Do Win Shares Per 48 tell you anything about the Pelicans?

On Reddit Im_Your_Neighbor discussed the meaning of WS/48. The Pelicans with his lens (where he notes this stat has a bias for bigs):

WS/48 < .000 scrub or raw young player.
-0.787 Will Magnay
-0.179 Isaiah Thomas
-0.099 Didi Louzada

.000 < WS/48 < .050 bench role player or rookie.
.031 James Nunnally
.035 Nickeil Alexander-Walker
.045 Kira Lewis, Jr.

.050 < WS/48 < .100 decent role player or middling efficiency volume scorer.
.052 Wenyen Gabriel
.053 Eric Bledsoe
.061 Naji Marshall
.089 Lonzo Ball
.097 Josh Hart

.100< WS/48 < .150 quality starter.
.119 Steven Adams
.120 Brandon Ingram

.150 < WS/48 < .200 all-star or highly efficient starter or role player.
.163 Willy Hernangomez
.176 Jaxson Hayes

WS/48 > .200 all-star starter, all nba player, or great-rebounding center.
.205 Zion Williamson

This stat says we have no quality starters at guard. Of course, you could have concluded that just from watching the games. But continuing with this stat we get the following list of guards (PG or SG) that are 28 or younger and between 0.1 and 0.12 in WS/48. Will any of these guys be here next year?

Marcus Smart 0.1, Grayson Allen .101, Sam Merrill 0.102, Matisse Thybulle .102, De'Anthony Melton 0.103, Jevon Carter .104, Devin Booker .104, Luke Kennard .105, Malcolm Brogdon .105, Tim Hardaway Jr. .105, Terry Rozier .105, Trent Forrest .106, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope .107, Javonte Green .107, Fred VanVleet .108, Garrison Mathews .108, Pat Connaughton .108, Tyus Jones .11, Jordan Clarkson .111, Monte Morris .115, Jaylen Brown .115, Delon Wright .117, and Damion Lee .119

It’s correct to an extent but you’re not gonna tell me Willy is better than Ingram lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

It?s correct to an extent but you?re not gonna tell me Willy is better than Ingram lol

---

It's comparing apples with oranges

Willy has been my favourite player this season. He's been a sensation in the post, with an array of moves and good hands. Always playing within the offense

We better re-sign him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

It's comparing apples with oranges

Willy has been my favourite player this season. He's been a sensation in the post, with an array of moves and good hands. Always playing within the offense

We better re-sign him

---

He has been excellent for what we expected and for what we paid him. However, he still has many flaws. He plays almost no defense and is not a great finisher around the basket. I really like him as a backup big though at his cost.

Win Shares are a useful metric for getting a rough, overall picture of someone's impact.

They are not a measurement of which players are better than others.

If you average negative win shares, you're not good; if you average .300 WS/48, you are good. In that sense, it's a solid broad-strokes metric for giving an outline of who may be good or bad. But it can easily be skewed by the lineups you play with, the position you play, and (because of course it's linked to win impact) how good your team is.

So no, Hernangomez is not better than Ingram, but given the makeup of our team and the lineups he played in, it's arguable that his impact was elevated.

Nobody should be using WS/48 as a tool to tell them what to think about a player. They should be using it as a diagnostic tool for evaluating their own judgements, or getting a rough outline of whether a player is being impactful. The impact a player creates has very little to do with their ''skill'' or their ''talent'' in many cases, but corresponds to how and when they're being used.

The classic example of this is Boban Marjonovic looking like a perennial all-star by PER and WS/48 measurements (career 25.9 PER, higher than Durant, CP3, Harden, Barkley, Kareem, Duncan, Malone, Curry, Giannis, Bird, Hakeem, Wade, Garnett, and West - career .238 WS/48, higher than Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Durant, Barkley, Kawhi, etc) when in reality he just only ever gets used very situationally in ways that maximise his specific limited skillset.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

It's comparing apples with oranges

Willy has been my favourite player this season. He's been a sensation in the post, with an array of moves and good hands. Always playing within the offense

We better re-sign him

---

So who would you rather be our backup big behind Adam’s, Jax or Willy? The answer is Jax easily for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AusPel

It's comparing apples with oranges

Willy has been my favourite player this season. He's been a sensation in the post, with an array of moves and good hands. Always playing within the offense

We better re-sign him

---

I agree, But if it's for a third guy at that position, it would be silly to go much higher than 3.5MM per year. That's part of the reason I want to move Adams; that, and to put the big money to use elsewhere.

Might as well put this here, just to give a wider range of perspectives. Here are the Pelicans as measured by a bunch of different impact stats and advanced metrics. I am only counting players who logged at least 900 minutes for the team, as my arbitrary cut-off point for minutes. I have also added where they rank in the NBA in relevant stats, for comparison. For those who did not hit the minutes limit for league wide ranking (NAW, Jax) I have put where their number would rank if they were on the leaderboard.

Name		PER	LEBRON	EPM	RAPTOR	ON/OFF	BPM
Bledsoe		11.5 (153rd)	-0.07 (176th)	-2.0 (304th)	-2.2 (203rd)	-1.9 (154th)	-2.3 (153rd)
Ingram		19.2 (49th)	+1.03 (92nd)	+0.9 (120th)	+1.3 (89th)	+2.5 (83rd)	+2.2 (44th)
Zion		27.1 (4th)	+3.78 (12th)	+4.4 (15th)	+3.0 (38th)	+5.6 (44th)	+5.4 (11th)
Lonzo		15.2 (91st)	+1.40 (62nd)	+2.1 (56th)	+1.8 (77th)	+2.7 (79th)	+1.6 (52nd)
Adams		15.1 (92nd)	+0.68 (105th)	+0.3 (156th)	+0.6 (118th)	+0.8 (104th)	-0.8 (118th)
Hart		12.2 (135th)	-0.19 (195th)	-1.4 (268th)	+0.8 (110th)	+1.1 (103rd)	-1.1 (130th)
Nickeil		12.5 (133rd)	-0.04 (172nd)	-2.2 (320th)	-0.6 (164th)	-2.7 (173rd	-1.6 (141st)
Jaxson		19.1 (50th)	-0.44 (234th)	+0.8 (125th)	Not Logged	-0.6 (129th)	-0.1 (93rd)

What you tend to notice from this chart:
- Zion is considered a top 15 player by most metrics, and a top 50 player by all metrics
- Ingram is considered a top 100 player by almost all metrics, and top 50 by a few
- Lonzo had a career best impact this season, and is considered a top 80 player by most metrics here
- Adams was roughly neutral
- Bledsoe had a horrible impact on the team and isn't considered a top 150 player by any metric listed, as a clear negative in every stat

Now of course, for some of these we can apply our knowledge of statistics and also our knowledge of the team to contextualise them. For example, we know that BPM 2.0 (the stat BasketballReference uses as BPM) favours steals as a way of calculating defensive impact, which means guards who tend towards high steal rates tend to do well in this metric, so that's something you have to keep in mind. Similarly, we know that PER tends to value pure production more than anything else, so players who have a high impact that doesn't show in the box score tend to suffer here.

So take all of these stats with a grain of salt. Evaluate them critically. But there they are, if anyone wants to compare players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Might as well put this here, just to give a wider range of perspectives. Here are the Pelicans as measured by a bunch of different impact stats and advanced metrics. I am only counting players who logged at least 900 minutes for the team, as my arbitrary cut-off point for minutes. I have also added where they rank in the NBA in relevant stats, for comparison. For those who did not hit the minutes limit for league wide ranking (NAW, Jax) I have put where their number would rank if they were on the leaderboard.

Name		PER	LEBRON	EPM	RAPTOR	ON/OFF	BPM
Bledsoe		11.5 (153rd)	-0.07 (176th)	-2.0 (304th)	-2.2 (203rd)	-1.9 (154th)	-2.3 (153rd)
Ingram		19.2 (49th)	+1.03 (92nd)	+0.9 (120th)	+1.3 (89th)	+2.5 (83rd)	+2.2 (44th)
Zion		27.1 (4th)	+3.78 (12th)	+4.4 (15th)	+3.0 (38th)	+5.6 (44th)	+5.4 (11th)
Lonzo		15.2 (91st)	+1.40 (62nd)	+2.1 (56th)	+1.8 (77th)	+2.7 (79th)	+1.6 (52nd)
Adams		15.1 (92nd)	+0.68 (105th)	+0.3 (156th)	+0.6 (118th)	+0.8 (104th)	-0.8 (118th)
Hart		12.2 (135th)	-0.19 (195th)	-1.4 (268th)	+0.8 (110th)	+1.1 (103rd)	-1.1 (130th)
Nickeil		12.5 (133rd)	-0.04 (172nd)	-2.2 (320th)	-0.6 (164th)	-2.7 (173rd	-1.6 (141st)
Jaxson		19.1 (50th)	-0.44 (234th)	+0.8 (125th)	Not Logged	-0.6 (129th)	-0.1 (93rd)

What you tend to notice from this chart:
- Zion is considered a top 15 player by most metrics, and a top 50 player by all metrics
- Ingram is considered a top 100 player by almost all metrics, and top 50 by a few
- Lonzo had a career best impact this season, and is considered a top 80 player by most metrics here
- Adams was roughly neutral
- Bledsoe had a horrible impact on the team and isn't considered a top 150 player by any metric listed, as a clear negative in every stat

Now of course, for some of these we can apply our knowledge of statistics and also our knowledge of the team to contextualise them. For example, we know that BPM 2.0 (the stat BasketballReference uses as BPM) favours steals as a way of calculating defensive impact, which means guards who tend towards high steal rates tend to do well in this metric, so that's something you have to keep in mind. Similarly, we know that PER tends to value pure production more than anything else, so players who have a high impact that doesn't show in the box score tend to suffer here.

So take all of these stats with a grain of salt. Evaluate them critically. But there they are, if anyone wants to compare players.

---

Not that it matters but I’m just curious where does Tatum, and Jaylen Brown stack up on this? I wanna see how they compete to Ingram. I know Tatum will be higher but curious on Brown

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Not that it matters but I’m just curious where does Tatum, and Jaylen Brown stack up on this? I wanna see how they compete to Ingram. I know Tatum will be higher but curious on Brown

---

....and Julius Randle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Not that it matters but I’m just curious where does Tatum, and Jaylen Brown stack up on this? I wanna see how they compete to Ingram. I know Tatum will be higher but curious on Brown

---

EPM:
Ingram: +0.9 (120th)
Tatum: +2.7 (38th)
Brown: +2.0 (60th)

LEBRON:
Ingram: +1.03 (92nd)
Tatum: +4.1 (10th)
Brown: +0.1 (159th)

BPM:
Ingram: +2.2 (44th)
Tatum: +3.7 (22nd)
Brown: +2.5 (42nd)

RAPTOR:
Ingram: +1.3 (89th)
Tatum: +2.9 (42nd)
Brown: +1.8 (77th)

PER:
Ingram: 19.2 (49th)
Tatum: 21.3 (29th)
Brown: 19.9 (43rd)

Best surprise of the team is definitely Hernangomez. If this were like 2003 he’d be considered an excellent starter.

Times have changed but he’s clearly got value and makes the cost to get Adam’s even more egregious than it already was. Da well.

We need a guard who can consistently shot the freaking rock. If I gotta drive up to Toronto or Indiana and kidnap Fred VanVleet or Brogdon myself to do it...

Or anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

EPM:
Ingram: +0.9 (120th)
Tatum: +2.7 (38th)
Brown: +2.0 (60th)

LEBRON:
Ingram: +1.03 (92nd)
Tatum: +4.1 (10th)
Brown: +0.1 (159th)

BPM:
Ingram: +2.2 (44th)
Tatum: +3.7 (22nd)
Brown: +2.5 (42nd)

RAPTOR:
Ingram: +1.3 (89th)
Tatum: +2.9 (42nd)
Brown: +1.8 (77th)

PER:
Ingram: 19.2 (49th)
Tatum: 21.3 (29th)
Brown: 19.9 (43rd)

---

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

....and Julius Randle.

---

Randle:

PER: 19.7 (45th)
EPM: +3.1 (26th)
LEBRON: +1.23 (77th)
RAPTOR: +3.2 (12th)
BPM: +3.7 (23rd)
On/Off: +0.2 (117th)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Randle:

PER: 19.7 (45th)
EPM: +3.1 (26th)
LEBRON: +1.23 (77th)
RAPTOR: +3.2 (12th)
BPM: +3.7 (23rd)
On/Off: +0.2 (117th)

---

Advanced stats hate him!

I think you could make a strong case we were the best rebounding team in the league. Thats a credit to our bigs and Zion.

Our 3P% is near the bottom of the league along with FT%, yet our eFG% and TS% are average. That's a credit to Zion, Ingram's mid-range, and probably also our bigs.

We don't have a player better than average at 3P shooting. Ingram and Lonzo are close, everyone else is bottom quartile. Meanwhile, we are one of the worst teams against 3P% and eFG%. More of a perimeter defense problem IMO.

I think it's safe to say this team is carried by Zion's offense, Ingram's mid-range and our bigs.

Kind of crazy we were towards the worst team at 3s when we had Ingram and Lonzo shooting 38%

What’s average now a days? With volume considered of course

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

Kind of crazy we were towards the worst team at 3s when we had Ingram and Lonzo shooting 38%

What’s average now a days? With volume considered of course

---

I filtered guys who shot 4 per game and played at least 700 mins.

145 Players qualified

74 BI
82 Lonzo
111 NAW
119 Bledsoe
133 Hart

0.38 is pretty much average though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stalwart385

I filtered guys who shot 4 per game and played at least 700 mins.

145 Players qualified

74 BI
82 Lonzo
111 NAW
119 Bledsoe
133 Hart

0.38 is pretty much average though.

---

I don’t think that’s nearly enough minutes, I should have said starter quality players. 700 minutes is only good for 23 games averaging 30 minutes a game. Not even a third of a season for a starter. I’m wondering what kind of 3pt percentage our starters will need to shoot to be above league average

Change that number to 4 attempts per game with at least 1500 minutes played gives you a player that has played 30 minutes a game over a 50 game span

Then I’d say since there are 140 starting players in the league, anything above 70 is above average.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HornetGuru

I don’t think that’s nearly enough minutes, I should have said starter quality players. 700 minutes is only good for 23 games averaging 30 minutes a game. Not even a third of a season for a starter. I’m wondering what kind of 3pt percentage our starters will need to shoot to be above league average

Change that number to 4 attempts per game with at least 1500 minutes played gives you a player that has played 30 minutes a game over a 50 game span

Then I’d say since there are 140 starting players in the league, anything above 70 is above average.

---

I was trying to include some bench players and guys that got hurt and only played like half a season. It doesn't change much however you mess around with it.

With 4 attempts and 1500 mins:

89 Qualify

49 BI
56 Lonzo
76 Bledsoe

League average is still around 0.38

I tried it with 3PA/36 also and got similar results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stalwart385

I was trying to include some bench players and guys that got hurt and only played like half a season. It doesn't change much however you mess around with it.

With 4 attempts and 1500 mins:

89 Qualify

49 BI
56 Lonzo
76 Bledsoe

League average is still at 0.38

I tried it with 3PA/36 also and got similar results.

---

Okay cool, good work, thanks!

In other news out 2 best 3pt shooters are average, great...

League average this year is exactly 36.7% from 3. Last year it was 35.8%, the year before 35.5% and the year before that 36.2%. It hovers around 36-37% any given year, at least in the modern era.

It is true that the only two Pelicans (who played real minutes for the team and took at least 2 threes a game, sorry Wenyen, sorry Jax) who shot better than league average this year were Lonzo and Ingram; and even then, only a bit better than league average. If league average is 36.7% and Lonzo shoots 37.8%, we're not smashing the average here. We're only about 1% better. Ingram is a bit better at 38.1%, but again, that's not smashing the average. Yeah, they're taking them at high volume so that does compensate somewhat, but they're mostly assisted (79% of Ingrams and 84% of Lonzo's 3s were assisted) which basically translates into ''these shots do not warp defenses nearly as much as self-created attempts do''. If someone is driving and kicking, and that driver is an absurd finisher at the rim (Zion), your shooters can't just be high volume average shooters to stop defenses helping. They have to be absolute dead-eye snipers. Or else people will help off them.

Nobody on this team was a 40% sniper. That's an issue. Pelicans shot about 36% as a team this year on wide open threes. By comparison, most of the best teams in the league shot over 40% on those looks.

Griff was not wrong when he said that we desperately need shooters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

League average this year is exactly 36.7% from 3. Last year it was 35.8%, the year before 35.5% and the year before that 36.2%. It hovers around 36-37% any given year, at least in the modern era.

It is true that the only two Pelicans (who played real minutes for the team and took at least 2 threes a game, sorry Wenyen, sorry Jax) who shot better than league average this year were Lonzo and Ingram; and even then, only a bit better than league average. If league average is 36.7% and Lonzo shoots 37.8%, we're not smashing the average here. We're only about 1% better. Ingram is a bit better at 38.1%, but again, that's not smashing the average. Yeah, they're taking them at high volume so that does compensate somewhat, but they're mostly assisted (79% of Ingrams and 84% of Lonzo's 3s were assisted) which basically translates into ''these shots do not warp defenses nearly as much as self-created attempts do''. If someone is driving and kicking, and that driver is an absurd finisher at the rim (Zion), your shooters can't just be high volume average shooters to stop defenses helping. They have to be absolute dead-eye snipers. Or else people will help off them.

Nobody on this team was a 40% sniper. That's an issue. Pelicans shot about 36% as a team this year on wide open threes. By comparison, most of the best teams in the league shot over 40% on those looks.

Griff was not wrong when he said that we desperately need shooters.

---

I'm guessing that is a full team average. ie. It includes low-volume guys.

Neither is wrong imo. Just trying to be clear where the numbers come from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stalwart385

I'm guessing that is a full team average. ie. It includes low-volume guys.

Neither is wrong imo. Just trying to be clear where the numbers come from.

---

The 36.7% is league wide, yep.