John Hollinger Thinks Conley May Opt Out

[latin jazz]

In other words, once you factor in opponent strength, the Jazz accomplished almost precisely the same thing with or without Conley . The Jazz's odds of winning last year were essentially the same with or without Conley.

Thanks for doing the work of including strength of schedule in your calculation.

The takeway is dissapointment, given the expectations from his previous year and the assets we lost in the process of acquiring him. On the other hand, the assertion that we were better without him looks silly and rather simplistic, and was only based on "were won 20 out of 22 without him" (or some number like that, when in reality we had an extremely easy schedule. Thanks again for putting the work and here is hoping that Conley continues the strong play of the last couple of months.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Here are some results from last year's season that are sure to change nobody's mind in the Conley discussion.

With the games/percentages up to the hiatus (since the Bubble had too much funny business going on), I charted the outcomes of Jazz games (winning/losing margin) against the opponents' season winning percentage. I did that with both Conley playing and without him playing.

View attachment 9832View attachment 9831

The result? Virtually no difference. You'll see that the trend line for both crosses 0 at almost precisely the same location on both graphs. (The trend lines basically show how much the Jazz should have been expected to win or lose by versus an opponent with any particular winning %.)

In other words, once you factor in opponent strength, the Jazz accomplished almost precisely the same thing with or without Conley. I ran a few more less interesting calculations along these lines, as well, but they all pointed to the same thing; in fact, all the with-vs-without-Conley calculations were almost eerily close . The Jazz's odds of winning last year were essentially the same with or without Conley.

This is a really good post.

 

[GVC]

The alternative is roll it forward... get a cheap big and hope it works... and end of the year you are in great shape with the cap but really can’t add anything meaningful. We likely need to pay the tax if we want to be a big boy contender. Problem is the goal may be to be a cute story contender... that remains profitable.

I know we sorta had part of this discussion before, but...

If you think the cap/LT will bounce back after next season but other teams act conservatively due to the lowered cap/LT this coming season, it's the absolute perfect time to go over the LT to add talent. Mike will be gone next year, and you'll have added talent at a reduced price.

Doesn't mean the Jazz brass are willing to do it, of course.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I know we sorta had part of this discussion before, but...

If you think the cap/LT will bounce back after next season but other teams act conservatively due to the lowered cap/LT this coming season, it's the absolute perfect time to go over the LT to add talent. Mike will be gone next year, and you'll have added talent at a reduced price.

Doesn't mean the Jazz brass are willing to do it, of course.

DL hasn't really shown to be ahead of the curve on these types of moves. I agree in general but want to see what they do with the cap. I really think the easiest solution is to leave the cap at the $115M projection and just deflate across the board through a bigger escrow. I'd want to know what the plan was next year too before I went after someone hard.

I don't think we need to go into the tax to use the MLE in that scenario. If the cap drops and there is an opportunity I agree that the MLE might net something solid and be worth paying the tax. There just aren't a lot of guys in the MLE tier that I think are good building blocks... I'd rather look at a lower price for guys that have shown some ability but might be diamonds in the rough like Shaq Harrison.

I don't think Wood goes for less than MLE in either scenario... and he's the only guy I see as a potential ceiling raiser.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

There are not many free agents I'd want to spend the full MLE. There are a few guys that will get a little more than MLE that are interesting, but even then do you want to spend 12-14M a year on Jerami Grant? In a vacuum that's fine, but if the cost is watching JC leave and extending Conley dangerously far into the future I will pass.

I'm not sure Wood will be worth that either, but if he shoots as well as he did last year and improves on a few things he could be worth a lot more than that. It would absolutely be a gamble though.

 

[idiot]

This is a really good post.

Appreciate this, though you may like it less after I say this:

If Donovan had missed time so that we could do such a comparison for him, we'd probably get similar results. I say that because DM's all-in-one metrics are really not any better than Conley's (in fact, maybe a little worse overall).

It's probably likely that for most players around the league (except for the very best), their teams manage to do pretty similarly in their absence as when they played (it would be an interesting study to try to figure this out, but I'm not going to be the one to do it). I think it's just how the league works. Doesn't necessarily mean that those players are useless and that they should be gotten rid of.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Appreciate this, though you may like it less after I say this:

If Donovan had missed time so that we could do such a comparison for him, we'd probably get similar results. I say that because DM's all-in-one metrics are really not any better than Conley's (in fact, maybe a little worse overall).

It's probably likely that for most players around the league (except for the very best), their teams manage to do pretty similarly in their absence as when they played (it would be an interesting study to try to figure this out, but I'm not going to be the one to do it). I think it's just how the league works. Doesn't necessarily mean that those players are useless and that they should be gotten rid of.

DM spent a lot of time with bench units this year. His scoring was more efficient than Mikes and his usage rate and volume is obviously higher. I also expect him to improve because of his age.

I know his on/off court stuff ain’t great. There were some other things that explain it away some. I think if he missed a few games we could cover but would struggle over the long term because we need his volume scoring... even if it is only above average and not crazy efficient. I think we’d definitely feel it if DM was gone for 15 games or so.

 

[idiot]

DM spent a lot of time with bench units this year. His scoring was more efficient than Mikes and his usage rate and volume is obviously higher. I also expect him to improve because of his age.

I know his on/off court stuff ain’t great. There were some other things that explain it away some. I think if he missed a few games we could cover but would struggle over the long term because we need his volume scoring... even if it is only above average and not crazy efficient. I think we’d definitely feel it if DM was gone for 15 games or so.

Sure, I feel the same way about DM. I just wanted to give a reminder that stats may not always show the conclusions our educated opinions may lead us to. For DL, he may (after two years of losing to the Rockets) still value the secondary creator role that Conley gives us over the long term more than some of us in the bleachers do (not to even broach the possibility of a DM injury).

So context is important for evaluating every player. (And just for context, it's worth reminding that Conley also spent a lot of time with the second unit, and--with the help of Clarkson--had it humming for stretches more than DM ever did.)

 

[jom2003]

Appreciate this, though you may like it less after I say this:

If Donovan had missed time so that we could do such a comparison for him, we'd probably get similar results. I say that because DM's all-in-one metrics are really not any better than Conley's (in fact, maybe a little worse overall).

On/Off Court Compare Advanced

Official NBA Advanced Statistics and Analytics Comparison Tool

stats.nba.com

On/Off Court Compare Advanced

Official NBA Advanced Statistics and Analytics Comparison Tool

stats.nba.com

Except it's not really true...

We are +6.5 with Donovan in the game and -8.3 without him.

And net 0 with Conley on the court vs. +4.8 without him.

That is a SIGNIFICANT difference.

 

[jom2003]

Here are some results from last year's season that are sure to change nobody's mind in the Conley discussion.

With the games/percentages up to the hiatus (since the Bubble had too much funny business going on), I charted the outcomes of Jazz games (winning/losing margin) against the opponents' season winning percentage. I did that with both Conley playing and without him playing.

View attachment 9832View attachment 9831

The result? Virtually no difference. You'll see that the trend line for both crosses 0 at almost precisely the same location on both graphs. (The trend lines basically show how much the Jazz should have been expected to win or lose by versus an opponent with any particular winning %.)

In other words, once you factor in opponent strength, the Jazz accomplished almost precisely the same thing with or without Conley. I ran a few more less interesting calculations along these lines, as well, but they all pointed to the same thing; in fact, all the with-vs-without-Conley calculations were almost eerily close . The Jazz's odds of winning last year were essentially the same with or without Conley.

On/Off Court Compare Advanced

Official NBA Advanced Statistics and Analytics Comparison Tool

stats.nba.com

Are we talking about the regular season? Cuz the official NBA on/off court metrics tells a similar story but "virtually no difference" means there's still a difference.

Statistically we are 0.7 better in terms of net rating with Conley on the bench. "Virtually" it's pretty hard to tell i guess. Good to know that having Conley is better than nothing.

 

[idiot]

I was basing my judgments on:

- B-Reference's OnCourt net/100 poss and On-off net rating /100 (both of which it's better to be positive): Conley had +2.0, and -0.4 respectively, and DM had +2.0 and -0.9 (though for some reason the results are different in B-Ref than NBA.com Stats, these pure on-off stats are rather untrustworthy by themselves, dependent as they on who you spend your time on the court with)

- PIPM score: MC: -0.27, DM: -2.31
- RPM score: MC: -0.80, DM: -0.30
-RAPTOR score: MC: -1.15; DM: 0.20

Taken together, these look pretty even (I guess it depends on which stat you trust, but I tend to value using them in combination rather than one single stat). Aside from the comparison between Mitchell and Conley, the point was also that DM doesn't really look like a net positive from these type of stats. But I hope we're wise enough not to just go off of one stat or another in evaluating either Mitchell or Conley (though I don't want to discount stats entirely, of course).

 

[idiot]

On/Off Court Compare Advanced

Official NBA Advanced Statistics and Analytics Comparison Tool

stats.nba.com

Are we talking about the regular season? Cuz the official NBA on/off court metrics tells a similar story but "virtually no difference" means there's still a difference.

Statistically we are 0.7 better in terms of net rating with Conley on the bench. "Virtually" it's pretty hard to tell i guess. Good to know that having Conley is better than nothing.

Yes, I'm not talking about playoffs.

One more reason to slightly distrust the net rating: the games Conley missed were disproportionately against weaker teams (as I hope my earlier graphs showed).