So far in playoffs: SGA BPM down about 45% from regular season. JDub up 150% and slightly ahead of SGA. Holmgren unchanged. Dort up 5 pts. Giddey up +1.5. Wallace up 3. All currently +3s. Wiggins and JWill in stratosphere and lead on BPM. Could not hope for better from these, except maybe SGA but maybe not given loaded coverage.
It is very heavily from defensive side and hard to say how much of that was Thunder or Pelicans.
The offense was OK at best because of weaknesses in offensive rebounding and getting to line. Hard to say how much total impact from Pelicans' defense.
Hayward rebounding but not shooting. And not being talked about / explained.
K Williams has been very poor. Out of rotation? Off team someday soon? Too early to say but these are real questions.
TS% in playoffs so far compared to regular season:
Down, SGA, JDub, Holmgren, Wallace, K Will, Hayward, Joe, Waters, Dieng
No change, Wiggins
Up, Dort, Giddey, J Will
Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Getting ready for round 2 data & observations:
OKC 3-1 vs. Mavs in regular season. 2 blowouts split, 2 Thunder moderate victories by 7, one home, one road.
Thunder 3pt fg% and efg% lowest month of season in April. TS% tied for lowest with March.
Thunder shot well from 3 against Mavs. Mavs 2 of 10 lowest against Thunder.
Defensive rebounding generally trend up with total rebounds per game reaching about average in April.
Rebounding vs. Mavs was pretty close, one of best splits for Thunder.
65 lineups uses against Mavs. None of 5 most used positive. Starters -6 / 100p in about 9 minutes per game with meh 3pt shooting and a very low FT rate. Coach D wins the dink lineup game... and has to.
Only one lineup tested in all 4 games and only 2 in more that 2. Only 3 tested over 6 minutes total. 85% of total time given to dink and near dink lineups.
8 of 10 most used Mavs lineups vs. Thunder positive, with 7 tremendously positive. No special lineup over 4 minutes per game but the quantity above near dink level was high with diverse personnel.
SGA against Mavs, 2nd lowest pts per game amongst opponents, based primarily on 2nd lowest fga rate.
Chet, top 5 split on offensive efficiency but 2nd lowest on pts per game.
JDub near normal split, Giddey bottom 5 on offensive efficiency. Dort bottom 7 on offensive efficiency and 8th lowest on defensive efficiency.
Some body / bodies on bench were probably significantly helping.
Doncic and Irving vs. Thunder? Each with 2nd best offensive efficiency amongst all opponents.
OKC 3-1 vs. Mavs in regular season. 2 blowouts split, 2 Thunder moderate victories by 7, one home, one road.
Thunder 3pt fg% and efg% lowest month of season in April. TS% tied for lowest with March.
Thunder shot well from 3 against Mavs. Mavs 2 of 10 lowest against Thunder.
Defensive rebounding generally trend up with total rebounds per game reaching about average in April.
Rebounding vs. Mavs was pretty close, one of best splits for Thunder.
65 lineups uses against Mavs. None of 5 most used positive. Starters -6 / 100p in about 9 minutes per game with meh 3pt shooting and a very low FT rate. Coach D wins the dink lineup game... and has to.
Only one lineup tested in all 4 games and only 2 in more that 2. Only 3 tested over 6 minutes total. 85% of total time given to dink and near dink lineups.
8 of 10 most used Mavs lineups vs. Thunder positive, with 7 tremendously positive. No special lineup over 4 minutes per game but the quantity above near dink level was high with diverse personnel.
SGA against Mavs, 2nd lowest pts per game amongst opponents, based primarily on 2nd lowest fga rate.
Chet, top 5 split on offensive efficiency but 2nd lowest on pts per game.
JDub near normal split, Giddey bottom 5 on offensive efficiency. Dort bottom 7 on offensive efficiency and 8th lowest on defensive efficiency.
Some body / bodies on bench were probably significantly helping.
Doncic and Irving vs. Thunder? Each with 2nd best offensive efficiency amongst all opponents.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
The Hayward trade was a failure. Not that damaging given riches but a failure. More time will tell how bad, depending of Hayward's time on court and future of those sent out. I'd think that something better could have been found. He wasn't right target or anywhere close.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Giddey to Jazz, Spurs or Wizards.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
22 lineups yesterday. 40% worked. Not any of the 4 Giddey lineups.
45% of pairs were positive. Giddey or Hayward in all of 8 worst. Mainly Giddey.
6 most used pairs were positive. All were starters but Giddey.
How much to react to yesterday and how fast / firmly is the coaching test. Does the rotation go to 8 or 9?
Just 2 lineups beyond the full starters tested a bit beyond 1 minute per game during season. So no real basis to know what to expect to happen. The value of responsible testing ignored.
On second look, Giddey vs
Mavs in regular season was bottom 20% split on both offensive and defensive efficiency. So shouldn't be a complete surprise.
45% of pairs were positive. Giddey or Hayward in all of 8 worst. Mainly Giddey.
6 most used pairs were positive. All were starters but Giddey.
How much to react to yesterday and how fast / firmly is the coaching test. Does the rotation go to 8 or 9?
Just 2 lineups beyond the full starters tested a bit beyond 1 minute per game during season. So no real basis to know what to expect to happen. The value of responsible testing ignored.
On second look, Giddey vs
Mavs in regular season was bottom 20% split on both offensive and defensive efficiency. So shouldn't be a complete surprise.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Restated for emphasis:
The failure of Coach Daigneault and the organization to test more than 1 lineup meaningfully over 1 minute per game in regular season was fundamental, elementary and completely unwise and unacceptable, imo.
Playing around with 625 lineups was absurd on its face (regardless of team record), given the importance of having some at least moderately tested and proven alternatives for playoffs.
The failure of Coach Daigneault and the organization to test more than 1 lineup meaningfully over 1 minute per game in regular season was fundamental, elementary and completely unwise and unacceptable, imo.
Playing around with 625 lineups was absurd on its face (regardless of team record), given the importance of having some at least moderately tested and proven alternatives for playoffs.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Thunder with 9 less offensive rebounds and 6 less ftas. Lose.
Played 10. Should have been less. Arguably as low as 7.
Played 10. Should have been less. Arguably as low as 7.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Thunder use 20 lineups today. 2 of top 8 positive. Starters not as awful as previously in series but still bad. With Joe worked and might have made difference if used more.
41 lineups used in 3 games. So an average of about 14 new lineups per game.
.
41 lineups used in 3 games. So an average of about 14 new lineups per game.
.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Edey, Holmes, Toppin, Dante, Filipowski, Mogbo. Those are the main names I'd want the Thunder to focus on. How many will be available at 12th pick? All 6? 4? Enough. Could move down and likely get one or some or maybe any of these.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Fwiw selective comparison of Thunder to Pacers:
Indy hires ex title winning NBA player and ex title winning Coach. OKC hires ex student manager of a NCAA champ / G League Coach / ex assistant to Billy Donovan.
Both have great PGs.
Indy has a 250 pound center. OKC a 208 pound center.
Both above average at at the rim shot frequency but not super elite. Both slightly below avg at 3pta rate. Both below avg FTA rates but Pacers way below. 3 with 200+ ftas for each. Both nonetheless super elite on team fg%, with Pacers 1st, Thunder 3rd. Both elite taking care of ball.
Both very young. Probably too young for title this season.
Both play fast and have strong defenses.
Both are below average rebounding but Thunder are worse.
Thunder play in stacked West. Pacers in more moderate East.
Both are considered small markets with good fans.
Both had a leader close to or above +7 BPM and 11 total positives.
Both younger than average but Thunder considerably younger.
Indy with two near or above 6% blockers, Thunder one.
Both have heavy foul rates. OKC yields heavy steals, Pacers average.
Thunder with 4 over 20% rate, 1 super. Pacers not quite 4 over 20% but 2 super.
Pacers with 5 rotation players over 20% usage, including 1 barely over 25%. Thunder with 4 over 20% with one at 33%.
Pacers with 5 100+ 3pt made guys. Thunder 4.
Thunder with a big SRS advantage, but Pacers with about an 8-2 advantage on these selected details.
Pacers reach conference finals, Thunder do not.
Thunder with 12 under contract for next season, Pacers 10.
Thunder currently with 1 max and 2 others over $10 million next season. Pacers same but would have 2 maxes if Siakam comes back.
Indy hires ex title winning NBA player and ex title winning Coach. OKC hires ex student manager of a NCAA champ / G League Coach / ex assistant to Billy Donovan.
Both have great PGs.
Indy has a 250 pound center. OKC a 208 pound center.
Both above average at at the rim shot frequency but not super elite. Both slightly below avg at 3pta rate. Both below avg FTA rates but Pacers way below. 3 with 200+ ftas for each. Both nonetheless super elite on team fg%, with Pacers 1st, Thunder 3rd. Both elite taking care of ball.
Both very young. Probably too young for title this season.
Both play fast and have strong defenses.
Both are below average rebounding but Thunder are worse.
Thunder play in stacked West. Pacers in more moderate East.
Both are considered small markets with good fans.
Both had a leader close to or above +7 BPM and 11 total positives.
Both younger than average but Thunder considerably younger.
Indy with two near or above 6% blockers, Thunder one.
Both have heavy foul rates. OKC yields heavy steals, Pacers average.
Thunder with 4 over 20% rate, 1 super. Pacers not quite 4 over 20% but 2 super.
Pacers with 5 rotation players over 20% usage, including 1 barely over 25%. Thunder with 4 over 20% with one at 33%.
Pacers with 5 100+ 3pt made guys. Thunder 4.
Thunder with a big SRS advantage, but Pacers with about an 8-2 advantage on these selected details.
Pacers reach conference finals, Thunder do not.
Thunder with 12 under contract for next season, Pacers 10.
Thunder currently with 1 max and 2 others over $10 million next season. Pacers same but would have 2 maxes if Siakam comes back.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
If the Thunder seek a Center by trade, Jarett Allen is about the best possible target.
(Other lessers and other routes.)
Maybe they'd be interested in JDub.
(Other lessers and other routes.)
Maybe they'd be interested in JDub.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Average listed weight of starting center for last 7 title winners?249. Low of 230, high of 282.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Thunder as designed vs. Timberwolves in 4 regular season games:
2 - 2.
But lowest scoring output than against anyone else in league. 8th lowest efg%, 9th lowest ts%. 6th lowest own off. reb. rate.
2 - 2.
But lowest scoring output than against anyone else in league. 8th lowest efg%, 9th lowest ts%. 6th lowest own off. reb. rate.
Re: Thunder lineup analysis and other commentary
Based on 82games W-L profiles:
Best way to beat Thunder is good shooting with ball protection.
Best way to beat Mavs is good shooting.
Best way to beat Timberwolves is 2 way net strength and getting to FT line.
Thunder probably better suited to beating Mavs than Timberwolves.
Neither Mavs or Timberwolves particularly well suited- based on overall regular season data- to beat the other.
Mavs somewhat better suited to beat Thunder though both are pretty well suited.
Best way to beat Thunder is good shooting with ball protection.
Best way to beat Mavs is good shooting.
Best way to beat Timberwolves is 2 way net strength and getting to FT line.
Thunder probably better suited to beating Mavs than Timberwolves.
Neither Mavs or Timberwolves particularly well suited- based on overall regular season data- to beat the other.
Mavs somewhat better suited to beat Thunder though both are pretty well suited.