note on December 2009: Since these are "Adjusted PR", they are downgraded for the games he missed. His Gross PR was actually higher in December than Oct/Nov, but he missed two games due to the flu, and therefore only had an 86% Reliability Factor.)

Finally, I'm starting to chart a couple of things. The first item is Assists vs. Turnovers:

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/6290/dannyastvtofv3.png (http://imageshack.us)

While Danny still makes too many turnovers, there is no question that he's made huge strides in this area over the course of this season. As is obvious from the chart, Danny was "upside down" on Assists vs. TO's early in the season. However, he's more than doubled his Assist-to-Turnover Ratio in December/January, go from 0.72 to 1.59, bringing his year-to-date numbers just over 1.1. While this is not spectacular, the Dec/Jan figures would put him in the 60th percentile of players who log 20 minutes or more per game.

It will take some time, but I'm also looking at Danny's 4th quarter performance. 82games.com lists Granger as the 4th highest scoring player in the 4th quarter in the league. Danny averages 7.2 points, which only trails LeBron James, Brandon Roy, and Dwyane Wade. I want to look inside those numbers so that I can understand what makes them up, but that will probably take a few days. The data isn't particularly user-friendly.

imawhat
01-06-2009, 02:00 AM
Please keep 'em coming!