W.O.W vs N.E.T.

Could be because of who they are playing against, don’t you think?

 

Wood, EGo, Nwaba, Tate is even better.

Any combo with Wall is going to be worse because he is a net negative on the floor right now.

Not as bad as Boogie or PJ, but still bad.

 

Adding Sterling Brown would create the big 4 - N.E.T.S

 

FIFY

 

The numbers are clear. Wood is negatively impacting this team. Trade or waive WOW and strictly focus on NET.

 

Unfortunately Wall has missed some games. We see 18 games in the season and expect Wall to be further
along; but In actuality Wall has only played in 11 games.

7 games (games 3 through 9):
33.9 minutes....1.4 (3PA)....4.4 (3PM)....31.8% (3P%)....4.7 (TRB).....5.1 (Ast)......18.6 (pts)..... -5.4 (+/-)

4 games (games 15 through 18):
25.1 minutes....2.0 (3PA).....5.8 (3PM)....34.5% (3P%)....2.5 (TRB).....7.0 (Ast)..... 16.5 (pts)..... +6.8 (+/-)

I said before the season John Wall should be around 25 minutes per game.

Rockets go from having one of the toughest schedules to one of the easiest (next 14 games are softer)....expect Wall
to get better. Helps that everyone around him have a better understanding of where they need to be on each play.

 

There are too many conditioning factors in those cold numbers:

- They don't consider chemistry issues. Defensively, chemistry issues do not necessarily indicate that we are talking about bad individual defenders but rather collective problems due to lack of, practices, minutes played or togetherness. Continuous lineup changes cause chemistry issues; having your most important player unhappy generates chemistry issues.

- Offensively, chemistry issues reflect worse offense in several ways: poorer shooting selection or bad quality shots, lower percentage on your regular shots (lower confidence, less comfort level, focus level), higher number of turnovers... and all this causes more transition opportunities for the opponent in which all the teams create more efficient offense. This once again relates the offensive level to the defensive level and it makes very problematic to separate them statistically: is the transition basket received caused by a poorly selected shot? a bad turnover? or a bad defensive balance? Offensive issues/mistakes are statistically computing as worst defensive level.

- Defensive rating reflects points received per possession, but what if we're granting extra possessions due to lack of defensive rebounding? Whose fault is it and who is being blamed statistically?

- Statistics neither consider everything been said... about the opponent, as well as his offensive rating.

- There are other peculiarities difficult to weigh. For example, we would have to know the rating of Nwaba as a starter compared to as a substitute. Starter with starters compared to starter with reserves. Or starter with starters vs bench players, compared to vs starters. Bench player vs starters or vs bench players... and so on. This kind of data with multiple lineups and cases is the one the franchises are handling and the one that could indicate more reliable trends, but not the simple net rating we're talking about. Net rating can be indicative sometimes but also misleading. Could be more reliable with an extremely wide sample of games and minutes, but is not the case.