2007-08 Game 32: Denver Nuggets @ Minnesota Timberwolves

January 4th, 2008 by SBG


The Wolves play host to the Denver Nuggets tonight at Target Center. The Nuggets played in Denver last night, edging the Manu-less San Antonio Spurs 80-77. I’m pretty down on the Wolves right now, so I won’t say anything about them, but I think Denver is a pretty interesting team.

Denver went all-in with this team last year when they acquired Allen Iverson from the 76ers. There’s a lot of negative things you can say about AI, but I’m generally positive on him. He’s a very tough little guy and he’s held up pretty well over the years, considering the punishment he takes on the court. He’s now 23rd on the career scoring list, just behind some guy named Larry Bird. By the end of the season, he should be sitting 20th all-time, just behind Elgin Baylor. In terms of career scoring, Iverson’s getting into some pretty rare air.

One of the knocks on AI has been that he’s never been afraid of shooting the ball and that he’s scored at the expense of his team. Indeed, his career true shooting percentage is a relatively paltry 51.5%, which is below average. I sort of expected that when he moved to Denver two things would happen. One, that his per game number would drop and two, that TS% would go up. Denver has, after all, another big time scorer in Carmelo Anthony and if AI were taking the shots in Denver that he took in Philly, well, things would NOT BE GOOD. The only question for me was who was going to be the alpha dog in Denver, ‘Melo or AI?

It looked early on like ‘Melo was going to be the guy. AI averaged 24.8 points a game after the trade last year, his lowest total since he was 22 years old back in 1997-98. He was shooting better, though – his TS% was 54.5, which would have been a career high. This season, AI has been scoring at a slightly higher pace that ‘Melo, something that is surprising to me. He’s also shooting much better – he’s at a career best 56.3 TS%, which is a reflection of his better shot selection. In addition, his assist rate is higher than every season, save his rookie campaign. Thus, we see that when Iverson is paired with an elite player, he shoots less often, but at a higher rate and his assist totals have gone up. I think the move to Denver will do a lot for AI’s legacy even if Denver never makes a serious run at a championship.

In addition to ‘Melo and AI, Denver has a monster in the middle in Marcus Camby. Camby isn’t a scorer at all (remember, there’s more to the game than scoring), but he’s an elite defender, shot blocker, and rebounder. Despite scoring fewer than nine points a game, he’s earning his $11 million plus by getting almost four blocks a game and over 14 rebounds per (check out this list of "guardians of the rim"). Camby is one of those guys whose game you should love. He’s been hurt a lot over the course of his career, but when healthy, he’s the kind of guy that championship caliber teams have. He’s a game changer.

So, why isn’t Denver winning more? Well, without seeing them play a lot at all, I’m going to pin a little blame on their young star. ‘Melo’s shooting percentages are down, even while his usage remains very high (28.6 with AI on the team?). Denver’s a great defensive squad 3rd behind the other-worldly Celtics and the would-be-best-in-most-years Pistons (Camby!), but they are only a middle of the road offensive club. After ‘Melo and AI, no one averages even 11 points a game (although they have four guys getting around 10 a game). In other words, they need a little more from their supporting cast. In Boston, there’s a guy that makes sure everyone gets the ball. Does Denver have that? I don’t think they do (KG >> AI > ‘Melo). Even still, they are a good team and are leading what is – and will be going forward, save one squad – an extremely competitive division.

Denver is a six-point favorite and the O/U is 207. Denver plays at a very fast pace, at 102 possessions per game, they are the fastest team in terms of pace in the league. The Wolves score total has almost never been above 207 (although it’s happened). In the two previous meetings, the score total has been 190 and 192. I think the Nugs will win handily and I’ll take Denver and give the points. Tonight, they play at a faster pace. Denver 110, Minnesota 95.

<GreekHouse>The Wolves have been starting Doleac at center for a few games now. At first, I didn't like this strategy, but my feelings on Smith have changed in the past few weeks.

The main problem with Smith is that he's a worse, undersized version of BAJ. Neither of them are very good passers or defenders. On offense, Smith is excellent at using his body to create space and is great at finishing near the basket. When he gets the ball, he makes it look as though he's doing nothing at all. It makes you think, "Hey, I could do that! Why don't more players just do that?". It's not that easy of course, he does a great job of using his body to put himself into a good position to score or get a rebound.

Defense is another story for Smith. While he is able to use his body well on offense, his large frame works against him on defense. He is very slow and can't really keep up with the pace of the NBA game. He has trouble on switches and can't fight through pick-and-rolls quickly enough. At 6-7, he is too short to guard most centers in the league. This allows other teams to completely abuse him through screens and pick-and-roll plays or by posting up bigger players against him.

It seems pretty useless to have both Smith and Big Al on the floor at the same time. Since they're both weak defenders, it gives up a lot on that end of the court. Offensively, they're both black holes. Since only one of them can take a shot per possession, this is a bit of a waste. The only benefit from having them both on the court comes from rebounding.

This leaves the Wolves in an awkward situation. If they want to win more than a dozen games this season, it might be best to use Smith when BAJ is on the bench and only sparingly use them together. This would mean starting Doleac and giving him a lot more minutes.

Another interesting option might be to pull a Billy Beane and manufacture Smith into a player we can sell. We could give him more minutes and run more offensive plays through him in an effort to pump up his scoring numbers. If you read the article that SBG linked to above, you will see that when it comes to salary, teams overpay for volume scoring and tend to ignore efficiency. The numbers had to do with salaries, but I'm willing to guess that the Wolves could get a team to overpay for Smith in trade. Ideally, we'd be able to trade him to a team that needs scoring for an average center. Most teams would naturally assume that McHale is being his normal retarded self and might jump at the opportunity to trade with him.

All this being said, I'd like to see Smith start tonight. Defensively, he should be able to "contain" Camby. In the first two games against the Nuggets, Camby has pulled down 21 and 18 rebounds respectively. Having two good rebounders out there could help slow him down on the glass and with his poor offensive game, we're not sacrificing a lot on defense.

I have no idea which line to pick here, so I'm going to go with the homer pick and choose the Wolves.</GreekHouse>



Comments Feed22 Letters to the Editor

ubelmann replied on January 4, 2008 at 6:28:23 pm

I'm willing to guess that the Wolves could get a team to overpay for Smith in trade. Ideally, we'd be able to trade him to a team that needs scoring for an average center. Most teams would naturally assume that McHale is being his normal retarded self and might jump at the opportunity to trade with him.

Unfortunately, I have a feeling that McHale will be his normal retarded self and not consider such a possibility.

GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 6:57:25 pm

Yeah, I have to agree. He'll just see Smith as a good player at a good price and not want to part with him. For the record, I think Smith is a very good player, he's just not going to be very useful on this team.

SBG pointed out another logistical problem with trading Smith. He's only making $650,000 this season. Because of the salary cap rules, this makes it really hard to get value for him. We'd probably have to package him with someone else and do a 2 for 1, which might hurt our chances.

ubelmann replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:22:15 pm

Sometimes I think that the NBA trade rules are set up in order to make it as difficult as possible for teams to improve themselves. As far as I can tell (based on this and this, every team but the Hawks and the Bobcats is over the salary cap, which makes it seem like more of a floor than ceiling.

Comparing baseball salaries to the basketball salaries, the NBA winds up doing a better job at keeping away extreme outliers like the Rays and the Yankees, but there is still a pretty big spread in salaries amongst NBA teams. (For instance, the Mavs are probably spending more than the Hawks and Bobcats combined when you include luxury tax payments.)

I guess my point is that all of this salary matching in trades isn't actually keeping some teams from spending a lot more money than other teams, so why not just let everyone make trades with salaries that don't match, but tax the crap out of them if they want to spend a lot of money?

 
 
 
ubelmann replied on January 4, 2008 at 6:29:33 pm

One of the knocks on AI has been that he’s never been afraid of shooting the ball and that he’s scored at the expense of his team. Indeed, his career true shooting percentage is a relatively paltry 51.5%, which is below average.

Question: is the average TS% different for starters than it is for bench players?

GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 6:58:17 pm

TS% is just:

(Points Per Shot)/2

ubelmann replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:07:08 pm

Right, but K/9 is just (strikeouts*9/IP), but relief pitchers have a higher average K/9 than starting pitchers.

GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:21:33 pm

I'm not sure. I know that there is an inverse relationship between shots taken and TS% though. A player like Hoiberg would have a tremendous TS% because he is only expected to shoot when he's wide open.

At the beginning of the 03-04 season, I lamented the fact that KG was shooting such a high percentage from the field and noted that this meant he was probably passing on some good shots that he could have taken to get the ball to his teammates.

ubelmann replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:32:30 pm

That makes sense (and is an interesting observation.) Is it true on a team level, or just on an individual basis?

In college hockey, on a team-by-team basis, I once found an inverse relationship between shots allowed on goal and save percentage.

My theory is that allowing a lot of shots is a signal of a poor defense (or a strong opponents' offense), which indicates to us that a team who allows a lot of shots is going to allow, on average, shots that are harder for the goalie to stop. Using that relationship could allow you to make an adjustment to the goalie's save percentage which would help to neutralize a bit the effects of playing on teams with defenses of different ability and in conferences with different levels of offensive prowess. (In particular, the WCHA and CCHA goalies generally had somewhat lower save percentages than Hockey East and ECAC goalies, but I think a good bit of this had more to do with WCHA and CCHA forwards possessing more ability to score than HE and ECAC forwards. As a result, everyone talked about how great HE and ECAC goalies were, when I think their guady stats had more to do with the conferences they played in than the quality of the goalies.) [/digression]

GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:49:02 pm

The idea is similar for basketball. If a player starts taking more shots (without increasing his minutes) the shots will be--on average--more difficult. Conversely, if he starts taking fewer shots, the shots that he is passing up will typically be the more difficult ones to make.

The trend is true for all players, but the curve will look a lot different based on the player. With Hoiberg for instance, you would expect him to have roughly the same percentage up to a certain threshold since most of his shots were long jumpers or 3-pointers. Beyond that threshold, you would expect his percentage to dip significantly since he would now be forced way out of his comfort zone. For a player like KG, you would expect the dropoff to be more linear since he would essentially be taking harder versions of shots that he was already taking. Hopefully some of this makes sense.

This is also the reason that some players are capable of carrying a team while others are not. When a player starts to bare a heavier load, his percentage will go down. Some players can do this with only a minor drop off, while others will suffer a more significant fall. Those that can't carry a team will still frequently make very good players, but they'll always need other players to take a bigger part of the burden.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
SBG replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:03:39 pm

True shooting percentage is also only one part of the story. A spot up jump shooter may be able to knock down jumpers, but can he create his own shot?

 
GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:28:30 pm

That's part of what I was saying with Hoiberg. He's great when all he has to do is catch and shoot, but if you want him to start taking more shots, he's going to have to work a bit harder and this will cause him to drop off significantly.

 
E-6 replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:39:54 pm

I'd kill for a Hoiberg right about now. He was a such a smart player, much more than just a sharp-shooter.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 7:50:18 pm

Smith started tonight. Wittman's been reading this blog again.

 
SBG replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:04:34 pm

Denver is getting the game at their pace. That's bad news for the Wolves.

 
GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:33:04 pm

Wolves look absolutely terrible right now. It's a miracle they're only down by 10.

 
E-6 replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:36:58 pm

McCants actually driving to the basket tonight, instead of settling for the jumper. More, please.

Guess I'm looking for a bright spot on the dark side of the moon.

GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:50:54 pm

McCants only has two fouls tonight too, and that last foul was actually a good one.

 
 
SBG replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:46:06 pm

Wolves have crept back in.

 
GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 8:47:16 pm

Great penetration and dish to BAJ by Gomes on that last play. Wolves have cut it to 6. If only for knowing that they'll get outscored by 10 in the 4th, I'd think they actually have a chance to win this game!

 
SBG replied on January 4, 2008 at 9:24:57 pm

This has been a very entertaining game.

 
GreekHouse replied on January 4, 2008 at 9:30:30 pm

SBG replied on January 4, 2008 at 9:36:14 pm

The GH predictor now has the Wolves winning 12.86 games this year.

 
 

Sorry, the LTE form is closed at this time.