Ayton

Does points/shot count 2 FTAs as 0 shot, 1 shot, or 2 shots? Seems to be it should count for 1 shot attempt when shooting two FTs and 0 shot attempt when part of an And-1. While there is certainly value in drawing fouls that should be measured (another way), wrapping it into shots/attempt doesn't seem like an accurate way of doing it. If shots/attempt doesn't count FTA but does count the points, it would be giving positive value to a player who gets fouled and shoots 25% from the line, even though that's only 0.5pts/possession; which would be awful.

 

Suns fans are the worst. The thinning ozone layer has fried their brains with ulra-violet zappy beams.

Suns weirdos will always blame Ayton for costing the team championships, regardless that basketball is a 5 man sport. Phoenix fired their coach, had an acceptably racist owner, relied on a 43 yr. old PG with bad knees & a bench full of scrubs, then thought it was OK for Booker to act like a whiney baby.

aaand... the reason why Phoenix has no championships is because Deandre [fill in the blank]

 

I like the fact he scores without relying on free throws. It's not like he's sitting out on the perimeter shooting 3s. He stays in the paint and he takes quality shots. I rarely cringe or yell at my TV when he shoots. I hate watching bigs like Nurk back players down in the paint. Very few can do it without turning the ball over. Ayton for the most part is pretty decisive. He shoots it quickly or he passes it.
He puts the ball on the floor at a minimum which I like. Overall I like his offense.

Not a lot of assists or turnovers. I am good with that. He stays out of foul trouble however I would like to see him get a few more blocks, which would probably also increase his fouls.

 

points/shot as I posted counts shots when the clock is running

I mildly disagree with your evaluation of FT's; yes, it 'punishes' players who have a low FT rate because I think that's appropriate when gauging scoring efficiency rather than just shooting efficiency. The ability to draw shooting fouls and score from the FT line is an important component of gauging value, IMO. What I'm trying to get at is points per possession. Whether it's a made FG or two made FT's, it's still the same possession

now, where you may have an argument, and that seems to be what you're getting at, is that a shooting foul deletes the FGA. I think that's a tenuous argument because shooting fouls can result in very high degree of difficulty shots. A couple of times, at least, during games, players gather and are essentially bear-hugged into an impossible shot. Should that only count as 0.2 FGA?

but more than that is that everybody is gauged by the same remedial calculation, whether it's 0 FGA on a shooting foul or 1.

 

Ayton's answers are goofy and a bit all over the place, and the public love dissecting what he has to say. The question is whether you give him the benefit of the doubt or not. they would have meme'd ayton either way on that 'have you proved anything' question, tbf.

In Phoenix he didn't get that benefit of the doubt anymore, and his guard seems to be up in Portland to start; ayton is not going to get less goofy—it'll just be whether the local media (and the national aggregators) are on his side or not. He seems to be turning the tide locally, with Quick as an exception. I don't see the national jackals changing anytime soon until he puts up insane advanced stats for 4 years, 82 games each, zero injuries. until then it'll be 'you have to remember, ayton is going to be bad soon, again.'

no one is watching blazers games so they'll only be monitoring whatever soundbites he has. they'll wave off good performances with 'good stats, bad team!' and 'but he's not a winning player.' i personally recommend tuning out sources like that.

 

there is another factor about FT Rate; I have no idea how it would be gauged. And that's drawing fouls puts opponents in the bonus earlier...which in turn can result in more FT points. Further, a big who draws fouls would seem to, at least generically, get the opposing big in foul trouble more often. And opposing bigs tend to be the best paint defenders and rim protectors, which in turn could make it easier to score on higher efficiency shots if that big was sitting on the bench in foul trouble or playing more passively on defense

drawing whistles is a skill that is to readily dismissed IMO

 

Probably dismissed as of late based on teams are taking 40+ 3-point shots a game. You rarely see bigs in foul trouble these days unless they make a lot of stupid reach-in fouls or offensive fouls while setting a screen.

 

even if it's not explicitly called out, I feel like it is THE skill. it's the engine under the cowling of every single star player.

it's the only difference between ayton and that super star center class over the past 10-15 games—getting the other team in foul trouble.

 

I may be misunderstanding, but let me give an extreme example to illustrate my point of why counting FTM towards PPS but not FTA can be misleading:

Player A gets fouled on purpose by a scrub every time the team is in the bonus. He makes 10 of his 40 FTs and goes 1/2 from the field. He's essentially been responsible for 22 possessions and has provided his team 12 points in those 22 possessions. Yet, his PPS would be 6? 6pps would be beyond elite, but 0.55 points per possession would be awful and actually hurting his team.

On the flip side, player B shoots 6/10 from the field but has no FTs. He'd have a PPS of 1.2 and a points per possession of 1.2. To me, Player B is helping his team win much more than Player A, despite his PPS being 20% of Player A.

What am I missing?

 

I 100% agree with the first part. To measure it properly, you'd need to be able to accurately weight pre-bonus fouls, less the ones that don't matter (2nd team foul with 2:30 left in the 1st quarter). Same would be true in putting individual players in foul trouble. Getting Jokic his 3rd foul in the 2nd quarter would carry significantly more weight than getting Moses Brown his 3rd foul and the 3rd string center.

I agree with you that there is value to drawing fouls outside of the FTs made. Like you said, tricky to measure.

 

Wasn’t super-specific, but look at his last his last-five. 25 pts, 16.4 boards, shooting 64% from the field, plus shooting well at the line (still doesn’t get to the line enough). Too bad he can’t perform at this level more consistently, but we knew that (or the Suns wouldn’t have traded him).

 

I don’t trust Ayton as far as I can throw him, but he has been playing really well.

And the most surprising thing, to me, is he seems like the quintessential “pack it in since my team sucks” guy.

I really have no idea what to make of him.

 

I mean, he said he had nothing to prove a month and a half ago. Now he's saying he's trying to prove himself everyday.

 

He doesn't take this shot very often.

 

1. Season high 6 is hilarious.
2. He wasn't drawing those fouls, he just happened to walk into 6 FTs.

 

After the Suns did not do a 5-year, rookie max contract ... and the Pacers did the 4-year max that they could do and PHX matched ... Ayton PERHAPS saying that he had nothing to prove was about having earned the contract he got that Portland actually traded for ... so maybe that's what he does not have to prove. Teams wanted him for what he got paid. [Work with me, here.]

And, now, for the team that wanted him (Portland) and traded away assets to do it, he wants to prove they made the right decision ... and prove it to his teammates ... and ... proving it every day.

 

people prefer to judge ayton in a vacuum for some reason—the reality is way more complicated: his coach, his teammates, and eventually the press corps turned on him for myriad reasons, some of which are I’m sure warranted. of course he’s going to have a stick up his ass about his worth—he just exited a situation where he was repeatedly told he ‘wasn’t’ worth the deal he got, quite publicly and profoundly.

‘you know what—you’re right, i haven’t proven I’m worth what I make.”

- said no one, ever.

Even if it was a fair question, it was absolutely a gotcha question.