Ranking the Kings players

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 21, 2009 4:43 PM PST

Trying to quickly digest what we have, I ran some quick numbers on both the holdovers and incoming players on a "what have you done for me lately" basis.

I took this season's PER and multiplied it times minutes per game to get a quick and dirty analysis on how the players stack up based on this year's performance. Here's what I came up with:

1. Kevin Martin, PER 19.2, MIN 38.1 = 732.

2. Drew Gooden, PER 15.4, MIN 29.6 = 456.

3. Beno Udrih, PER 12.7, MIN 30.3 = 385.

4. Francisco Garcia, PER 14.0, MIN 26.8 = 375.

5. Jason Thompson, PER 13.2, MIN 26.6 = 351.

6. Spencer Hawes, PER 12.0, MIN 27.2 = 326.

7. Andres Nocioni, PER 11.4, MIN 24.1 = 275.

8. Bobby Jackson, PER 11.3, MIN 19.0 = 215.

9. Rashad McCants, PER 10.0, MIN 18.7 = 187.

10. Will Solomon, PER 13.9, MIN 12.8 = 178.

11. Donte Greene, PER 7.8, MIN 12.9 = 101.

12. Cedric Simmons, PER 18.0, MIN 5.5 = 99.

13. Kenny Thomas, PER 8.8, MIN 7.8 = 69.

14. Ike Diogu, PER 11.5, MIN 3.8 = 44.

15. Calvin Booth, PER 39.7, MIN 1.0 = 40.

Just for comparison, let’s take a last look at the two key guys we shipped out as well as a guy who plays for Cleveland:

John Salmons, PER 16.2, MIN 37.4 = 606.

Brad Miller, PER 15.9, MIIN 31.5 = 501.

LeBron James, PER 32.0, MIN 37.6 = 1,203.

It’s pretty obvious this Kings team is now officially Kevin Martin and everyone else.

If you assumed the players will play about the same amount of minutes they’ve played this year, you’d start to run out of minutes after McCants. If you take Gooden out of the equation while he is hurt, that would extend through Donte.

Since Brad Miller played his last game for the Kings Jan. 30, Spencer has averaged 34 minutes a game and JT more than 31. I’d expect that to continue. Donte played 18 minutes last night and I’d think he’s going to get about that a night if not more going forward. I don’t think we have enough point guard minutes available to see much of Solomon, but who knows.

My guess is that Simmons, Thomas and Booth aren’t going to suit up much going forward.

Nocioni, McCants and Diogu have all posted better numbers in previous seasons.

(This is a FanPost from a member of the Sactown Royalty community. The views expressed come from the member, and not Sactown Royalty staff.)

Tweet Comment 33 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I would be very surprised if Donté continues to get

18 minutes after Nocioni arrives/settles in. I’m hoping Dé3 can get 10 minutes a night, consistently.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 21, 2009 4:47 PM PST reply actions

as it should be

for this 19 yr old rookie.

by betweentheeyes on Feb 21, 2009 4:56 PM PST up reply actions

Donte's 21 birthday was today

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Feb 21, 2009 9:18 PM PST up reply actions

Donte & alkiehol is one funny ass combination

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....

by pookeyguru on Feb 21, 2009 9:26 PM PST up reply actions

Episode 4 of the Donte Greene Show

Donte & JT drinking at a strip club and they run into Mussleman.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Feb 21, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions 3 recs

LOL

Too funny.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 21, 2009 9:35 PM PST up reply actions

you are a sick man HighTops

and your humor infectious

rec’d!

by betweentheeyes on Feb 22, 2009 12:01 PM PST up reply actions

He might get more minutes

playing the 4 as the Kings play more small ball.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 21, 2009 5:00 PM PST up reply actions

My projection - off the top of my head

Speed – 35 min.
JT – 33 min.
Hawes – 33 min.
Nocioni – 30 min.
Beno – 30 min.
Cisco – 25 min.
BJax – 20 min.
Diogu – 12 min.
McCants – 12 min.
Donté – 10 min.

That’s 240. It’s also 10 players. Should be interesting to see what happens.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Feb 21, 2009 5:26 PM PST up reply actions

IMO

Natt can’t manage a 10 man rotation.

by Beagle12 on Feb 21, 2009 8:47 PM PST up reply actions

I like your method

of combining PER and minutes.

If we just looked at PER, Calvin Booth looks a good deal better than that Cleveland guy you mentioned.

That said, it’s kind of sad to see our guys’ PERs like that. If I remember right, the league average is set at 15.0. In that case, we have four guys with above-average PERs. Two play less than 6 minutes a game, one is injured and may miss the remainder of the season, and the other has the weight of our franchise’s hopes on his shoulders.

by twasserm on Feb 21, 2009 9:09 PM PST reply actions

Yep

When you have a roster full of slightly below average players, you can;t expect much from the team.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 21, 2009 9:30 PM PST up reply actions

PERS is what you make of it

San Antonio Spurs – 9 below 15.0, 4 above. (9<15>4). Of course it helps when 3 of those 4 are above 20 and they are named Geeeeeenoooobilleeee, Mr. Longoria and the Big Fundamental)

by betweentheeyes on Feb 22, 2009 12:33 PM PST up reply actions

If you add up the numbers

based on the PER * MIN formula above, the Spurs have 4,452 as a team, including 880 for Tim Duncan, 701 for Parker and 632 for Ginobili. Matt Bonner is next at 390. The Kings add up to about 3,800. Give me two more Kevin Martins and maybe we are in the hunt.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 22, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions

I think that's accurate

and a powerful statement of how our weak talent base is…

give us two more KMarts and we’d be in the hunt…

…on the other hand, in two years two of our guys should be significantly better than today, and two more decent PER guys (FA and 2009 pick) should be in the mix.

Life is every mammal's journey from very very wet to very very dry.

by Holmdel on Feb 23, 2009 11:29 PM PST up reply actions

I think in our case this exercise is fairly useless

The team is (hopefully WAS) in dissarray physically and emotionally, I have seen little sign of a coherant offensive or defensive philosophy of any kind, so these by-the-numbers evaluations, which I find suspect anyway, make less sense than usual for the Kings this year.

Sorry, thats how I feel – but have fun with’em!

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Feb 22, 2009 12:34 PM PST reply actions

You're right

So since there’s no real way to evaluate these guys, let’s just throw them in a hat to come up with our starters.

Voila! The New Kings starters will be:

7. Andres Nocioni, PER 11.4, MIN 24.1 = 275.
10. Will Solomon, PER 13.9, MIN 12.8 = 178.
12. Cedric Simmons, PER 18.0, MIN 5.5 = 99.
13. Kenny Thomas, PER 8.8, MIN 7.8 = 69.
15. Calvin Booth, PER 39.7, MIN 1.0 = 40.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 22, 2009 4:28 PM PST up reply actions

Introducing the 2001-2002 Kings

Here’s their numbers:

1. Chris Webber, PER 24.4, MIN 38.4 = 936.
2. Peja Stojakovic, PER 19.3, MIN 37.3 = 720.
3. Doug Christie, PER 15.2, MIN 34.5 = 525.
4. Vlade Divac, PER 17.0, MIN 30.3 = 514.
5. Mike Bibby, PER 14.9, MIN 33.2 = 495.
6. Bobby Jackson, PER 17.3, MIN 21.6 = 374.
7. Scot Pollard, PER 15.0, MIN 23.5 = 353.
8. Hedo Turkoglu, PER 14.2, MIN 24.6 = 350.
9. Lawrence Funderburke, PER 13.8, MIN 12.9 = 178.
10. Gerald Wallace, PER 13.3, MIN 8.0 = 106.
11. Chucky Brown, PER 10.1, MIN 5.1 = 52.
12. Mateen Cleaves, PER 8.8, MIN 4.8 = 42.
13. Jabari Smith, PER 7.0, MIN 5.9 = 41.
14. Brent Price, PER 6.6, MIN 4.5 = 29.

Team Total = 4,715.

All of the top 10 players had a PER of at least 13. That’s a pretty impressive team.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 22, 2009 5:32 PM PST reply actions

Impressive indeed

So Kevin Martin’s PER (x minutes) this year would rank second on this team?? Interesting…

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Feb 22, 2009 5:47 PM PST up reply actions

Off the top of my head

+1100 = MEGASTAR
+900 = SUPERSTAR / ALL-STAR
+700 = STAR
+500 = SOLID STARTER
+300 = SOLID SUB
+BELOW 300 = ROSTER FILLER

Given that, the 2001-2002 team had one superstar, one star, three solid starters if you give Bibby five points, and three solid subs.

Compare that to our current cast: one star and five solid subs. The only problem is four of those guys are starters. And we’re talking about at least one roster filler guy as a possible starter.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 22, 2009 6:48 PM PST up reply actions

JT and Spence

Are a rookie and sophomore respectively so you can’t really compare them to the players in that 2001 team

"Let's stop arguing and get together and agree on who really is the problem: PEACHES" - HighTops

by eduardo_m7 on Feb 22, 2009 7:01 PM PST up reply actions

Agreed

They are a work in progress, but that’s where they’ve got to get for us to be good. Or we need to trade them as part of an effort to build towards that level of players across the team.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 22, 2009 7:59 PM PST up reply actions

coaching coaching

Not that I really disagree. So per your evaluations BMiller was a ‘solid starter’ (low end)and Jsalmons was on the high end of ‘solid’ status.

sounds about right

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Feb 22, 2009 8:17 PM PST up reply actions

I'd still like that analysis turned on every starting center in the league

wonder how many actually are in that solid category.

So imitate the action of the tiger!
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favoured rage.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,

Now set the teeth - and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Feb 22, 2009 8:27 PM PST up reply actions

Spence was hurt during the beginning of his rookie season

Brad said he was still a rookie until he got 82 games in and he made him carry a backpack like the other rookies. Plus Hawes only averaged 12 mpg, last year, so JT & Hawes really aren’t that far apart as far as there experience.

"If you don't have anything good to say, LIE" - Mom

by HighTops on Feb 22, 2009 9:08 PM PST up reply actions

It's pretty important to remember also HT

That Shawes is actually younger than Donte too.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 22, 2009 9:21 PM PST up reply actions

we need to remember

using coolcat’s metric here very heavily weights minutes played.

So it gives a major advantage to players that have actually gotten an opportunity to play.

For example, for Spencer to be considered a Star, given his minutes, his PER would have to be 25.93. If his PER was that high, he’d be one of the top players in the league, well above a Star.

Its probably better just to look at PER directly, at least for players that have gotten legitimate minutes. Obviously Booth and Simmons haven’t gotten enough minutes to tell anything about their performance.

by ForThree on Feb 23, 2009 6:05 AM PST up reply actions

That's because

Stars actually play star minutes. The more you play, the more you impact the game and the more the team can count on you.

They don’t need to give someone else some of your minutes because you can’t hang. You’re so damn valuable, they have to drag you off the floor.

"The basis for winning an NBA title is having a superstar in his prime. Not an all-star, or a bunch of all-stars, but a superstar."

by coolcatreportdotcom on Feb 23, 2009 6:58 AM PST up reply actions

I understand

but here you’re comparing people that get minutes and people that don’t. The advantage of PER is that its minutes neutral.

All I am saying is because you build minutes into the formula, you build in an additional assumption: that each coach makes equally good decisions allocating minutes.

If Coach A plays a guy that doesn’t deserve it too much or Coach B doesn’t play a guy enough that deserves it, those scenarios bias these stats. I’m not saying your idea is terrible or has no merit, but I’m an analyst at heart. When I look at numbers, I want to know the possible biases behind them. I was merely trying to point out where the extra assumptions are with this metric.

by ForThree on Feb 23, 2009 7:35 AM PST up reply actions

Using minutes played

Would also theoretically overreward (NEW WORD) the “best player on a bad team”, wouldn’t it?

Mambo King

by otis29 on Feb 23, 2009 9:07 AM PST up reply actions

It does but

I actually think that’s a weakness of the PER stat also.

I don’t think (and Hollinger would probably disagree) that PER does a great job of addressing the different roles on a team. Salmons is the perfect case study for good player on a bad team that’s been traded.

His PER with us this year was 18, above NBA average. But Salmons with us had almost complete freedom to explore his game, we needed the scoring and so he had essentially as many opportunities as he wanted to score (within reason). To his credit, he did score pretty efficiently for us. Now he’s going to Chicago and I would find it hard to believe his PER will stay as good. Chicago is not going to give him the freedom and opportunity we did, and because his role will be different I bet his PER goes down. Salmons won’t be worse, but his role will be worse for allowing him to do things that raise PER.

The opposite effect should help Nocioni, as long as he’s efficient with his new chances. If he’s inefficient it won’t help him at all.

So to answer your question otis, Salmons PER in my opinion is inflated over what it would probably be on a good team, combining that inflation with lots of minutes would result in “overrewarding”, but that’s just my opinion. If Hollinger read this he’d attack my opinion with both barrels of his data shotgun. I like PER as a stat, I don’t think its the entire story though.

by ForThree on Feb 23, 2009 9:35 AM PST up reply actions

Every point you made there 4 3

Is exactly why I’m thrilled the Kings traded him. They couldn’t have traded him at a better team, and at a higher peak value. Best of both worlds.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 23, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions

at a better time^

And I’m referring to John Salmons.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Feb 23, 2009 9:54 AM PST up reply actions