The last 10 Coach of the Year awards have averaged a Win% increase of .133 over their team's previous season.
This season's projection leaders: Ind +.216, Sac +.183, OKC +.177
Relative to predictions by apbr members: OKC +.164, Ind +.143, Sac +.114
Thunders are not headed for a winning record still. The COY hasn't gone to a sub-.500 record since Red Kerr with the 1st-year Bulls in 1967.
Last year's team averaged 22.4 years of age, almost a full year younger than anyone else. This year, half a year older, and Hou is younger.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/le ... _2023.html
Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Daigneault might get some COY votes. I'd guess he might finish 10-12th in that.
If there was a coach draft, I probably wouldn't take him before 18th and it might be lower. The bottom half of coaches do not look that good.
If there was a coach draft, I probably wouldn't take him before 18th and it might be lower. The bottom half of coaches do not look that good.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
From Field Level Media on stats.com:
"OKC is 4-12 (.250) in games when Giddey has 15 or more shots, third worst among players with at least 10 such games this season (Porter Jr., HOU, 6-19; Westbrook, LAL, 2-10)."
"OKC is 4-12 (.250) in games when Giddey has 15 or more shots, third worst among players with at least 10 such games this season (Porter Jr., HOU, 6-19; Westbrook, LAL, 2-10)."
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Giddey - SGA was -10.7 pts / 100p last session. Thru Jan. 1 is it was only 10-15% better. In last few games, it has been great. Real lasting change or more about small sample? We'll see.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Giddey - SGA, no Pokusevski has been slightly positive and 19pts / 100p better than with the pair with Pokusevski. Who made the trio a steady part of starting lineup? Coach D. Probably would still be if not for injury. No Poku is probably a big part of recent success.
If a coach plays a trio 300 minutes at -17, he appears to either not know it sucks, doesn't care or doesn't believe it to be true. In any case, I'd say he is wrong.
If a coach plays a trio 300 minutes at -17, he appears to either not know it sucks, doesn't care or doesn't believe it to be true. In any case, I'd say he is wrong.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
After a dominating win against a full-strength Sixers team, the Thunder are now an above-avg team this season. Their +0.50 SRS is 8th best in the West and 8.4 pts/100 improved over last season.
Being just 19-23 at this point, their projection is now 40-42, which projects to the 8th seed. Their schedule to date has been 2nd toughest in the West (0.29), while their remaining SOS (-0.31) is 3rd softest.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/fr ... _prob.html
Being just 19-23 at this point, their projection is now 40-42, which projects to the 8th seed. Their schedule to date has been 2nd toughest in the West (0.29), while their remaining SOS (-0.31) is 3rd softest.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/fr ... _prob.html
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Tonight's starting lineup with Muscala was only mildly positive in this game but has been great in limited play for season. I'll take a positive starting lineup over the endless string of garbage ones. This is the ONLY strong lineup in 14 most used and there is only one other mild positive in the group. So yay, finally a defensible lineup choice.
I had called for 4 of these 5 starters in several lineups I named as preferred priority lineups back in September. Some how I missed a version with all 5. Didn't see Jalen Williams as a PF. And he doesn't really look like one, even if it worked in this lineup for 60 minutes. Would / will it look in playoffs, soon or someday? I kinda doubt it.
Too early to say if this lineup is actually good. though in long-run or will be maintained when injured players return or next season. Initial success based on hitting 3s, getting to ft line at team level, defensive rebounding and playing aggressive defense. None of the first 3 has been characteristic of team in general.
Playing to win is easier to follow and support. If it lasts. I've judged from that perspective, so, if that does last, the dialogue may get more congruent.
I wasn't set for or against a tank but got annoyed with the ambiguity and the attitude that herky jerky whatever was fine.
Even if W-L is above expectations, the lack of testing concentration is a big negative to me. 500th lineup comes next game, ahead of my last December projection. No lineup used 3 minutes per game for season. Have they really learned much about lineups this season for next season? NO. Not nearly as much as they could have.
Can you win anything significant without bigger minute positive lineups? I doubt it. But that is the path taken so far by Coach D and tacitly by Thunder management. Ultimately my review is about the long-run, not today's fight for 11th place in the West. Maybe I am too rigid in my belief in lineup concentration but I don't recall a successful team with this lineup management style.
I had called for 4 of these 5 starters in several lineups I named as preferred priority lineups back in September. Some how I missed a version with all 5. Didn't see Jalen Williams as a PF. And he doesn't really look like one, even if it worked in this lineup for 60 minutes. Would / will it look in playoffs, soon or someday? I kinda doubt it.
Too early to say if this lineup is actually good. though in long-run or will be maintained when injured players return or next season. Initial success based on hitting 3s, getting to ft line at team level, defensive rebounding and playing aggressive defense. None of the first 3 has been characteristic of team in general.
Playing to win is easier to follow and support. If it lasts. I've judged from that perspective, so, if that does last, the dialogue may get more congruent.
I wasn't set for or against a tank but got annoyed with the ambiguity and the attitude that herky jerky whatever was fine.
Even if W-L is above expectations, the lack of testing concentration is a big negative to me. 500th lineup comes next game, ahead of my last December projection. No lineup used 3 minutes per game for season. Have they really learned much about lineups this season for next season? NO. Not nearly as much as they could have.
Can you win anything significant without bigger minute positive lineups? I doubt it. But that is the path taken so far by Coach D and tacitly by Thunder management. Ultimately my review is about the long-run, not today's fight for 11th place in the West. Maybe I am too rigid in my belief in lineup concentration but I don't recall a successful team with this lineup management style.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
4 of 5 most used Thunder lineups are negative, 3 horrendously.
4 have Jalen Williams at PF. 2 have Pokusevski at Center. Will any of these be primary and positive lineups next season?
The one positive has Muscala at Center. Will he be on team next season? Will that lineup be used much?
It is possible that few to none of these lineups have much of a future.
Does that sound like an acceptable use of the season to date to you?
Coach D in the running for king of the dink lineups this season. Does he used the same approach next season and beyond and with what future effectiveness. If he changes, what lineups get heaviest future use and with what justification?
Everything else has been used less than the equivalent of 1.5 minutes per game. Zero basis for confident
assessment.
Focus on the results from chaos or focus on the chaos? I am mostly focused on the chaos and the uncertainty that comes with it. Of course I've said that many times, but this time the focus is on the future and a few details are highlighted to clarify how dubious and unlikely these lineups are in long-term.
All 5 are committed to SGA-Giddey-Dort. Little committed testing of any specific variation on that. Payoff or left without much information on anything else? Time will eventually answer one way or another.
4 have Jalen Williams at PF. 2 have Pokusevski at Center. Will any of these be primary and positive lineups next season?
The one positive has Muscala at Center. Will he be on team next season? Will that lineup be used much?
It is possible that few to none of these lineups have much of a future.
Does that sound like an acceptable use of the season to date to you?
Coach D in the running for king of the dink lineups this season. Does he used the same approach next season and beyond and with what future effectiveness. If he changes, what lineups get heaviest future use and with what justification?
Everything else has been used less than the equivalent of 1.5 minutes per game. Zero basis for confident
assessment.
Focus on the results from chaos or focus on the chaos? I am mostly focused on the chaos and the uncertainty that comes with it. Of course I've said that many times, but this time the focus is on the future and a few details are highlighted to clarify how dubious and unlikely these lineups are in long-term.
All 5 are committed to SGA-Giddey-Dort. Little committed testing of any specific variation on that. Payoff or left without much information on anything else? Time will eventually answer one way or another.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Based on the criteria posited in the Kings thread, Thunder have one player over +2 in big minutes, 2 if you count I Joe, perhaps in bigger future minutes. 1-2 proven of 4 or 6 needed for playoffs or a title? That's how I see it. Thunder probably think they are already at 6 or 8 or more or have 6-8 who will develop into qualifiers soon or eventually.
Focus on factors and Thunder are above average on 4 and bortom 1/3rd on 4. To make playoffs, 5 good factors are probably likely and probably need to be bad on no more than 2-3. Factor goals could / probably should drive roster decisions and other evaluations.
Focus on factors and Thunder are above average on 4 and bortom 1/3rd on 4. To make playoffs, 5 good factors are probably likely and probably need to be bad on no more than 2-3. Factor goals could / probably should drive roster decisions and other evaluations.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Of 10 most used lineups, 9 have just one other guy over 6'6 besides Giddey. The only exception was -30pts / 100p.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Now at SRS = +1.44, is #5 in the West and 10th in the league.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
4 most used lineups emphasizing the core design average -20pts / 48 min.
516 dink lineups average +2.2.
On average down about 2 after 1st quarter and half. Surge to a 1 pt lead after 3 quarters. Lose a little in the 4th.
4-12 against Sagarin top 10, 25th best. http://sagarin.com/sports/nbasend.htm
So Thunder, good only against teams below the top 10, positive in 1 quarter only and only playing dink lineups.
It is a foothold, but relatively not that much of one.
516 dink lineups average +2.2.
On average down about 2 after 1st quarter and half. Surge to a 1 pt lead after 3 quarters. Lose a little in the 4th.
4-12 against Sagarin top 10, 25th best. http://sagarin.com/sports/nbasend.htm
So Thunder, good only against teams below the top 10, positive in 1 quarter only and only playing dink lineups.
It is a foothold, but relatively not that much of one.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
DBPM estimate for Dort is worst on team. D-DRIP 2nd worst. D-RAPM 6th best but luck adjusted it falls to 12th. D-Efg% is pretty good but opponent turnover and foul factors are negative (with him being 6th highest in league on raw foul total) and impact on defensive rebounding is very poor in a sea of such teammates.
His DARKO projection has flatlined below -1 after improving to that level in his rookie season. Modest improvements in a number of discrete stats hasn't made much difference on overall metrics.
Jalen Williams negative with 7 of 10 bigger minute pairs. Good with K Williams, very good with I Joe abd Muscala. Middling mild negatives with SGA and Giddey.
Meh Moreyball. Weak A/TO. Meh rebounding even considered as really a guard instead of listed PF.
13th on team +/- on court. 14th on / off.
The quad of SGA, Dort, JDub and Giddey is -1.7 pts /100p. Not bad but 3 pts worse than team average. Remove Giddey or Dort and things deteriorate significantly. Remove Williams and there is barely any impact. Is this a long-term main quad?
His DARKO projection has flatlined below -1 after improving to that level in his rookie season. Modest improvements in a number of discrete stats hasn't made much difference on overall metrics.
Jalen Williams negative with 7 of 10 bigger minute pairs. Good with K Williams, very good with I Joe abd Muscala. Middling mild negatives with SGA and Giddey.
Meh Moreyball. Weak A/TO. Meh rebounding even considered as really a guard instead of listed PF.
13th on team +/- on court. 14th on / off.
The quad of SGA, Dort, JDub and Giddey is -1.7 pts /100p. Not bad but 3 pts worse than team average. Remove Giddey or Dort and things deteriorate significantly. Remove Williams and there is barely any impact. Is this a long-term main quad?
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
What team are Thunder "most like"? I'd say probably the Hawks by the stats. Pacers are a decent comp as well.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
B Ref's Playoff Probabilities Report gives the Thunder 1 chance in 15 to win the western conference berth in the Finals and a 1 in 40 chance to win the title. Do you believe those projections? I sure don't.