Exum needs to play over Mack

[Cappy_Smurf]

With Exum out there it just slows everyone else down and kind of kills the teams ability to develop as a unit.

It's true that if you put him on the floor in one of Quin's iffy lineups and expect him to run the offense, it won't go well. He's obviously not ready to run the offense most of the time. However, Exum proved in his first year that he can contribute to winning basketball by understanding his role, but yeah, he kind of needs to play with guys like Hayward or Hood on the floor. Either way, just because he's limited with what lineups he should be in, doesn't justify DNPs.


I would have no problem with Quin going game by game, playing Mack over Exum when Mack is playing well, but Mack should be shown the bench when he struggles, same as Dante.

 

[stitches]

For the small sample on/off and +/- lovers:

KAT: -5.1 on/off and -2.4 +/-
Cole Aldrich: +5.7 on/off and +3.3 +/-

Should Minny bench KAT for Aldrich?

 

[stitches]

So I'll post again for [MENTION=498]andylarsen[/MENTION] advanced stats show exum has a better TS%, better rebounding in every way, better blocks in every way, better turnover ratio, better offensive win shares, better overall win shares, better VORP, better PER, Exums Offensive rating is much better per 100 possessions and his overall net rating is better, he has a better offensive box score plus/minus and overall for the same stat, getting to the rim more often, shooting better percentages at the rim and getting to the ft line more often.

Mack statistically is playing better defense but those stats are really skewed and not a good indication of an individual but of a unit playing together, he is better at long 2s which are a bad shot choice often, he is passing better but turning it over enough to negate that and slightly shooting the three better but most of that is because Exum has two bad games shooting threes before having his minutes reduced. So going forward it's hard to say Mack is currently playing better that is debatable but mostly that is based on passing and defense which seemingly are Exums strengths and given the minutes he should prove. I'm sure there are reasons to bench him. But those reasons are not cut and dry that Mack is playing better. If that was the case what about our 4th string guy Neto? He has played well in his minutes. Shouldn't that earn him more than Mack from that logic?

Sent from my Nexus 5X using JazzFanz mobile app

Here's the advanced stats(extracted them before last game, don't have time to go over them again):
Ortg
Exum: 101
Mack: 92

Drtg
Exum: 107
Mack: 104


TS%
Exum: 51%
Mack: 47%

WS:
Exum: 0.5
Mack: 0.1

WS/48
Exum: 0.070
Mack: 0.012

BPM
Exum: -1.2
Mack: -2.9

PER
Exum: 9.4
Mack: 9.5

VORP
Exum: 0.1
Mack: -0.1

RPM
Exum: -3.19
Mack: -1.72

 

[stitches]

1) SUPER arbitrarily selected cutoff point. Admittedly. But choose any cutoff point with Dante, and it's not great.
2) Agreed small sample on/off numbers aren't reliable as a predictor of long-term future success. But I think they're indicative of Exum's performance so far looking backwards, along with his other stats. I also think that looking at how Exum plays with the Jazz's other players (especially in apples to apples comparisons with Mack) eliminates one potential way small-sample on/off numbers can lie.

This is not the reason they are unreliable. They are unreliable because small sample sizes introduce A TON of noise and ESPECIALLY for on/off and +/- stats where ~80% of the stat accounts for the impact of THE OTHER players on the floor.

2 stretches of horrible 5 minute runs in which a player has done nothing wrong can screw up his samples with pretty much any other player... simply because, again - they are small samples and even little(minutes wise) excerpts of big runs introduce big disruptions(noise) in the sample.

 

[GVC]

Here's the advanced stats(extracted them before last game, don't have time to go over them again):
TS%
Exum: 51%
Mack: 47%

WS:
Exum: 0.5
Mack: 0.1

WS/48
Exum: 0.070
Mack: 0.012

BPM
Exum: -1.2
Mack: -2.9

PER
Exum: 9.4
Mack: 9.5

VORP
Exum: 0.1
Mack: -0.1

Bunch of garbage stats.

 

[stitches]

Bunch of garbage stats.

What are good stats? BTW I agree that on the current sample size even those prove close to nothing.

 

[GVC]

This is not the reason they are unreliable. They are unreliable because small sample sizes introduce A TON of noise and ESPECIALLY for on/off and +/- stats where ~80% of the stat accounts for the impact of THE OTHER players on the floor.

2 stretches of horrible 5 minute runs in which a player has done nothing wrong can screw up his samples with pretty much any other player... simply because, again - they are small samples and even little(minutes wise) excerpts of big runs introduce big disruptions(noise) in the sample.

There is no combination of two five minute stretches that if removed would make Dante's +/- look even passable. He's played 373 minutes, and the team is 26.7 points per 48 better with him off the floor. I find it hard to believe that can be explained by noise v. signal at this point. The offense is **** when Dante plays.

The Kat/Aldrich comparison is not a good one. First, Kat and Aldrich play vastly different roles, with different lineups, presumably against different opposing lineups; Mack and Exum are far more similar in roles and lineups played with and against (note: Exum and Mack have played about the same number of minutes; Kat has played almost 3X as many minutes as Aldrich). Second, the +/- difference between Kat and Aldrich is just a bit more than a third of the difference between Mack and Exum. Third, maybe (at the margin) Aldrich should get some of KAT's minutes if Minnesota is trying to win games -- confirmation bias is a bitch, and Minnesota's priorities are almost certainly different than the Jazz's.

 

[stitches]

There is no combination of two five minute stretches that if removed would make Dante's +/- look even passable. He's played 373 minutes, and the team is 26.7 points per 48 better with him off the floor. I find it hard to believe that can be explained by noise v. signal at this point. The offense is **** when Dante plays.

The Kat/Aldrich comparison is not a good one. First, Kat and Aldrich play vastly different roles, with different lineups, presumably against different opposing lineups; Mack and Exum are far more similar in roles and lineups played with and against (note: Exum and Mack have played about the same number of minutes; Kat has played almost 3X as many minutes as Aldrich). Second, the +/- difference between Kat and Aldrich is just a bit more than a third of the difference between Mack and Exum. Third, maybe (at the margin) Aldrich should get some of KAT's minutes if Minnesota is trying to win games -- confirmation bias is a bitch, and Minnesota's priorities are almost certainly different than the Jazz's.

How much of it do you think is signal and how much of it is noise? In other words, do you think if you put Exum in ALL of Mack's minutes those would authomatically turn from Mack's +1.2 to Exum's -8.4. I don't disagree that some of it might be signal. My problem is presenting it like it's all signal. Purely eye test-wise I think Mack has played slightly better than Exum but I don't think the difference anywhere near what the on-off numbers would suggest. I think the difference is small enough to not warrant benching the player we actually have invested more in and the player we need to develop if we want to see whether he's our PG of the future or not.

Pretty much the whole case about Mack>>Exum lies with one single stat that is notoriously unreliable on small samples. Everything else points to Exum being at about the same level as Mack, if not better.

 

[BTP]

The head to head +- comparison is just not valid, since Exum's started tough games in Hill's absence. He's faced stronger opposition compared to Mack who almost exclusively plays against really bad lineups.

 

[fishonjazz]

The head to head +- comparison is just not valid, since Exum's started tough games in Hill's absence. He's faced stronger opposition compared to Mack who almost exclusively plays against really bad lineups.

Good addition to the discussion that I hadn't seen mentioned before.

 

[RandyForRubio]

The head to head +- comparison is just not valid, since Exum's started tough games in Hill's absence. He's faced stronger opposition compared to Mack who almost exclusively plays against really bad lineups.

He's also playing with better players. Makes a difference if the guy across from you is Hayward and not Ingles.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

He's also playing with better players. Makes a difference if the guy across from you is Hayward and not Ingles.

Exum spent what, 8 games starting and playing with our A team.